The_Busy_Mom wrote:I have mixed feelings about posting in this thread, as I don't want to get virtually 'beat-up', but I would like to add my .02 to this conversation.
I agree that self-defense is the number one priority. I look at concealed carry like this:
AndyC wrote: No, my point - which is apparently being ignored - is that while we SHOULD be able to carry without anyone's permission, we're putting ourselves in mortal and legal peril if we think that we can do so without getting at least a little legal and practical knowledge.
I have to tussle with myself on this issue because I WANT freedom to carry for everybody with no restrictions - but that's not the real world, and I wonder if any father or mother here would be happy to just slap a firearm into their son or daughter's hands - "There you go, son" - without nothing further said or done. Somehow I doubt it, but we'd be happy for others to carry like that?
Assuming we can't get Constitutional carry and still HAVE to pass an exam, etc, here's my ideal scenario - t
reat it like a driver's license exam. Take as little or as much training privately as you like (or zero, if you consider yourself skilled enough) - then take the written RANDOMIZED exam at any local gov't office. That way the time can be broken up however one likes or needs - yes, I can dream
When I got my driver's license, I took a class, but this isn't a requirement unless you are under 18. At 18, you can get the book, study, and go take the written/driving test. BUT, when I got my CDL, just getting the manual wasn't enough. I am a very intelligent person, and love studying - I could be a lifetime student - but I needed the training to get through all the legal stuff and connect all the dots. CHL is a lot like this. Where my path diverges is the shooting aspect. CHL classes are not designed to teach people how to shoot. Students should come to the class proficient in the firearm they are using. There are many 'newbies' who think that they are going to learn to shoot in the CHL class. It is not designed that way. There is a need for instructors who are proficient at relaying the material to their students. The problem there is that we have too many instructors who are just weekend warriors teaching classes that they have no business teaching. That is evident in our own state issuing office who 'forgot' to enforce the instructor requirement to get the CHL certification. We've been too lax on instruction. Shooting proficiency needs to be demonstrated before a CHL license is issued. I know there is a big push from many instructors to require CHL candidates to have taken a basic firearms class/shooting class.
RoyGBiv wrote:
NRA basic pistol (or equivalent) would be MUCH more valuable from a proficiency standpoint.
The two ladies in my TX class were literally shaking when we got to the range.
Everyone passed.
The TX class as it's structured today does not fix that. IMO.
I know some out there are going to say we don't need classes to practice our God given right. But I say to you that most people taking these classes are not your grandfather's kids. Long gone are days when kids got to experience firearms, if only once a year when they went to grandpa's house. My oldest daughter made it 17 years without ever touching a firearm. Not me, it seems I've been shooting since I was a twinkle in my daddy's eye, but there are more 'newbies' than seasoned shooters nowadays, and I am beginning to think more and more each day that some sort of basic pistol (or equivalent) class should be required before taking the CHL class. And instructors should not feel restricted or unable to tell those students, "hey, you don't have the proficiency. Go take a NRA class and then come back and see me. I'll qualify your shooting under the same fee you already paid." We have to remember that, just like a driver's license, CHL is for all the legal stuff, with a component for proficiency. Instructors should be able to proficiently and efficiently teach students in 4-6 hours, and then examine the shooting proficiency. And to those who think that devoting a day to learning the law is too much, well, I'd rather devote one day now than 20-to-life at Huntsville.
