TexasCHLforum.com

Keith B wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

Keith B wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

I had to take a 12hr hunter safety course at 25 because I was born after 1972, how is that fair that the older folk didn't have to take it but I did?

Thats unfair too. However because "A" is bad doesn't equate to "B" being good.

This is probably sliding off topic so lets just agree to disagree here.

Life's unfair. Get over it.

I am over it. I still don't have to agree to favoritism. If the instructor doesn't want to charge him (?) fine thats his call. His loss, not mine.

So, let's say you are pilot for a large airline. if you moved to anotehr airline adn were flying the exact same aircraft, do you think you should have to go through all of the basic training for that aircraft again or should you be grandfathered?

If the pilot was taking a CHL you betcha. If Zombie President Roosevelt wanted one he should have to pay and take the class just like everyone else. And he would pass, despite being dead, because Teddy Roosevelt invented manly.

Its a principle thing. In no way am I saying cops are bad at shooting or otherwise qualified. But all citizens must be held to the same standard.

Keith B wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

I had to take a 12hr hunter safety course at 25 because I was born after 1972, how is that fair that the older folk didn't have to take it but I did?

Thats unfair too. However because "A" is bad doesn't equate to "B" being good.

This is probably sliding off topic so lets just agree to disagree here.

Life's unfair. Get over it.

I am over it. I still don't have to agree to favoritism. If the instructor doesn't want to charge him (?) fine thats his call. His loss, not mine.

I had to take a 12hr hunter safety course at 25 because I was born after 1972, how is that fair that the older folk didn't have to take it but I did?

Thats unfair too. However because "A" is bad doesn't equate to "B" being good.

This is probably sliding off topic so lets just agree to disagree here.

nightmare69 wrote:

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

VMI77 wrote:Nothing wrong with a cop taking the class, but they should have an exemption that lets them get a CHL without having to take the class.

No way Jose. EVERYONE should have the same standard. I've seen enough of this "rules for thee but not me" thank you very much.

We shot 500rds all the way from anchor point to 25yrds, and both night and day, one handed plus weak hand, timed shoots with reloads and had to score 80% or better to pass. I think LEOs go above and beyond the required 4hr class plus 50rds shooting proficiency, this is from someone who has done both.

Shooting is pretty irrelevant for the CHL if you don't know that you're reason #1 why everyone should have to do the same thing.
You could train with Rambo, John Wayne, and Audie Murphy, and I could care less. Its irrelevant. It has nothing to do with law enforcement, shooting ability, or even your capacity to cook awesome barbeque. If one person has to do it to meet requirements under the Second Amendment and Texas Law, everyone should have to do it.

So I guess according to you we all need a five month long academy to get our CHL's.

No, according to me, the same obligations should apply to police as to citizens. they're not special snowflakes. If I have to take a class they should have to take a class. Equality under the law is what this nation was founded on (well except for slavery but we fixed that). No animal should be more equal than others.

VMI77 wrote:Nothing wrong with a cop taking the class, but they should have an exemption that lets them get a CHL without having to take the class.

No way Jose. EVERYONE should have the same standard. I've seen enough of this "rules for thee but not me" thank you very much.