Search found 7 matches

Return to “Instructor mis-information”

by txinvestigator
Tue Nov 21, 2006 11:39 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

Renegade wrote:Most common instructor mistakes I see:

1) The alcohol thing, including 51% rule.

2) Failure to realize amusement parks, hospitals, etc., are no longer off-limits unless they post.

3) Belief that 30.06 verbal notice must be same as 30.06 written notice.

4) Random printing is illegal.

BTW TexInvestigator, I have second-hand info of one class/range where a convicted felon runs the shooting portion of the class. And it will always be second-hand info as I will never go to that range or take a class, since I do know for a fact a convicted felon is affiliated with the range.
Tell me, I'll go take the class. ;-)
by txinvestigator
Fri Nov 17, 2006 10:16 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

Will938 wrote:So let me get this straight then, you can have some amount of alcohol in your system and be carrying? The way it was explained to me you can't have "any detectable amount" of alcohol in your system.
Didn't read the entire thread Will938? :smile:
Regarding carrying while intoxicated;

Here is the law;


§46.035. Unlawful carrying of handgun by license holder.


(d) A license holder commits an offense if, while
intoxicated, the license holder carries a handgun under the authority
of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether
the handgun is concealed.

It does not say "with any detectable amount of alcohol", or, "after consuming any alcohol". It says "while intoxicated".

The term "legal limit" is a misnomer. It was created by the media to describe a person who, for the purposes of DWI, had a blood alcohol level that was at or above the PRESUMED LEVEL of intoxication. Currently that level is .08%. The DWI law says that a person commits an offense if the person drives "intoxicated", period.

Intoxication is then defined as:

(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties
by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a
drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those
substances, or any other substance into the body; or

(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

Regardless of how the person acts or behaves, he is presumed to be intoxicated at .08% or above BAC. However, if the person is BELOW the .08% or refuses to submit a breath sample, definition A can be used to obtain a conviction. The DWI laws require that a person be offered a chance to give a sample of breath or blood if suspected of DWI.

That is the only offense where a BAC test is applicable. For charges like Public Intoxication and Carrying a Concealed Handgun while Intoxicated, definition A is all that is required.

The term "legal limit" is used to describe a .08% BAC, and is applicable for DWI only. Many people believe that if you are below .08%, you are not DWI. That is not true.

The teaching in the CHL class and the subsequent question on the test regarding "no legal limit for CHL" applies to the fact that the .08% means nothing for the purpose of a CHL holder carrying while intoxicated. You are not required to be offered a breath test, nor will you be offered one if a LEO suspects you of being intoxicated while carrying, unless you were also driving at the time.

All the LEO has to suspect is that you do not have the normal use of mental or physical faculties
by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a
drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those
substances, or any other substance into the body.

He will establish that by observing your speech, balance, dexterity, eyes and smell of your breath.

If he has probable cause, he can arrest you under that. It would be an illegal arrest to arrest a person if they exhibit no signs of intoxication, but the LEO either observed the person consume alcohol or simply smelled it on your breath.
by txinvestigator
Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:43 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

Mike1951 wrote:
nomadcrna wrote:1. The people are responsible for knowing the laws. They should read the particular laws themselves and not take what ANY instructor says.

2. Talk to him and help him if he wants, otherwise butt out :).

3. I see so many in this thread blaming the instructor. Once again, it is the peoples responsibility to read and know the laws.



Just my 2 cents,

Ron
txinvestigator wrote:Interesting. If your assertion that it is solely the student's responsibility then why certify instructors and make students take a class?

Students rely on the instructor to make sense of the law and explain it properly.
I agree completely with what Ron said. Anyone who relies on their instructor will have an incomplete, often inaccurate education about CHL information.

Having taken the course four times, I consider the instructor nothing more than an informed individual, certainly not the final authority. From this very discussion, you can see how different instructors teach the course differently.

Why certify instructors and require a class? That was the price of getting the legislation passed.

I have always printed out and studied applicable parts of the governing statutes. From the beginning, I joined PDO and other forums to get others' opinions and stay current.
Yes, and the very fact that you are here shows that you are unusual among CHL holders. The instructor is teaching them wrong, period. I do not believe that one should stick thier head in the sand just because something somone else does not not seem to directly impact oneself.

Thats one of societies problems.
by txinvestigator
Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:15 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

nomadcrna wrote:1. The people are responsible for knowing the laws. They should read the particular laws themselves and not take what ANY instructor says.

2. Talk to him and help him if he wants, otherwise butt out :).

3. I see so many in this thread blaming the instructor. Once again, it is the peoples responsibility to read and know the laws.



Just my 2 cents,

Ron
Interesting. If your assertion that it is solely the student's responsibility then why certify instructors and make students take a class?

Students rely on the instructor to make sense of the law and explain it properly.

It is too late to butt out, DPS has been notified. It is my opinion I had an ethical obligation, if not a legal one.
by txinvestigator
Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:15 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

Regarding carrying while intoxicated;

Here is the law;


§46.035. Unlawful carrying of handgun by license holder.


(d) A license holder commits an offense if, while
intoxicated, the license holder carries a handgun under the authority
of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, regardless of whether
the handgun is concealed.

It does not say "with any detectable amount of alcohol", or, "after consuming any alcohol". It says "while intoxicated".

The term "legal limit" is a misnomer. It was created by the media to describe a person who, for the purposes of DWI, had a blood alcohol level that was at or above the PRESUMED LEVEL of intoxication. Currently that level is .08%. The DWI law says that a person commits an offense if the person drives "intoxicated", period.

Intoxication is then defined as:

(A) not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties
by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a
drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those
substances, or any other substance into the body; or

(B) having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more.

Regardless of how the person acts or behaves, he is presumed to be intoxicated at .08% or above BAC. However, if the person is BELOW the .08% or refuses to submit a breath sample, definition A can be used to obtain a conviction. The DWI laws require that a person be offered a chance to give a sample of breath or blood if suspected of DWI.

That is the only offense where a BAC test is applicable. For charges like Public Intoxication and Carrying a Concealed Handgun while Intoxicated, definition A is all that is required.

The term "legal limit" is used to describe a .08% BAC, and is applicable for DWI only. Many people believe that if you are below .08%, you are not DWI. That is not true.

The teaching in the CHL class and the subsequent question on the test regarding "no legal limit for CHL" applies to the fact that the .08% means nothing for the purpose of a CHL holder carrying while intoxicated. You are not required to be offered a breath test, nor will you be offered one if a LEO suspects you of being intoxicated while carrying, unless you were also driving at the time.

All the LEO has to suspect is that you do not have the normal use of mental or physical faculties
by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a
drug, a dangerous drug, a combination of two or more of those
substances, or any other substance into the body.

He will establish that by observing your speech, balance, dexterity, eyes and smell of your breath.

If he has probable cause, he can arrest you under that. It would be an illegal arrest to arrest a person if they exhibit no signs of intoxication, but the LEO either observed the person consume alcohol or simply smelled it on your breath.
by txinvestigator
Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:44 am
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

He is not going to change his teaching. He was argumentative when I tried to discuss it with him.

I think I can make DPS pay attention.
by txinvestigator
Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:04 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Instructor mis-information
Replies: 69
Views: 9744

Instructor mis-information

Yesterday I assisted another instructor. He has old injuries that make running a shooting line difficult for him. He found me via word of mouth, and asked if I would assist him in his class and run all of the actual gun portion of the training.

I agreed and met him before class. Although he is a likable guy, I now know why some people post here that their instructors tell them things that have left me going :headscratch .

Here are but a few things he said that I tried to correct as politely and non-confrontational as possible.

1. 30.06 only applies if they tell you to leave.

2. Because there is no "legal limit" of intoxication for carrying while intoxicated, it is illegal to drink any amount of alcohol while carrying. He explained this to me at break that regardless of the law, the CHL holders don't need to be drinking if they carry. so by misinforming them, they think they cannot drink at all.

3. There was a new federal law passed that you cannot have a gun within 1000 feet of a school and even though state law says the premise does not include the parking lots, you are still in violation of federal law if you carry there. So if you know you have a meeting with your kids teacher before you go to work, you cannot carry your gun in the car. You should leave it at home. at break I asked him to source that law for me so I could read it and be sure I understood it. Of course he could not, but he "heard" about it so he makes sure the students know.

4. Only serious felony convictions will keep you from being licensed.

5. He had no idea that the 10 year restriction for a person adjudicated of felony grade Delinquent Conduct was in reference to juveniles.

6. He did not understand 51%.

7. He told me how he runs the firearms qual, and it is not in line with the state requirement. I ran it properly

8. He told me he never runs 10 hours.


We shot early, and I split right afterwards. I was afraid I would not be able to contain myself if I listened to the rest of his training. I am really concerned about what these students were told.

I think I should write DPS.

Return to “Instructor mis-information”