Search found 2 matches

by Charles L. Cotton
Thu Apr 02, 2015 5:20 pm
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Is The CHL Proficiency Test Sufficient?
Replies: 83
Views: 10180

Re: Is The CHL Proficiency Test Sufficient?

K5GU wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:As jmra stated, the proficiency requirement was necessary to pass SB60 in 1995. Yes, it is very easy, but it is also much like the minimum standards required of peace officers in Texas, except they must qualify annually. (See below.) (Many/most departments require more frequent range qualifications and often more stringent that TCOLE Rule 218.9(c).) I believe we could repeal the need for demonstrating range proficiency without diminishing public or individual safety. I've never had a person fail the proficiency test, but I've had 4 students have to shoot a second time and one who passed on her third attempt. However, we would risk reciprocity with some states, but probably not many. If it were a big issue, then I would have expected it to have caused problems when we repealed the renewal class requirement in 2013.

A key element in assessing the efficiency of the current proficiency exam is the fact that we don't have a problem with accidental injuries or death with well over 840,000 Texas CHLs. Yes, there have been a few incidences, but very few and they are statistically insignificant. I can tell if a student practices on a regular basis and those that do not are not going to start after they complete the CHL class. Yes, I stress it heavily, even to the point that I sound like a Baptist preacher. (Baptist I am, preacher I'm not.) Nevertheless, I know I'm not changing anyone's mind. Those that practice will continue to do so and those that do not will no start because of anything I say.

Every person who carries a gun should practice to maintain proficiency, but more importantly, to maintain the confidence that they can perform under the stress of a deadly attack. Those who study the art of self-defense know that 90% of the battle is in the mind, not the hand. If you believe that you cannot, then you will not. I presume the "Rule of Threes" still applies to most shooting; three rounds in three seconds from three feet. If so, them minimal physical proficiency is required, but mental preparation and willingness are critical. These cannot be measured in any CHL proficiency exam.

Chas.
TCOLE Rule 218.9(c) wrote:The minimum standards for the annual firearms proficiency course of fire shall be:
(1) handguns ‐ a minimum of 50 rounds, including at least five rounds of [duty] ammunition, fired at ranges from point ‐ blank to at least 15 yards with at least 20 rounds at or beyond seven yards, including at least one timed reload; . . .
Excellent post Chas. BTW, do you think the proposed caliber change to .22 cal. for proficiency will better enable folks with less-than-full use of their hands when loading a semi-auto magazine? The only experience I have with a .22 is rifle, revolver, and a Ramset hammer.
Yes. Not only can instructors help people with disabilities, DPS reminds us that the ADA requires us to make "reasonable accommodations."

Chas.
by Charles L. Cotton
Wed Apr 01, 2015 11:23 am
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: Is The CHL Proficiency Test Sufficient?
Replies: 83
Views: 10180

Re: Is The CHL Proficiency Test Sufficient?

As jmra stated, the proficiency requirement was necessary to pass SB60 in 1995. Yes, it is very easy, but it is also much like the minimum standards required of peace officers in Texas, except they must qualify annually. (See below.) (Many/most departments require more frequent range qualifications and often more stringent that TCOLE Rule 218.9(c).) I believe we could repeal the need for demonstrating range proficiency without diminishing public or individual safety. I've never had a person fail the proficiency test, but I've had 4 students have to shoot a second time and one who passed on her third attempt. However, we would risk reciprocity with some states, but probably not many. If it were a big issue, then I would have expected it to have caused problems when we repealed the renewal class requirement in 2013.

A key element in assessing the efficiency of the current proficiency exam is the fact that we don't have a problem with accidental injuries or death with well over 840,000 Texas CHLs. Yes, there have been a few incidences, but very few and they are statistically insignificant. I can tell if a student practices on a regular basis and those that do not are not going to start after they complete the CHL class. Yes, I stress it heavily, even to the point that I sound like a Baptist preacher. (Baptist I am, preacher I'm not.) Nevertheless, I know I'm not changing anyone's mind. Those that practice will continue to do so and those that do not will no start because of anything I say.

Every person who carries a gun should practice to maintain proficiency, but more importantly, to maintain the confidence that they can perform under the stress of a deadly attack. Those who study the art of self-defense know that 90% of the battle is in the mind, not the hand. If you believe that you cannot, then you will not. I presume the "Rule of Threes" still applies to most shooting; three rounds in three seconds from three feet. If so, them minimal physical proficiency is required, but mental preparation and willingness are critical. These cannot be measured in any CHL proficiency exam.

Chas.
TCOLE Rule 218.9(c) wrote:The minimum standards for the annual firearms proficiency course of fire shall be:
(1) handguns ‐ a minimum of 50 rounds, including at least five rounds of [duty] ammunition, fired at ranges from point ‐ blank to at least 15 yards with at least 20 rounds at or beyond seven yards, including at least one timed reload; . . .

Return to “Is The CHL Proficiency Test Sufficient?”