TexasCHLforum.com

Liberty wrote:All is lost, The day has come! Thee Bradys have won.
I never thought I would see the day when folks on a gun board would be advocates of reasonable restriction.

Man, that's a great impression of Fred Sanford/Redd Foxx! I don't think any member of this forum would support the kinds of "reasonable restrictions" the Brady Bunch would inflict on us. But as an instructor, I do follow the law and the law says you have to successfully demonstrate proficiency before I sign off on the TR-100 you submit as part of your CHL application. It is almost instinctual to call those who can't pass the basic proficiency demonstration, blind idiots. But since I have seen a blind man pass the test, I realize that is an insult to the blind and I think we've discussed the idea that blindness alone shouldn't be a disqualifier. So rather than insult the blind, I'll just say those who can't pass are idiots. Scratch, that...I'm being too harsh and insenstive to idiots. Those who can't pass are not idiots. They are simply incompetent and in most cases, are not conscious of their incompetence until they fail the proficiency. We see those at instructor renewals every couple years too.

In all seriousness, I have a hard time believing you or anyone on this board wouldn't prefer that people to be proficient and competent when using things like cars, planes, chainsaws or guns with which they could kill or injure themselves, you or anyone in their immediate vicinity. That's the purpose of this discussion and the OP was simply looking for answers on how to address that issue. Now if you think that's promoting reasonable restrictions, that's your choice and you are free to think what you want. I think it's nothing more than shooters having a discussion about what to do when we see someone who is obviously incompetent and a danger to herself and everyone around her. I think TxFig came to the right place to discuss the issue. And I think nearly all of us would agree there are far too many unconsiously incompetent idiots on the the street with guns...Metro PD may have just proven that least half of the idiots may be wearing a badge. If we as a community can't talk about how to fix that without accusing each other of being against the 2nd Amendment, you can bet the Brady's will and none of us will like their solutions.

That's my $0.02 and I'm done with this thread.

WildBill wrote:

G.C.Montgomery wrote:It is also amazing to me this woman didn't grasp the magnitude of what just happened when she said, "I only put a hole in your jeans."

I think that this attitude would burn me up the most.
Since you really couldn't have gotten away with beating her, you should have at least shot her with your tazer.

Trust me I had to restrain myself because I knew if I let myself go, any resistance she offered would have just fed the rage. I thought for a moment about tying her to a chair to keep her from hurting anyone. But then I started thinking up ways to use a hammer, a pound of 16p nails, a potato peeler, and some rubbing alcohol to more thoroughly explain my displeasure. That's when I really knew I just had to let it go and call it a day with putting a failure on her TR-100.

But the whole point lurking in that story is that if I'd let someone else rack her slide for her or load the gun for her, there's no way I'd have known that she couldn't safely operate a handgun of the type she chose to use. She might well have been better off with Beretta that had a tip-up barrel. Regardless of that, she should have recognized the magnitude of her mistake. She should have seen her in ability to fix the problem safely as an indicator she needed more training or needed to use a different piece of equipment.

Liberty wrote:

jorge wrote:

Liberty wrote:Are you saying that older arthritic people should not be able to qualify with with a Semiauto because they are incapable of reloading or charging their weapon?

Are you saying that someone who can't qualify with a semiauto without help should get a SA license?

As long as there's a difference between SA and NSA then I think people shouldn't cheat to "pass" the SA test when they only have the skills to pass the NSA test honestly.

That is exactly what I am saying.
The ability to load Magazines or rack a slide has nothing to do with how safe someone is. If they can handle the SA safely, If they can hit the target, If they understand and can operate the controls on the gun why shouldn't they be allowed license? Are we better off letting these folks be victims?

Actually having a clear understanding and ability to demonstrate administrative tasks such as charging magazines and loading the weapon have everything to do with how safe someone is with a firearm. Racking the slide is accomplished the same way whether you are loading the firearm or reducing a stoppage. If you can't load the firearm safely, you more than likely can't safely reduce a stoppage either. And if injury or medical conditions make it impossible, you either need to wait until you've healed or consider another weapon system if the condition is permanent. As a prime example, I disqualified a shooter with carpal tunnel issues in February after she nearly shot me while trying to reduce a stoppage.

The shooter experienced an ignition failure during a single shot string. When the gun failed to fire, she tried to pull the slide to the rear using the "pinch-pull" method but her carpal tunnel issues made this difficult. In reviewing the video of the range, we learned that in her second attemp to grip the slide, she pointed the gun at left breast while trying to come over the top of the slide with her support hand but, her wrist braces were getting in the way. So then she tried the "pinch-pull" method again. Except this time, she stepped out of her booth, spun around 180-degress toward me with the gun held straight and level with her finger on the trigger. I side stepped the muzzle and immediately moved toward the shooter to take control of the gun. She partially realized her error because she lowered her muzzle but was still facing toward me and up range. Before I could get there, she lost control of the slide and I heard a muffled pop the instant before my hand landed on the gun. As I took control of the gun, I found the gun now had a stovepipe stoppage and a smoking case stuck in the ejection port. Thankfully, the only damage was a .32 cal hole in my jeans.

It is amazing how quickly things can go wrong on a range. It is also amazing to me this woman didn't grasp the magnitude of what just happened when she said, "I only put a hole in your jeans." She had been one of the ones who commented that my constant promotion of additonal training was just for Rambo wannabes. She was also one of the people who appeared to not to be paying attention when I covered administrative handling procedures and stoppage reductions in the classroom portion of the class. I signed her TR-100 but only after having her print the world FAIL in the box for the proficiency demonstration. Since she has never come to me to get another TR-100 that indicates she passed the shooting proficiency, I'm sure that she is still someone who thinks her ability to load/unload a gun has nothing to do with how safe she is now that she knows Texas law allows her to have a gun in her car so long as she's traveling.