HB 3784

[MeMelYup]

Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

There will still be places off limits by statute to carry a handgun for non-LTC holders that are not off limits to LTC holders unless there is a 30.06/7 sign, namely:

Hospitals
Amusement Parks
Government meetings subject to Open Meetings Act

What about gun free school zones?
"Once a customer leaves private property located within 1,000 feet of a school with a rearm, they may be in violation of Federal Law. However, in the following situations an individual would not be possessing a rearm in violation of 922(q)(A):
1. The individual is licensed by the State or political subdivision to possess the rearm, and the license was issued after law enforcement of cials veri ed that the individual is quali ed to receive the license;
2. The rearm is unloaded and is contained within a locked container or a locked rearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
3. The rearm is possessed by an individual for use in a school-approved program;
4. The individual or his/her employer is doing so in accordance with a contract between the individual and the school;
5. The individual is a law enforcement of cer acting in their of cial capacity; or
6. The individual is crossing school grounds to reach a public or private way. Their rearm is unloaded, and they have permission from the school.
ATF realizes that not all persons who enter or exit an FFL’s premises in such case may fall under one of the above-described statutory exemptions. Therefore, ATF advises that in those States where a permit is not needed, the FFL should ensure that prior to a purchaser leaving the business premise with a rearm that it is unloaded and placed in a locked container."

[allisji]

Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

There will still be places off limits by statute to carry a handgun for non-LTC holders that are not off limits to LTC holders unless there is a 30.06/7 sign, namely:

Hospitals
Amusement Parks
Government meetings subject to Open Meetings Act

What about gun free school zones?

I actually thought about saying other than gun free school zones... but I didn't think about the statutorily prohibited places which are still required to post signs.

Good points.

[Papa_Tiger]

Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

There will still be places off limits by statute to carry a handgun for non-LTC holders that are not off limits to LTC holders unless there is a 30.06/7 sign, namely:

Hospitals
Amusement Parks
Government meetings subject to Open Meetings Act

What about gun free school zones?

I actually thought about saying other than gun free school zones... but I didn't think about the statutorily prohibited places which are still required to post signs.

Good points.

Interestingly, this means that the State Capitol would be off limits to an unlicensed carrier while the legislature is meeting. Which would likely mean that they would be stopped at the metal detectors and turned away.

As always GFSZA applies to unlicensed carriers.

[ScottDLS]

Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

There will still be places off limits by statute to carry a handgun for non-LTC holders that are not off limits to LTC holders unless there is a 30.06/7 sign, namely:

Hospitals
Amusement Parks
Government meetings subject to Open Meetings Act

What about gun free school zones?

I actually thought about saying other than gun free school zones... but I didn't think about the statutorily prohibited places which are still required to post signs.

Good points.

Interestingly, this means that the State Capitol would be off limits to an unlicensed carrier while the legislature is meeting. Which would likely mean that they would be stopped at the metal detectors and turned away.

As always GFSZA applies to unlicensed carriers.

The Capitol would only be off limits if they post 30.06/7 when they are meeting, and presumably only the legislative chambers. My understanding is they don't post.

[Papa_Tiger]

Interestingly, this means that the State Capitol would be off limits to an unlicensed carrier while the legislature is meeting. Which would likely mean that they would be stopped at the metal detectors and turned away.

As always GFSZA applies to unlicensed carriers.

The Capitol would only be off limits if they post 30.06/7 when they are meeting, and presumably only the legislative chambers. My understanding is they don't post.

Read 46.035 again, especially 46.035(c) and 46.035(i) in CSHB 1911. Open Meetings are off limits by statute to non-licensed handgun carriers, but are off limits to LTC holders only if 30.06/7 are posted.

[ScottDLS]

Interestingly, this means that the State Capitol would be off limits to an unlicensed carrier while the legislature is meeting. Which would likely mean that they would be stopped at the metal detectors and turned away.

As always GFSZA applies to unlicensed carriers.

The Capitol would only be off limits if they post 30.06/7 when they are meeting, and presumably only the legislative chambers. My understanding is they don't post.

Read 46.035 again, especially 46.035(c) and 46.035(i) in CSHB 1911. Open Meetings are off limits by statute to non-licensed handgun carriers, but are off limits to LTC holders only if 30.06/7 are posted.

Aha...I see I failed to see "unlicensed" in your post. You are correct. So an advantage of having LTC would be ability to carry in 46.035 off limits locations that don't post 30.06/7 (or aren't required to).

[TexasJohnBoy]

Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

There will still be places off limits by statute to carry a handgun for non-LTC holders that are not off limits to LTC holders unless there is a 30.06/7 sign, namely:

Hospitals
Amusement Parks
Government meetings subject to Open Meetings Act

School zones
College campuses
And who knows about gun buster signs...
I'm sure there's more that we are forgetting

IMHO, this bill is in search of an issue that doesn't exist. Lowering the cost of the LTC to $40 is a much better step to take than this.

There are some subjects that should be taught face to face. Topics concerning licensing for carrying of a weapon on a daily basis is one of them.

[Liberty]

I wonder who is lobbying and backing this bill. There is money to be made in state mandated training. But it's not by CHL instructors

[rob777]

If online instruction were to be implemented, then the DPS should do it and there should be no fee. The written test could be administered by LTC instructors when the student comes to them for the range qualification.

My initial thought after reading the original (I believe a substitute is coming?) is that someone at DPS meets the very narrow requirements to teach the course online. And considering they are about to lose $100/applicant this would be a way to recover some dollars.
Also possible, as politics often seem to play into these types of changes, that someone related to someone in the house or senate wants in on the action.

I personally like the idea IF LTC Instructors could easily qualify and the definition of 'online' included Webex/Skype style video conferencing.

The written test should be administered in person. One of my girls took quite a few college courses online from LSU and had to drive to Baton Rouge for the mid-term and final exams.

My 2 cents...

[NotRPB]

I'm just guessing the intent of this bill was for those very very sparsely populated counties (like where it is 100 miles between schools/gas stations etc) to make "equal access" easier, rather than driving 100 miles to take a course and test.

If two or more are gathered ...No Code Ham license is still probably easier and cheaper to get than a License to carry a RKBA constitutionally protected object.

I see where it could affect incomes or have unintended consequences, perhaps if I'm right in the intent, it could have been a "local & consent" type bill instead of what it is.
I agree w/ Charles .. I'd hate Sylvan Learning Centers or similar companies running the program.
Imagine if the online education was run by a Liberal University like University of Texas since they already offer online courses ... May as well have California Sheriffs decide on a "May Issue" basis instead of "Shall issue" if Universities are the ones doing the online instruction/testing

[Ruark]

There's lots of jaw-wagging about taking courses online, but what about the other half of this thing? It requires at least ONE HOUR of range instruction BEFORE taking the proficiency test. I wonder what that's supposed to include. I can't say it's a bad idea - LTC instructors have told many stories of students showing up with their new first guns still in the Academy bag - but it could also be somebody trying to sneak in some restriction that wasn't there before. You wonder if (assuming 3784 passes) there will be content requirements, extra ammo requirements, new instructor qualification requirements, etc.

[jmorris]

And explain this one to me.

A qualified handgun instructor shall require an
applicant who successfully completed an online version of the
classroom instruction part of the handgun proficiency course to
complete not less than one hour but not more than two hours of the
range instruction part of the handgun proficiency course before
allowing a physical demonstration of handgun proficiency as
described by Subsection (d)(2).

The range instruction part of the course? Didn't see that in the four parts required to be taught.

OK, rereading it, I evidently read over this part too fast. DPS would have to add another section.for range instruction. So, will this apply only to online students?

(a) The director by rule shall establish minimum standards
for handgun proficiency and shall develop a course to teach handgun
proficiency and examinations to measure handgun proficiency. The
course to teach handgun proficiency is required for each person who
seeks to obtain a license and must contain training sessions
divided into two parts. One part of the course must be classroom
instruction and the other part must be range instruction and an
actual demonstration by the applicant of the applicant's ability to
safely and proficiently use a handgun. An applicant must be able to
demonstrate, at a minimum, the degree of proficiency that is
required to effectively operate a handgun of .32 caliber or above.

[rjr5545]

looks like this is going to happen. Lots of movement yesterday

[locke_n_load]

So with all the good gun bills that died this year, this junk is what has a chance at passage at the end? Did they get rid of the "with previous online teaching skills" crap that would eliminate most instructors?

[rjr5545]

Still in there.