TexasCHLforum.com

DPS rules state that we must give students three tries to pass the written or shooting part of the course. What happens if they
fail all three tries?

(c) An instructor must submit failures of the written examination or shooting examination to the department on the class completion notification and must indicate if the failure occurred after the student had been given three opportunities to pass the examination.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/rea ... ch=6&rl=11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

feltoncorbett wrote:DPS rules state that we must give students three tries to pass the written or shooting part of the course. What happens if they
fail all three tries?

You mark it as a 3-strikes fail and can't give them any more chances.

I hope this is hypothetical. Many new shooters pass on the first try, so failing three times is pretty epic.

There are individuals that because of their own ineptitude should not own or use firearms. This does not mean that I don't support their right to do so. Just because you can legally do something does not necessarily mean it is always a good personal choice for you.

There is nothing that says that the student can not repeat the course and get three more chances.

You hand them the lead to their seeing-eye pooch and send them on their way.

I should have gone futher with my question.
What are the student's choices after failing the third time?
I have had 3 people fail the shooting portion the second time. At that point I told them they needed professional instruction and practice before trying again. So far we haven't seen any of them back for in struction or shooting.
After watching the public shoot, I agree with a friend that people should pass a proficency test before buying a gun.
Felton

I had a student fail 1 try then after looking at her target determined we had not worked out right/left eye dominance. We determined she was left eye dominant and corrected for that and she scored 95% second time through. I always review eye dominance in the classroom but for whatever reason she did not make change for range time. She was also pretty nervous on the range.

I had a gal fail the 1st try. Did not expect this as she was quite sharp during class.

Went over the basics again. Grip, sight alignment/picture, breathing, and about 20 rds or so of additional training which included dry firing so she could dramatically see her flinching errors.

Shot the qualification again and she scored well into the 200's.

You go girl.

Just my own opinion, but the CHL class is NOT a gun training class.
It is assumed (wrongly) that you already know how to handle a firearm.

If someone fails the CHL qualification course three times they obviously ARE NOT qualified to carry a fire arm.
In fact, with most qualifying at the 9 foot & the 21 foot line, the second fail should disqualify.
But it should open an up-sell opportunity to the instructor.

Just my two cents. I take carrying a weapon very seriously. In my humble opinion, one should be able to consistently hit a still target at 50 feet with no threat or panic. And I mean EVERY SINGLE SHOT! We're only talking 50 feet and at that stage the time given to shoot is fairly long. This is not the requirement currently. So failing...even once...shows a great opportunity to sell more classes.

I was an LEO for ten years, I took classes before my CHL. I was also a Commercial Diving Instructor at the College of Oceaneering for underwater inspection and welding. If I were to want to Scuba dive today I'd take an open water Scuba class. I hold (held) several instructor certs, including Nitrox and Mixed Gas. Even with 5000 plus hours on dive time.

Training is far too under rated. Ya just can't get enough. And it's fun!!! I'm getting a group of CHL holders at my office to join the IDPA club at Elm Fork.
Carrying a firearm and being an EXPERT with it could save someones life....not being a trained expert....could take one.

Moby wrote: If someone fails the CHL qualification course three times they obviously ARE NOT qualified to carry a fire arm.
In fact, with most qualifying at the 9 foot & the 21 foot line, the second fail should disqualify.

I agree with your opinion, up to the "upsell" part...

misterlarry wrote:There are individuals that because of their own ineptitude should not own or use firearms. This does not mean that I don't support their right to do so. Just because you can legally do something does not necessarily mean it is always a good personal choice for you.

Well and diplomatically stated...

The second amendment is a right and as stated should not be infringed. So obtaining and keeping a gun should be relatively simple. However, the right doesn't negate responsibility in that firearms owners should be responsible for knowing how to safely operate & keep their weapons.

A CHL and carrying a concealed handgun, on the other hand, is not a right. I think it should be a one & done - if you take the class & fail either portion, go back & start the process all over again. The CHL class & test is a proficiency demonstration. The idea that people are using the chl class as a 'first shots' or as a 'learn to shoot' is absurd.
If someone tries and fails 3 times, then steering them to a more appropriate class would be in everyone's best interest.

I've never had anyone fail. However, I have pulled 1 or 2 off the line for further instruction and test later.
If the first 5 shots are head, belly, shoulder, white, and miss, then I probably will not let them continue.
Some students I have encountered become very nervous and intimidated around people and guns.
I'm sure you have all had the X member of X Military branch, etc that have been shooting before they were born;
well I have seen those same ninjas load ammo into their mags backwards and also have a hard time letting the slide go.
I can't imagine how they would react under a real threat or danger.

In those cases, one on one firearms instruction is a must before completing the CHL training.

TexasCajun wrote:The second amendment is a right and as stated should not be infringed. So obtaining and keeping a gun should be relatively simple. However, the right doesn't negate responsibility in that firearms owners should be responsible for knowing how to safely operate & keep their weapons.

CHL aside, if we are going by the strict wording of the 2A, even a complete amateur's right cannot be infringed. There is nothing in the 2A about responsibility or proficiency. Just like the 1A, even incoherent babble is protected speech. Just being devil's advocate, as I do agree with your sentiment.