TexasCHLforum.com

Given that some have recently returned from an initial class, what is the DPS saying about Open Carry and the new legislative requirement that CHLIs teach handgun retention including retention holsters?

EastofAustin

They really didn't say much about it. Didn't go into retention levels or anything like that. They seemed to be a bit anxious about the open carry thing; which I completely understand as it will present people in their position with new challenges for sure. However, it WILL soon become law and I do feel that they should probably get onboard with a training component which reflects this fact. Perhaps they are waiting til after the implementation of the law before they address it, they really didn't say.

Surfer

My lack of knowledge about this subject is bottomless, so I have to ask: Are O.C. holsters going to have retention requirements?

If so, I can see all the fancy BBQ holsters, like a Tucker, (I've always wanted one, but leather isn't the best holster material, but IS the prettiest...) having to be retrofitted.

Abraham wrote:My lack of knowledge about this subject is bottomless, so I have to ask: Are O.C. holsters going to have retention requirements?

If so, I can see all the fancy BBQ holsters, like a Tucker, (I've always wanted one, but leather isn't the best holster material, but IS the prettiest...) having to be retrofitted.

Retention requirements did not make it into the OC law. IIRC, the only requirements that did are that the holster must be either a belt or shoulder holster.

C-dub,

Thanks and I thought so.

So, why the emphasis on retention holster teaching by instructors, not that I expect you to necessarily know...?

I wonder, are instructors of OCers (speculating) going to have to teach how to use martial arts to keep aggressive gun grabbers at bay, or ...?

I've waxed and waned about OCing myself and have concluded I won't be doing it. Not even at BBQ's...

Doing so, for some reason reminds me of the time of women wore bustles or men wore big wigs.

In other words, silly...

I think they are wanting the instructor to make sure that the student is responsible for the retention of the handgun they are carrying. Not that a level 2 or higher will be required but poor retention could be found negligent and negligence is not what we as licensed to carry handgun folks do not need. The media will try to condemn all for the actions of few.

THanks for the responses. The legislature did not require security holsters. However, they did require that Handgun Licence Instructors (no longer CHLIs) teach weapons retention and security holsters. I have been through such training thirty years ago as a LEO. As someone mentioned, it turns into a martial arts class, and just like all such skills, one needs to practice them until they are reflexive. Given the fact that people can choose to carry anywhere on the belt and there are a variety of styles of shoulder holsters, instruction is a whole lot more intensive than needed when everyone in a LE Academy class is going to be wearing a strong side hip holster.

I have two great reservations with the situation we instructors are being left in. If we create our own curriculum and are not teaching what the DPS has taught us, we are assuming liability. Likewise, if we ignore the subject, we are failing to address the legislature's requirements. Secondly, in the past 20 so years, we have been warned against recommending specific handguns, calibers, ammo, etc. (I don't know if any of you remember the part of the original outlines that ask questions about "adult learners" versus "child learners." This is such an issue. Anyone who is taking the responsibility of carrying a lethal weapon for self defense needs to be able to make choices for themselves. Our role as instructors was to provide material which would allow those in our class to make informed judgments, but the responsibility for actual deciding between revolver/semi auto, caliber, brand of ammo, holster style, carry position, etc. was left to the individual.)

We have protection in law against suit unless we are grossly negligent in what we say or don't say. Our best protection is to rely on the DPS to provide outlines and follow them, fleshing them out based on our own experiences. Right now, I feel like we are being hung out to twist in the wind. I'm not sure that I will teach another class until we have some guidance from the DPS.

Eastofaustin

eastofaustin wrote:I have two great reservations with the situation we instructors are being left in. If we create our own curriculum and are not teaching what the DPS has taught us, we are assuming liability.

CHL instructors enjoy immunity from civil liability unless 1) we act arbitrarily or capriciously; 2) engage in fraud; or 3) violate the DTPA. No. 1 is a very high standard for a plaintiff and Nos. 2 and 3 are easily avoided.

eastofaustin wrote:Likewise, if we ignore the subject, we are failing to address the legislature's requirements.

Instructors are certified by DPS and we must teach the DPS-mandated class. We have neither the obligation nor the authority to interpret legislative intent, so we cannot deviate from the DPS mandated course.
. . .

eastofaustin wrote:We have protection in law against suit unless we are grossly negligent in what we say or don't say.

Gross negligence will not deny instructors liability. (See above.)

eastofaustin wrote:Our best protection is to rely on the DPS to provide outlines and follow them, fleshing them out based on our own experiences.

I agree, so long as what we add does not conflict with the DPS material. I don't think that adding more information is required because most CHL instructors have not had additional training or experience to pass along.

The only reason I posted this response is because I don't want the CHL instructor community to start creating a higher standard of care for ourselves than exists under current law.

Chas.

I am curious to know if DPS has issued guidelines to instructors regarding the use of paddle holsters. I have a Model 578 GLS Pro-Fit Holster that is difficult to remove from my waist even after first removing the belt. It also has a retention device which prevents drawing the gun from the holster until the device is released by depressing a "trigger" on the rear of the holster. Factually, it is at least as secure both in retaining the gun and in remaining on the belt as is my Bianchi pancake holster with thumb snap. I know that we've had this discussion before about paddle holsters in other threads, but I am very curious to know if DPS has made a decision as to whether or not they qualify as a "belt holster" or not. My 578 can be converted to a belt holster fairly easily, but then I lose the convenience of the paddle. I figure that I will rarely ever OC, but enquiring minds want to know.

Did any mention of paddle holsters come up in the instructor classes?

The Annoyed Man wrote:I am curious to know if DPS has issued guidelines to instructors regarding the use of paddle holsters. I have a Model 578 GLS Pro-Fit Holster that is difficult to remove from my waist even after first removing the belt. It also has a retention device which prevents drawing the gun from the holster until the device is released by depressing a "trigger" on the rear of the holster. Factually, it is at least as secure both in retaining the gun and in remaining on the belt as is my Bianchi pancake holster with thumb snap. I know that we've had this discussion before about paddle holsters in other threads, but I am very curious to know if DPS has made a decision as to whether or not they qualify as a "belt holster" or not. My 578 can be converted to a belt holster fairly easily, but then I lose the convenience of the paddle. I figure that I will rarely ever OC, but enquiring minds want to know.

Did any mention of paddle holsters come up in the instructor classes?

No mention of paddle holsters during the August class, TAM.

Surfer

I think a paddle holster will qualify as a belt holster.

DPS is creating a retention video. All instructors will have to watch it and certify to DPS they have watched it. You can add it to your class, let your students watch it.

I remember when someone cautioned that recommending hollow point ammo was NOT part of the DPS curriculum and we could be found liable. I think HP's are safer and I'd be negligent if I did NOT point this out to students.

I think a lot of these liability discussions are the result of deadline pressure. "I need a topic for my magazine article this month. What can I write about? I know, I'll write about how bad it is to carry reloaded ammo in your carry gun."

switch wrote:. . . I remember when someone cautioned that recommending hollow point ammo was NOT part of the DPS curriculum and we could be found liable. I think HP's are safer and I'd be negligent if I did NOT point this out to students. . . .

I agree with you wholeheartedly! I recommend HP ammo during the safety portion of the class. I specifically recommend against 115 gr FMJ 9mm for anything other than practice ammo, because of its penetration potential.

Chas.

Resurrecting an old thread to continue discussion on paddle holsters. Now that open carry is here and a "belt or shoulder holster" is required, how are you handling student questions about paddle holsters? I even got the expected question: "What if I don't wear a belt?"

I quote the law and state that there is no legislation to rule on paddle holsters, pro or con.

I for one am wearing one. Over my belt of course.

Additionally, I would like to know if there has been any discussion on "thigh rigs"? Technically, they do attach to a belt, but also to the thigh via straps. Considering the whole unit relies on a belt for attachment, does that qualify it as a "Belt Holster"?

Additionally, I would like to know if there has been any discussion on "thigh rigs"? Technically, they do attach to a belt, but also to the thigh via straps. Considering the whole unit relies on a belt for attachment, does that qualify it as a "Belt Holster"?

That's up in the air. Many believe they are 'legal' but, ultimately, it will be up to the individual LEO. (DPS has said they are NOT belt holsters. I don't know if they are sticking to that definition. :( )