Minimum Caliber for Handgun Proficiency Exam

[stoneg1]

Senate Bill 263  Effective: September 1, 2017
Caption: Relating to the handgun proficiency required to obtain or renew a license to carry a handgun.
This bill removes the minimum caliber of handgun to be used in the handgun proficiency examination.

[surprise_i'm_armed]

IIRC, the old minimum was .32.

Since the minimum has now been removed, people with recoil sensitivity issues
may now use a .22 or .25.

Even a .22 is much better than harsh words. :-)

SIA

[NotRPB]

I guess even a .17 hmr pistol ?
https://www.google.com/search?q=.17+hmr ... PAZK7LCFCI

[ninjabread]

I guess even a .17 hmr pistol ?
https://www.google.com/search?q=.17+hmr ... PAZK7LCFCI

A .22 short revolver would have less recoil.

[flechero]

A 4" or 6" revolver in .22 shooting Calibre's would have less recoil than just closing the cylinder on the reload.

[Medley86]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

[locke_n_load]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

I would allow it. But remember, you are not allowed to use optics, red dots, lasers, etc. Only open sights.

[Medley86]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

I would allow it. But remember, you are not allowed to use optics, red dots, lasers, etc. Only open sights.

Yeah I knew about the no optics restrictions, honestly the shooting part of the class wasn't hard enough I would ever feel like I need that kind of advantage. It was more of a stray thought I had. Having shot the qualification already, I feel like I would have a reasonable chance of passing if I got to take a good look before every string then was blindfolded.

[jmorris]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

As long as the brace has not been modified and the shoulder use is incidential, sporadic, or situational.

[locke_n_load]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

As long as the brace has not been modified and the shoulder use is incidential, sporadic, or situational.

True about the modification. But about the shouldering, that is your interpretation. Texas DPS does not dictate how you must hold a pistol to qualify, and ATF has since "updated" 'their opinion that shouldering a brace does not re-classify the firearm. So in my opinion as an instructor, shouldering would be ok. Not preferred, but ok.

[jmorris]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

As long as the brace has not been modified and the shoulder use is incidential, sporadic, or situational.

True about the modification. But about the shouldering, that is your interpretation. Texas DPS does not dictate how you must hold a pistol to qualify, and ATF has since "updated" 'their opinion that shouldering a brace does not re-classify the firearm. So in my opinion as an instructor, shouldering would be ok. Not preferred, but ok.

It's late for me so I'm not going on go cut and paste but in my reading of both memos the concern was the incidental shouldering of the pistol and that was what the ATI clarified.

[locke_n_load]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

As long as the brace has not been modified and the shoulder use is incidential, sporadic, or situational.

True about the modification. But about the shouldering, that is your interpretation. Texas DPS does not dictate how you must hold a pistol to qualify, and ATF has since "updated" 'their opinion that shouldering a brace does not re-classify the firearm. So in my opinion as an instructor, shouldering would be ok. Not preferred, but ok.

It's late for me so I'm not going on go cut and paste but in my reading of both memos the concern was the incidental shouldering of the pistol and that was what the ATI clarified.

I gotcha. What I took away was the intent when building the pistol originally. If the intent was to put on a brace and use that as a stock, then they made an illegal SBR. But if they built it to use as a pistol, and then shouldered it later, as long as that was not their intention when building it, then it is ok to shoulder at a later time.

[couzin]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

I'll bite - why would you want to? How do you plan on packing that thing around dude?

[spectre]

Not that I would expect it to happen often, but since there is no caliber restriction, could one use an AR pistol with a brace, and then since the atf has decided it's ok, shoulder it?

I'll bite - why would you want to? How do you plan on packing that thing around dude?

Texas LTC doesn't list the guns you qualified with and doesn't restrict what you can carry based on caliber or action type. You can qualify with a .22LR revolver and carry a Desert Eagle or vice versa.

[couzin]

Heck - I know that, nor am I oblivious to the whole BATF "brace" issue on pistol ARs. I also am aware of Medley86 just posting a straw man question/comment. I was simply asking, why, pray tell, would anyone even consider showing up at the range qualification with a short barrel AR with (or without for that matter) a brace?