Minor incident with another CHL'er today

[The Annoyed Man]

Everybody wanted to comment on my post about why he wanted to know the instructors name. IMO this has no bearing in this incident as the instructor was not there and is not responsible for this persons actions and that was why I asked the OP why he asked that.

You're absolutely right....it had no immediate bearing on the incident, but it is instructive to us for other reasons. I might have asked the same question were I in 2farnorth's shoes. The reason is simply that, although it doesn't change the immediate situation one bit, it would make a difference as to whether or not I'd want to recommend that instructor to anyone else. And one way to confirm that is to have an after-the-fact conversation with the instructor about this particular incident.....for reasons I outlined in my previous post. But you're correct in that the identity of his CHL instructor had little or no bearing on how 2farnorth should have handled the immediate incident.

As a general thing, I believe that we in the CHL community are not responsible for one another's actions any more than we are for anyone else's actions. But I also believe that we do have a vested interest in countering it, insofar as we are able to, whenever bad information gets disseminated by either by our fellow CHLs, poorly trained/informed instructors, or the general public and the press. So desiring to know the identity of the customer's CHL instructor falls under that latter sentiment.

[Abraham]

TAM,

I fully appreciate what you're saying, but I can't imagine any Texas instructor advising his CHL students that a portion of their handgun can legally/visibly be seen by the public when it's supposed to be completely concealed, as in: Yes, it's O.K. if the butt of your handgun is visible...nah, I don't buy it.

Perhaps, there are instructors out there applying that level of incompetence, but I doubt it.

My guess is the 'outed' CHLer, if indeed he's actually in possession of a CHL, is simply a poor student or willful...

[WinoVeritas]

I'll give the benefit of doubt. If the guy is only looking in a mirror or facing others, obviously the grip isn't seen, except from behind. Eventually he will encounter a LEO and learn the hard way, concealed means concealed, regardless of the viewing angle. Hopefully he had a learning moment from this encounter.

[The Annoyed Man]

TAM,

I fully appreciate what you're saying, but I can't imagine any Texas instructor advising his CHL students that a portion of their handgun can legally/visibly be seen by the public when it's supposed to be completely concealed, as in: Yes, it's O.K. if the butt of your handgun is visible...nah, I don't buy it.

Perhaps, there are instructors out there applying that level of incompetence, but I doubt it.

My guess is the 'outed' CHLer, if indeed he's actually in possession of a CHL, is simply a poor student or willful...

My point isn't that an instructor would deliberately communicate that misinformation. My point is that a conscientious instructor would probably want to know if one of his or her students was out there disseminating untrue information......not so that they can do anything to the student in question (they can't, realistically), but because they might want to emphasize these points with future classes, and use this student (anonymously) as an example of what NOT to do. That's all. I know that if I were an instructor, I'd want to do that. Perhaps others disagree. That's OK.

[2farnorth]

Thanks TAM. You broke down so it wasn't a rambling narrative and made it more understandable.

At work so far so good, but based on the employer's questions they are still considering their course of action carefully. Out of the blue she expressed concern about the reduction in chl training requirements just passed by the legislature. That concern was based on what "trained NY City police officers did last year when they hit several bystanders when shooting at a gunman". She's afraid of that scenario being repeated or worse with lesser trained chls. I tried to assure her that Texas chls have a very good record in their responses to shooting situations and that we don't normally pursue assailants as those police were doing. Our first responsibility is the safety of innocent lives around us. She knows a lot about my background and has a certain amount of trust in my judgement. She did say a lot of what I told her made a lot of sense.

I was never blaming the instructor. It was just making conversation and wondering if I knew the instructor. I now know who the instructor is but I will only bring it up in a generic conversation with no names or specifics. Not as a complaint or accusation. As TAM expressed it could be used as a teaching aid. I know my instructor was interested in the generic details when I talked to him last night.

[TexasGal]

My first thought upon reading this thread was the part where he unconcealed his gun without any apparent concern and equally had no reluctance to enter postal poperty with it. Two likely reasons came to mind: He feels all laws that inhibit his desire to carry whatever where ever are to be disdained as much as possible, Or he never really learned the laws to begin with. That sounds more like a non resident CHL. I certainly hope every Texas Instructor is doing a way better job of getting these basic things across thoroughly. But when you get an out of state license that never covers Texas law at all, you are on your own to learn them. Some people are really lousy at that. Did he ever answer who his instructor was?

My second thought was that this is just one example of the kind of reactions we would likely see if open carry was enacted in Texas. Lots of places could be posted that aren't now and it could affect a lot of us who are carrying concealed at work. I carried concealed for years at an office that would likely have been posted immediately if they ever ever had a single person enter it openly armed. A majority of their patients were left wing in their politics and the owner would have posted it to avoid upsetting them. The OP is now having to worry if his own right to carry will be jeopardized by a single dimwit.

[2firfun50]

My first thought upon reading this thread was the part where he unconcealed his gun without any apparent concern and equally had no reluctance to enter postal poperty with it. Two likely reasons came to mind: He feels all laws that inhibit his desire to carry whatever where ever are to be disdained as much as possible, Or he never really learned the laws to begin with. That sounds more like a non resident CHL. I certainly hope every Texas Instructor is doing a way better job of getting these basic things across thoroughly. But when you get an out of state license that never covers Texas law at all, you are on your own to learn them. Some people are really lousy at that. Did he ever answer who his instructor was?

My second thought was that this is just one example of the kind of reactions we would likely see if open carry was enacted in Texas. Lots of places could be posted that aren't now and it could affect a lot of us who are carrying concealed at work. I carried concealed for years at an office that would likely have been posted immediately if they ever ever had a single person enter it openly armed. A majority of their patients were left wing in their politics and the owner would have posted it to avoid upsetting them. The OP is now having to worry if his own right to carry will be jeopardized by a single dimwit.

I experienced a similar situation in 2009 at my place of employment. A CHL holder had an "intential" failure to conceal on the job. He whipped out his shinney, new EDC to show a buddy. The facility was not posted, but all employees knew a firearm anywhere on the property was automatic termination. By the time this individual finished "educating" management about Texas CHL law and expounding on his 2A rights, he was hooked up and on his way to jail.

The very next morning, the entire property was properly 30.06 posted, meetings were held to inform everyone that possession of a firearm on the property would result is arrest and termination. Corporate Legal presided over the meetings and quoted chapter and verse from the Texas statutes. So every CHL holder was effectively barred from carrying to and from work until the parking lot law went into effect on 9/1/2011. The 30.06 signs came down for the parking lot, and remain today for the buildings.

It only takes 1 jackwagon.

[The Annoyed Man]

It only takes 1 jackwagon.

And that hits the nail right on the head. The problem is that jackwagons are partly jackwagons because they insist on vocally sharing their ignorance with those who are least likely to be sympathetic to their views........and the world is full of jackwagons.....and the rest of us pay the price for their jackwagonery.

[RogueUSMC]

and the world is full of jackwagons.....and the rest of us pay the price for their jackwagonery.

This statement defies basic math principles...lol...the world is almost full...otherwise there is no 'rest of us'...lol

Sorry, splitting hairs is just in my nature...lol...don't mind me...

[Jaguar]

and the world is full of jackwagons.....and the rest of us pay the price for their jackwagonery.

This statement defies basic math principles...lol...the world is almost full...otherwise there is no 'rest of us'...lol

Sorry, splitting hairs is just in my nature...lol...don't mind me...

What a jackwagon...


j/k

[RogueUSMC]

[bayouhazard]

If a customer gave me any attitude in a situation like that, I would say "you need to leave now" and walk away. If he didn't leave, I would call 911 and tell them there's a MWAG who refused to leave after receiving oral notice. He can see how well his attitude does with the cops.