People who really need more training

[Liberty]

All is lost, The day has come! Thee Bradys have won.
I never thought I would see the day when folks on a gun board would be advocates of reasonable restriction.

Man, that's a great impression of Fred Sanford/Redd Foxx! I don't think any member of this forum would support the kinds of "reasonable restrictions" the Brady Bunch would inflict on us. But as an instructor, I do follow the law and the law says you have to successfully demonstrate proficiency before I sign off on the TR-100 you submit as part of your CHL application. It is almost instinctual to call those who can't pass the basic proficiency demonstration, blind idiots. But since I have seen a blind man pass the test, I realize that is an insult to the blind and I think we've discussed the idea that blindness alone shouldn't be a disqualifier. So rather than insult the blind, I'll just say those who can't pass are idiots. Scratch, that...I'm being too harsh and insenstive to idiots. Those who can't pass are not idiots. They are simply incompetent and in most cases, are not conscious of their incompetence until they fail the proficiency. We see those at instructor renewals every couple years too.

In all seriousness, I have a hard time believing you or anyone on this board wouldn't prefer that people to be proficient and competent when using things like cars, planes, chainsaws or guns with which they could kill or injure themselves, you or anyone in their immediate vicinity. That's the purpose of this discussion and the OP was simply looking for answers on how to address that issue. Now if you think that's promoting reasonable restrictions, that's your choice and you are free to think what you want. I think it's nothing more than shooters having a discussion about what to do when we see someone who is obviously incompetent and a danger to herself and everyone around her. I think TxFig came to the right place to discuss the issue. And I think nearly all of us would agree there are far too many unconsiously incompetent idiots on the the street with guns...Metro PD may have just proven that least half of the idiots may be wearing a badge. If we as a community can't talk about how to fix that without accusing each other of being against the 2nd Amendment, you can bet the Brady's will and none of us will like their solutions.

That's my $0.02 and I'm done with this thread.

I was going to bow out of this cause to be honest I get pretty emotional about a couple of things in this issue.
First thing I find offensive is that folks here so quickly dismiss the disabled. I can not equate the ability to rack a slide to a level of safety. The fact of denying the very folks who need the protection the most is abhorent and disgusting.

I never found a problem with failing people in a CHL testing situation for unsafe actions. The problem is that there are those that consider field stripping their weapon a means of safety testing. If folks feel that the ability to charge their weapon is a matter of safety. and reason to deny anyone the right to carry on or streets and market places. They aren't ever likely to approve of carry without a license. Once some is opposed to accepting licensed carry as going far enough, there is no commonality. One can not truly believe in the right for every man to be armed and stripping them of the right because they cannot field strip their weapon.
I'm through also.

[Oldgringo]

One may be called upon to reload one's weapon and one doesn't have to rack the slide on a revolver.

We should all know our limitations in whatever endeavor that we're engaged in. You reckon?

[Pistol storm 40]

One may be called upon to reload one's weapon and one doesn't have to rack the slide on a revolver.

We should all know our limitations in whatever endeavor that we're engaged in. You reckon?

In fact if you can't operate a manual transmission there is another option out there for them too!

[TxFig]

That's my $0.02 and I'm done with this thread.

As the OP, I am going to request that you NOT be "done with this thread". Maybe the side topic that has grown from it - but not with the original topic. You are EXACTLY the kind of person I would like to see discussing it.

[jbirds1210]

field strip their weapon.

I'm confused. I agree that people should not be held back because they can't field strip their weapon (I tried it with my Ruger Mark I and it was ugly).

Being able to properly manipulate the weapon in a no/low stress situation safely is an entirely different thing and not unreasonable IMO.

Jason

[roberts]

Being able to properly manipulate the weapon in a no/low stress situation safely is an entirely different thing and not unreasonable IMO.

[Darwood]

By law, Texas CHL instructors have a certain amount of information that they are required to teach in a certain amount of time. The class requires about 11 hours of your time and around $125 of your money. This doesn't include the $140 fee for issuing your CHL.

How many of you would like to be required to take a another class [time/$$$] and present a "Certificate of Handgun Safety Training" to your CHL instructor before you can take the CHL class?

Some states, such as California, require this. Have you ever checked the number of CCWs issued in California compared with Texas?

I have a "California Department of Justice Handgun Safety Certificate". It's required if one desires to own a handgun in the peoples republic. It consisted of me taking a 30 question multiple choice test about handgun safety. I miraculously passed by getting every question correct. I'm not entirely sure the gun store clerk even graded it. I still carry the "certificate" around in my wallet for kicks.