TexasCHLforum.com

Curious: I'm traveling to Ohio this Summer, and would prefer to be armed. Is there anyone in the Houston are teaching a Utah CHL class?

I would also be interested as I have family there, and that would be the only state between here and Michigan (My wifes home) that I would not be able to carry in.

Here is a link to the out of state Utah instructors:
http://publicsafety.utah.gov/bci/docume ... te_071.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Has anyone heard anything about a UTAH class in Houston area?
I have family in OH and would like to be set when I visit them.

I have looked at the instructors, and hope that Mr. Cotton does do a class, but that question has yet to be answered.

Anyone?

Thanks

Okay folks, here is my issue with Utah licenses. I'm a Utah instructor but I haven't done any classes in a good while. The issue of Texas residents getting a Utah CFP instead of a Texas CHL has caused quite an uproar in Austin and it's going to get worse. There are at least two Utah instructors who are aggressively marketing the Utah CFP as a cheaper and easier way to carry a gun in Texas. This advertising is precisely what has a number of folks in Austin upset.

I've only taught a few Utah classes and to my knowledge every one of my students had a Texas CHL and wanted the Utah CFP to get reciprocity with other states. I have had quite a few requests to do another Utah CFP class and I have not scheduled one for the above-listed reasons. However, if there is enough interest, I will schedule a class in Friendswood, but only for people who have a Texas CHL. I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but I'm not about to have my name mentioned in the Capitol as one of the people causing the "Utah problem."

I'll post a separate thread to gauge interest.

Thanks,
Chas.

Hmmm, perhaps the "Utah Problem" would go away if Texas were a little more competitive with their license fees... Just say'n...

I have a Utah CFP, and I think there are legitimate reasons for having one, but I got mine a year after I got my Texas CHL. I waited because I wanted the renewal periods for each to overlap, not coincide, just in case an unforeseen complication made the renewal plastic for one or the other arrive after the old one expired.

The reasons I got one in the first place are two-fold: one is that you pick up reciprocity with OH, WV, & WA; and in the unlikely even that my CHL were temporarily suspended pending a shooting investigation, I would still (hopefully) be able to carry under the authority of the CFP. I figure that, God forbid, I should have to shoot someone, there would be some risk of retaliation on the part of the shootee's compadres, and that would be when I would least want to be disarmed. On the other hand, the Texas CHL gives you SC and KS, which you can't get with the non-resident CFP.

All of that said, I not only have personally steered people away from a Utah CFP as an alternative to a Texas CHL, I've told at least one vendor at the Fort Worth gun show that I thought they were doing concealed carry in Texas a disservice by marketing the CFP as an alternative. Also, I noted that one such vendor at last weekend's show was giving misleading information. That vendor told a friend of mine — while I was several aisles over and missed the conversation or I would have nipped that one in the bud — that you get more state reciprocity with a CFP than with a CHL, neglecting to add that you get more state reciprocity if you have both. They were using what looked like ripped off copies of the reciprocity maps from handgunlaw.us to make their case.

I set him straight. With a NON-resident Utah CFP, you have reciprocity with 28 states (updated 5/23/10), Texas included. With a resident Texas CHL, you have reciprocity with 31 states, Utah included (updated 5/7/10). So that kind of advertising is misleading at best.

I am sure I will get flamed for this.... If we in fact will always be required to have a CHL to carry (not getting into a 2nd Amend. discussion) then I feel that any Texas resident who is going to carry should be required to hold a Texas CHL, any other states license would be for back-up only and for other states that do not honor the Texas license. If the legislature passed a bill requiring this I would not be upset about it.

I see postings on Craigslist from somebody who pushes the Utah license as the only license that people need, I feel this to be mis-leading although technically true. My issue is that they do not go over the Texas carry laws and no shooting is required. Should one of these people get arrested for carrying in a prohibited location the first thing we will read is that a "CHL" person was arrested for ......... this will not look favorably on any of us. I keep hearing about the cost, I have a hard time believing that the cost difference is really that much of an issue to 99% of the CHL holders.......

Salty1 wrote:Should one of these people get arrested for carrying in a prohibited location the first thing we will read is that a "CHL" person was arrested for ......... this will not look favorably on any of us.

I tend to agree with your sentiment, but I believe that the above quoted is not necessarily relevant, as anyone carrying in Texas under the authority of a CFP is subject to Texas CHL law — the same as if I were carrying under authority of my Texas CHL in Utah, I would be subject to Utah CFP law.

I think the relevance is that if people "shortcut" the Texas CHL license for one issued in Utah they are not taught the Texas requirements as well as prohibited places. I feel that many of them will not do the research on their own to find out the differences in the Texas State Laws.... To each their own, everybody has their reasons for what they do....

The Annoyed Man wrote: The reasons I got one in the first place are two-fold: one is that you pick up reciprocity with OH, WV, & WA; and in the unlikely even that my CHL were temporarily suspended pending a shooting investigation, I would still (hopefully) be able to carry under the authority of the CFP. I figure that, God forbid, I should have to shoot someone, there would be some risk of retaliation on the part of the shootee's compadres, and that would be when I would least want to be disarmed. On the other hand, the Texas CHL gives you SC and KS, which you can't get with the non-resident CFP.

Isn't the issuance of a non-resident UT CFP based on the premise that you a hold a TX CHL? If so, wouldn't suspending the one invalidate the other until resolved?

If I were an LEO and I ran your plates and it came back with a Suspension, I would probably totally discount the UT CFP.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

Salty1 wrote:I think the relevance is that if people "shortcut" the Texas CHL license for one issued in Utah they are not taught the Texas requirements as well as prohibited places. I feel that many of them will not do the research on their own to find out the differences in the Texas State Laws.... To each their own, everybody has their reasons for what they do....

I'm not really arguing your point. I'm just point out that CFP holders are subject to the same regs as the rest of us.

Purplehood wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote: The reasons I got one in the first place are two-fold: one is that you pick up reciprocity with OH, WV, & WA; and in the unlikely even that my CHL were temporarily suspended pending a shooting investigation, I would still (hopefully) be able to carry under the authority of the CFP. I figure that, God forbid, I should have to shoot someone, there would be some risk of retaliation on the part of the shootee's compadres, and that would be when I would least want to be disarmed. On the other hand, the Texas CHL gives you SC and KS, which you can't get with the non-resident CFP.

Isn't the issuance of a non-resident UT CFP based on the premise that you a hold a TX CHL? If so, wouldn't suspending the one invalidate the other until resolved?

If I were an LEO and I ran your plates and it came back with a Suspension, I would probably totally discount the UT CFP.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

Hence the red (hopefully)

I wasn't going to jump into this, but I feel that I must.

As a Utah instructor in Texas, I feel it is my DUTY to instruct Utah students in Texas CHL law. Anything less is a disservice to the students. If I only tell them about restrictions that apply to Utah, how does that help them in Texas? I don't know how other instructors teach their classes, other than what I have heard.

I do know that there is one instructor in the area who is advertising his classes as this:

Save your valuable time and earn your Concealed Handgun License in only 5 hours and your license will be valid in 30 states including Texas. No written test, no range qualification and no renewal classes are ever required. Very limited seating and pre-registration is required by calling CHL Instructor...

No mention anywhere that this is a Utah class. He is NOT a Texas CHL instructor, and I have a problem with him representing his class as a Texas class.

To answer a previous question, you are not required to have a Texas CHL for the non-resident Utah CFP to be valid. However, there are a growing number of states that will not recognize the non-resident permit - Colorado, Florida, New Mexico right of the top of my head.

The Utah thing is a problem. But only because irresponsible instructors have made it a problem. Like Charles, I have considered not teaching the class any more because of this. Or, at the least, not offering the Utah CFP without a Texas CHL.

Purplehood wrote:Isn't the issuance of a non-resident UT CFP based on the premise that you a hold a TX CHL? If so, wouldn't suspending the one invalidate the other until resolved?

I just checked Crossfire's Website, and here are the CFP eligibility requirements:

To be eligible for a Utah Concealed Firearm Permit, you:

• Must be at least 21
• Must be fully qualified under federal and state laws to purchase and possess a firearm
• Must not have been convicted of a felony
• Must not have been convicted of a crime of domestic violence
• Must not have been adjudicated by any state or federal court as mentally incompetent
• Must not currently be subject to a Protective Order
• Must not have been convicted of a Class A misdemeanor in the past 5 years
• Must not have been convicted of a Class B or Class C misdemeanor in the past 3 years
• Must not have been convicted of a DUI OFFENSE in the past 6 years

If you have questions about your eligibility status, you can contact a Utah BCI investigator at 1-801-957-8620 before sending in your application.

It doesn't say, outright anyway, that you have to hold a valid CHL (or resident license of another state) to obtain or keep a Utah CFP. I just checked the Utah Dept. of Public Safety website, and I am unable to find any mention of a requirement for non-resident applicants that they hold a current license in another state.

Charles, if you do teach the class, add my name to the list. I have my Texas CHL, and want the Utah CFP for reciprocity reasons.

CB