TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Safety-c ... 38831.html

It's a booming business for two former cops, Travis and Paula Bond, who have run DFW Shooters Academy for the past two years.

"There are just some folks who probably shouldn't be training other people,” said Travis Bond. “I've seen safety issues, I've seen people cutting classes short... there just needs to be a lot more supervision."

Strauss and Burnam are not our biggest obstacle. It is CHL Instructors like this

An attack piece by Brett Shipp at Channel 8 DFW aided and abetted by CHL instructors.

When this story aired last night Brett Shipps intro was " is 4 hours enough to teach someone to use a firearm" (paraphrased).
A CHL class is not intended to "teach someone to use a firearm" 4 hours is plenty to teach the CHL course.

Of course if it is lowered to 4 hours we could have the same problems Utah and Florida have now

AndyC wrote:I disagree; I believe that shortening the 10-hour class to only 4 hours is asking for trouble and I do not support it.

Flynn said. "A lot of people who try to get their license, they have to take a day off of work, or they have to take a whole Saturday to go do this

Well, boohoo. The subject isn't a game, nor should it be a gimme.

It's infrequent that I disagree with you Andy but in this case I do... There are many other states where the classroom requirement is far less than 10 hours. (Off topic, but, Is 10 hours the longest of any state?). Some states have a zero-training requirement. I don't find any accounts of bloodshed related to that reduced training requirement.

If a novice (or brand new) shooter shows up for a class, is 8 hours of classroom instruction focused on TX laws (not on shooting basics) and 50 rounds at the range anything we should consider "training".?

My question to Mr. Bond would be "are you saying you are not properly training your renewal students since those courses are statutorily limited to 4 to 6 hours?"

As I noted, there will be a committee substitute that amends HB47 so that it will allow a course to be between 4 to 6 hours long, excluding range time. I looked on Mr. Bond's website and I couldn't find anything about the length of his renewal classes.

CHL's have an excellent track record and we've been teaching renewal students in 4 hours for 16 years, and this includes range time.

Chas.

RoyGBiv wrote:

AndyC wrote:I disagree; I believe that shortening the 10-hour class to only 4 hours is asking for trouble and I do not support it.

Flynn said. "A lot of people who try to get their license, they have to take a day off of work, or they have to take a whole Saturday to go do this

Well, boohoo. The subject isn't a game, nor should it be a gimme.

It's infrequent that I disagree with you Andy but in this case I do... There are many other states where the classroom requirement is far less than 10 hours. (Off topic, but, Is 10 hours the longest of any state?). Some states have a zero-training requirement. I don't find any accounts of bloodshed related to that reduced training requirement.

If a novice (or brand new) shooter shows up for a class, is 8 hours of classroom instruction focused on TX laws (not on shooting basics) and 50 rounds at the range anything we should consider "training".?

Not only that, but the classroom requirement adversely affects many of the people who need CHL's the most. Crime is often highest in low-income areas. Many residents in those areas work 6 and 7 days a week and are paid hourly. Taking a day off from work to spend 10 hours in class means lost wages - often is cases where money is already tight. This problem is further compounded for single-parent families or families where both parents are working because now they have to hire a babysitter to watch the kids while they're in class. That's nothing to sneeze (or "boohoo") at.

I don't know exactly how I feel about this yet...

I can tell you this.... No one said you can't make your classes longer so be my guest and make them 14 hours. When I took my class, I can say that 1/4 to half of the time was filled with unneeded stories for filler sake. We covered the state mandated items with no problems.

This is still America although reading some of the post you would not think so.

Truth is we should not have to have ANY CLASS (or license) to be able to exercise our God given rights backed by the Constitution of the United States.

carlson1 wrote:This is still America although reading some of the post you would not think so.

Truth is we should not have to have ANY CLASS (or license) to be able to exercise our God given rights backed by the Constitution of the United States.

carlson1 wrote:This is still America although reading some of the post you would not think so.

Truth is we should not have to have ANY CLASS (or license) to be able to exercise our God given rights backed by the Constitution of the United States.

RX8er wrote:I don't know exactly how I feel about this yet...

I can tell you this.... No one said you can't make your classes longer so be my guest and make them 14 hours. When I took my class, I can say that 1/4 to half of the time was filled with unneeded stories for filler sake. We covered the state mandated items with no problems.

When the committee substitute to HB47 is submitted, it will limit classes to between 4 to 6 hours, exclusive of range time. An instructor will be required to issue a CHL-100 to all students who pass the class at the end of the 4 to 6 hour session and upon completion of the range portion of the class. If the instructor wants to offer optional hours to his students after distributing the CHL-100s, he/she will be free to do so.

Depending upon the size of the class, their experience with firearms and the number of people that can be put on the firing line at one time, the range portion of the class usually runs from 1 to 2 hours, sometime even longer. If an instructor wants to teach a 6 hour class, and then spends from 1 to 2 hours on the range, then the total time will be 7 to 8 hours. That is more than enough time to teach the required material. Even if one teaches a 4 hour class, the total time will usually be between 5 and 6 hours.

I seriously doubt anyone covers the use of force more thoroughly than do I and it takes me about 2 1/2 hours. Even my stand-alone Texas Self-Defense & Deadly Force Laws Seminar can be completed in 3 hours, so my students get almost my entire seminar in both the initial and renewal classes. Sure, I could add more fluff to that segment and spend an entire day on the topic, but it doesn't take 4 hours to teach the Penal Code sections on the use of force, plus a good dose of "real world" discussion.

To those who fear a problem with shorter initial classes, I keep coming back to the fact that we have been doing it in only 4 hours (not 4 to 6 hours excluding range time) with amazing success for 16 years. Rest easy folks, HB47 isn't based upon speculation, but on 16 years of experience.

Chas.

AndyC wrote:Personally, I'd rather see it longer - but it would never happen as long as we believe that rights don't come with any emphasis on learning about the responsibilities which come with that right.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one Andy.

I'm ok with the State giving me a test... like a drivers exam.
If I can pass a written test (I read CHL-16 and understood it just fine without the class) and a shooting test, then I have demonstrated the same understanding of the requirements as someone who took the class. Why do I need to pay ~/>$100 and give up a day of my time?

I agree that demonstrating proficiency and an understanding of the law is a "reasonable restriction".
[I'd rather see Constitutional Carry, but I can't argue with a written test and proficiency being called "reasonable"]

NRA basic pistol (or equivalent) would be MUCH more valuable from a proficiency standpoint.
The two ladies in my TX class were literally shaking when we got to the range. Everyone passed.
The TX class as it's structured today does not fix that. IMO.