HB 3784

[NotRPB]

HB 3784
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... ill=HB3784
Relating to persons approved by the Department of Public Safety to administer online the classroom instruction part of the handgun proficiency course.
passed to 3rd reading

[kg5ie]

I, for one, think this is great if it makes it. There is lots of business out there with folks who would do the class online if they could. Just like online college courses. Teach via conference call and Skype.

[TreyHouston]

This will destroy real instrustors... then again, perhaps it won't be 4 hours of selling an "insurance product"

[WTR]

This will destroy real instrustors... then again, perhaps it won't be 4 hours of selling an "insurance product"

I didn't learn anything in person that I could not have learned by taking an online course.....this site as an example,has been as much or more educational than the course I took.

[Lambda Force]

My only objection is not requiring the written test be taken in person, like all my online classes required for the final exam. If they have to shoot in person, why not spend an extra 10 minutes to do the written exam at the same time?

Not that it really matters to me anyway until HB560 or equivalent passes.

[rob777]

My only objection is not requiring the written test be taken in person, like all my online classes required for the final exam. If they have to shoot in person, why not spend an extra 10 minutes to do the written exam at the same time?

[TreyHouston]

This will destroy real instrustors... then again, perhaps it won't be 4 hours of selling an "insurance product"

I didn't learn anything in person that I could not have learned by taking an online course.....this site as an example,has been as much or more educational than the course I took.

100% correct! you can't make people learn, classroom or not!

[jmorris]

I, for one, think this is great if it makes it. There is lots of business out there with folks who would do the class online if they could. Just like online college courses. Teach via conference call and Skype.

Actually, when I first read this bill I did not read it as online instruction being video conferencing but an online program.

I see a couple problems with your average LTC instructor getting certified to teach online. First, the requirements.

(a-1) The director may certify as an approved online course provider a person who has:
(1) at least three years of experience in providing online instruction;
(2) experience working with governmental entities;
and
(3) direct knowledge of handgun training.

How many instructors can meet (1)? I've conducted several training video conferences over the years as part of my IT job but nowhere is that documented. And we'll have to see how they define (2). Having worked for the feds for the last seven years and as a government contractor for 20 years before that I'd say I'd had a good chance of meeting that one.

And how are you going go conduct the test in a video conference? Myself, I'd use something like Brainsbuilder (https://www.brainsbuilder.com/pricing.html) but if, like me, you provide them with a copy of CHl-16 and your slides, it's now an open book test.

Which brings up, how do you get them and you a signed copy of the CHL-100? Sign, scan, email, sign, scan, email it back an forth? Could build the CHL-100 form in Acrobat to be digitally signed by both parties.

What I see is some online instruction company getting one of it's programmers certified, creating a online course such as the NRA Basic Pistol online course and charging $20 for it.

And explain this one to me.

A qualified handgun instructor shall require an
applicant who successfully completed an online version of the
classroom instruction part of the handgun proficiency course to
complete not less than one hour but not more than two hours of the
range instruction part of the handgun proficiency course before
allowing a physical demonstration of handgun proficiency as
described by Subsection (d)(2).

The range instruction part of the course? Didn't see that in the four parts required to be taught.

[jmorris]

My only objection is not requiring the written test be taken in person, like all my online classes required for the final exam. If they have to shoot in person, why not spend an extra 10 minutes to do the written exam at the same time?

Not that it really matters to me anyway until HB560 or equivalent passes.

Who says the same instructor will be doing both? For $20 I'll provide the class to as many people as can log on and email them a CHL-100 with the classroom instruction part signed. Go find your own instructor for range proficiency.

I think all my online classes in the last ten or so years (not college, may be different) included on on-line exam.

[o b juan]

soon you will be able to become a supreme court judge on line.

Verbal communication is disappearing.

Just look at anytime all the folks around you texting. The downfall of verbal communication and human interaction.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I have mixed feelings about this Bill. I applaud any reasonable effort to reduce the burden on citizens wanting to get a license to carry, but we have to watch out for unintended consequences. I share the concerns expressed by jmorris in his post. I have taken many online courses to meet my continuing legal education requirements, but none require a test. Neither do they cover subjects so critical to my safety and liberty that I want/need the opportunity to ask questions. The LTC class is arguably the most important safety/liberty class one can take, so a knowledgeable live instructor is critical, at least in my view.

I'm also very concerned about the criteria for being approved to provide online courses. LTC instructors are shut out and companies like Sylvan Learning Center will have the entire market. The benefits of a knowledgeable live instructor would also help to ensure better online courses, if they/we were allowed to offer courses. We know the types of questions we typically receive and we are in a better position to cover the less clear issues in an online course. As for testing, no one can ensure an honest test given online -- no one.

The overall cost to applicants using online courses is quite likely to be higher than a live course, when you consider the cost of the course, plus the fee to an instructor to provide the range qualification certificate. Most instructors will reduce their fees only slightly, especially when they have to pay a line fee to a range.

If online instruction were to be implemented, then the DPS should do it and there should be no fee. The written test could be administered by LTC instructors when the student comes to them for the range qualification.

Chas.

[Jusme]

I have mixed feelings about this Bill. I applaud any reasonable effort to reduce the burden on citizens wanting to get a license to carry, but we have to watch out for unintended consequences. I share the concerns expressed by jmorris in his post. I have taken many online courses to meet my continuing legal education requirements, but none require a test. Neither do they cover subjects so critical to my safety and liberty that I want/need to opportunity to ask questions. The LTC class is arguably the most important safety/liberty class one can take, so a knowledgeable live instructor is critical, at least in my view.

I'm also very concerned about the criteria for being approved to provide online courses. LTC instructors are shut out and companies like Sylvan Learning Center will have the entire market. The benefits of a knowledgeable live instructor would also help to ensure better online courses, if they/we were allowed to offer courses. We know the types of questions we typically receive and we are in a better position to cover the less clear issues in an online course. As for testing, no one can ensure an honest test given online -- no one.

The overall cost to applicants using online courses is quite likely to be higher than a live course, when you consider the cost of the course, plus the fee to an instructor to provide the range qualification certificate. Most instructors will reduce their fees only slightly, especially when they have to pay a line fee to a range.

If online instruction were to be implemented, then the DPS should do it and there should be no fee. The written test could be administered by LTC instructors when the student comes to them for the range qualification.

Chas.

Or even have the DPS administer the test, at a DPS office,like they do for DL. That way there is no chance, that a less than scrupulous LTC holder, or instructor doesn't "take" the test for them. But, I agree that face to face instruction, with the ability to ask questions, is a much more effective way to ensure that the information, is actually "learned" and not just read. JMHO

[AF-Odin]

Charles

Thanks. You have perfectly articulated my thoughts on the subject. This is also tied to my concern with the ON-LINE Basic Pistol class that NRA tried and is now, apparently, pulling back on a little. Throughout my life, I have been in quite a few face to face classes as well as countless hours of required on-line instruction (in fact I am in the process of completing my biennial required refresher on-line training to renew my flight instructor certificates). On-Line for LTC has merit as a refresher, but not for the actual licensing. In my classes, particularly the firearms safety portion, I have students demonstrate safe handling techniques as well as sighting (using blue guns). We also cover safety checks. This saves quite a bit of time on the range and allows me to evaluate whether the student has paid attention to my instruction.

[allisji]

My wife had to do the defensive driving course recently. She went online for the course. It was like $25 for about 8 hours of instruction. After she passed the test, they mailed her the certificate. I just did a google search for texas defensive driving online, and received 10.3MM hits in 0.63 seconds.

The Texas LTC course could easily go that way but the DPS is going to have to control the content. They will have to make sure that each approved course gets updated every time the legislature makes a change. It could work fine, if it's managed well. Or it could be a disaster. Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

If this can substantially decrease the cost of obtaining an LTC then it's worth doing, especially if we get HB1911 because we want as many people to do the training as we can get. However, if it's going to cost $30+ to do the online course and another $40 so that the range instructor can pay the range and still make a little money, then it won't make any difference anyway. If we can get the LTC fees reduced to $40 and the training reduced to $40, then after fingerprints, etc. you're out less than $100 to get an LTC, and more people might get it even if they can carry without.

[Papa_Tiger]

Of course, course if HB1911 is passed then people don't need the training in order to be able to carry a gun in Texas, anywhere that an LTC can.

There will still be places off limits by statute to carry a handgun for non-LTC holders that are not off limits to LTC holders unless there is a 30.06/7 sign, namely:

Hospitals
Amusement Parks
Government meetings subject to Open Meetings Act