New CHL requirements???

[VoiceofReason]

“I personally watched a gal pass the shooting test who had never fired a pistol before and could not load the hand gun her brother loaned her to take the test.”

How did she pass? I thought it was a competency test, not just a shooting test. If she could not reload she would not have passed the class I took.

“I promise you, if that woman ever starts firing in self defense, not only will she shoot your wife, she will shoot me, you, God, the ceiling, the floor, the left and right waiters....and maybe even herself before she ever hits the intended target.”

That’s damn scary. I could have gone all day without you telling me that.

[03Lightningrocks]

“I personally watched a gal pass the shooting test who had never fired a pistol before and could not load the hand gun her brother loaned her to take the test.”

How did she pass? I thought it was a competency test, not just a shooting test. If she could not reload she would not have passed the class I took.

“I promise you, if that woman ever starts firing in self defense, not only will she shoot your wife, she will shoot me, you, God, the ceiling, the floor, the left and right waiters....and maybe even herself before she ever hits the intended target.”

That’s darn scary. I could have gone all day without you telling me that.

The class I attended was real small. Me....and her...LOL. There were two fellers in it doing a renewal class and he took them to shoot without us. the range was in the same building.

I stood there watching as he taught her how to load and operate that pistol. She learned to shoot good enough in the fifty practice shots to score enough hits on the "test" to pass. I made this comment on another post I made but I will say it again here. it is not that hard to shoot a hand gun and hit a paper target. Last Wednesday I was at Bullet trap and a guy in the range beside me was not even holding the pistol right. I could not see him, but a range officer had noticed him holding the gun with his right hand and his left hand was holding the wrist of his right hand...LOL. His first few rounds at about 7 feet went into the target so low, I could see sparks flying off the ground right behind the target. Five minutes later, after the range officer intervened and probably saved the rest of us from getting shot...LOL...this guy was grouping five inch groups at 10-15 feet.

I watched a Saxe cop trying to qualify at Garland Public shooting range. His groups at 25 feet were like 48 inches...LOL. I was kidding around with his superior officer about him not shooting if I was being held at gun point. his commanding officer joked back that I would be safer with him firing because he couldn't hit anything anyway...LOL. An hour later...boom...this guy was shooting paper plate groups at the same 25 feet.

The point of all this is that I don't believe one should take any comfort from the fact that a person can pass this CHL shooting test. It just isn't any kind of real challenge and sure does not mean a person is capable of shooting well when facing self defense.

I honestly believe it was only put into the class to help appease the irrational fears some of the anti's had when we first started trying to get a CHL in Texas. I believe it is intentionally easy. I understand that they only did this to help get CHL legislation passed, but I also feel like it is not in keeping with our second amendment rights. Passing this "test" sure doen't make me feel secure about a CHLers shooting abilities. There are plenty of folks that shoot once every five years and have a CHL.

[57Coastie]

Lightning,

I share wholeheartedly your view about the nothingness of the Texas CHL written examination and range qualification process, which just reinforces my opinion that more training in the use and care of firearms, as well as additional training in marksmanship, are needed -- the key word being training.

During my initial CHL course many long years ago and during my several renewal courses, I have seen only one applicant turned away by an instructor because of his ignorance/incompetence of firearms in general and his own Saturday-night-special in particular. (Thank you to my good friend el Gato, for giving me a little faith in our instructors).

On two different occasions over post-exam coffee I nicely, and unargumentively, asked a new CHLer how he goes about field stripping the M1911 he had just used on the range. Neither of them had the slightest idea how to go about it, much less put it back together.

If everyone is deemed qualified then there is no need for the hassle (and expense) of an examination and range qualification.

Which, of course, brings us back to the many views on RKBA which reject any prequalification requirements. There is no secret about my views on that, but for the moment I will apply my comments to the world we have, not an imaginary world.

With respect,

Jim

[marksiwel]

Lightning,

I share wholeheartedly your view about the nothingness of the Texas CHL written examination and range qualification process, which just reinforces my opinion that more training in the use and care of firearms, as well as additional training in marksmanship, are needed -- the key word being training.

During my initial CHL course many long years ago and during my several renewal courses, I have seen only one applicant turned away by an instructor because of his ignorance/incompetence of firearms in general and his own Saturday-night-special in particular. (Thank you to my good friend el Gato, for giving me a little faith in our instructors).

On two different occasions over post-exam coffee I nicely, and unargumentively, asked a new CHLer how he goes about field stripping the M1911 he had just used on the range. Neither of them had the slightest idea how to go about it, much less put it back together.

If everyone is deemed qualified then there is no need for the hassle (and expense) of an examination and range qualification.

Which, of course, brings us back to the many views on RKBA which reject any prequalification requirements. There is no secret about my views on that, but for the moment I will apply my comments to the world we have, not an imaginary world.

With respect,

Jim

heck when I took drivers ed they made us learn how to check the tires, and take one off if need be.
I see Grown adults who cant even jump a car.

[03Lightningrocks]

Lightning,

I share wholeheartedly your view about the nothingness of the Texas CHL written examination and range qualification process, which just reinforces my opinion that more training in the use and care of firearms, as well as additional training in marksmanship, are needed -- the key word being training.

During my initial CHL course many long years ago and during my several renewal courses, I have seen only one applicant turned away by an instructor because of his ignorance/incompetence of firearms in general and his own Saturday-night-special in particular. (Thank you to my good friend el Gato, for giving me a little faith in our instructors).

On two different occasions over post-exam coffee I nicely, and unargumentively, asked a new CHLer how he goes about field stripping the M1911 he had just used on the range. Neither of them had the slightest idea how to go about it, much less put it back together.

If everyone is deemed qualified then there is no need for the hassle (and expense) of an examination and range qualification.

Which, of course, brings us back to the many views on RKBA which reject any prequalification requirements. There is no secret about my views on that, but for the moment I will apply my comments to the world we have, not an imaginary world.

With respect,

Jim

I whole heatedly agree that everyone engaging in the use of firearms should receive more training. But this is not the same as believing that the RKBA is dependent upon such training. Their is nothing about believing in the second amendment that is imaginary. I am sorry as I can be if you really believe this.

I would call it an imaginary world were one believes that they are somehow safer from negligent discharge because of a shooting test requirement, that could be passed by a blind midget, to get a CHL.

[03Lightningrocks]

heck when I took drivers ed they made us learn how to check the tires, and take one off if need be.
I see Grown adults who cant even jump a car.

This guy couldn't check the tire pressure but............




so they went ahead and gave him a license.

[Big Tuna]

How did she pass? I thought it was a competency test, not just a shooting test. If she could not reload she would not have passed the class I took.

I hear stories that some instructors "help" students with loading and other things during the test, but I don't know how DPS allows that. If the only thing the student has to do is line up the sights and operate the trigger, there's no difference between a revolver and semiautomatic. Sights work the same. DAO triggers work the same. However, there is a difference in the law, depending on what someone uses on the test.

[03Lightningrocks]

How did she pass? I thought it was a competency test, not just a shooting test. If she could not reload she would not have passed the class I took.

I hear stories that some instructors "help" students with loading and other things during the test, but I don't know how DPS allows that. If the only thing the student has to do is line up the sights and operate the trigger, there's no difference between a revolver and semiautomatic. Sights work the same. DAO triggers work the same. However, there is a difference in the law, depending on what someone uses on the test.

The person I was referring to loaded it herself during the test. The instructor had to teach her how to do it before she took the test. It reallyy isn't that complicated to load a magazine. The only point I was trying to make is that passing the test is no indicator of shooting skills or abilities.

[Big Tuna]

The person I was referring to loaded it herself during the test. The instructor had to teach her how to do it before she took the test. It reallyy isn't that complicated to load a magazine. The only point I was trying to make is that passing the test is no indicator of shooting skills or abilities.

I don't see any problem with that. No different than driving a borrowed car for the road test and getting a lesson where the controls are in that car. The situation I heard about would be like someone else operating the turn signals and shifting gears for you during the test.

[seamusTX]

There are two issues to keep in mind here:

• In colonial America, the majority of households had firearms (mostly muzzle-loading rifles) that were used frequently. Country people hunted and had to protect themselves and their livestock from predators. City people were members of militias and drilled frequently.
  
  In that environment, a young man (and many a young woman) would learn to shoot at an early age. That was the background in which the second amendment was written
  
  Obviously, this is no longer the case.
• Most CHL holders will carry for a short time if at all, then decide it is too inconvenient and uncomfortable. Of those who carry frequently, most will never have occasion to draw a firearm, and even fewer to actually shoot.
  
  Therefore, the chance that one of these poorly trained people is going to hurt anyone but a bad guy is vanishingly small. It rarely happens in the entire country, even in states with unlicensed carry.

- Jim

[marksiwel]

There are two issues to keep in mind here:

• In colonial America, the majority of households had firearms (mostly muzzle-loading rifles) that were used frequently. Country people hunted and had to protect themselves and their livestock from predators. City people were members of militias and drilled frequently.
  
  In that environment, a young man (and many a young woman) would learn to shoot at an early age. That was the background in which the second amendment was written
  
  Obviously, this is no longer the case.
• Most CHL holders will carry for a short time if at all, then decide it is too inconvenient and uncomfortable. Of those who carry frequently, most will never have occasion to draw a firearm, and even fewer to actually shoot.
  
  Therefore, the chance that one of these poorly trained people is going to hurt anyone but a bad guy is vanishingly small. It rarely happens in the entire country, even in states with unlicensed carry.

- Jim

I'm gonna have to call false on the first one,
http://www.historycooperative.org/journ ... 01/arming/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I saw a similar book at Half Price books, basically their is a Myth that American were as armed as they were now at the time of our founding fathers.
I alsobelieve you dont see many Rifles being passed along in the wills of the era. Read the full article, its an interesting read.
"When confronted with evidence that the vast majority of young men in seventeenth-, eighteenth-, and early nineteenth-century America had no idea how to use a gun, advocates of an eternal, universal American gun culture look the other way. Best to ignore such information and retain the myth, for otherwise it just might be conceivable that we are responsible for our own culture."
* Puts on Flask jacket*

[marksiwel]

I'm also going to point out that the Article/Book I cited has seen alot of controversy and some claim it is completely false.
I say its not 100% but the Myth of Early America is very apparent to History Buffs.

So, take this article with a HUGE Grain of Salt, but dont buy into the "Facts" because alot of them are not real.

Now if we only had a time machine

[boomerang]

Therefore, the chance that one of these poorly trained people is going to hurt anyone but a bad guy is vanishingly small. It rarely happens in the entire country, even in states with unlicensed carry.

So I have to wonder about the real motivation behind people opposed to relaxing the Texas training requirements, or want to deny the right to people who have licenses from states without a range test. (Resident or non-resident is a red herring if the training requirement is the same.)

[seamusTX]

Michael Bellesiles's Arming America has been thoroughly debunked. The publisher withdrew the book from publication, and the author resigned his academic position after an investigation focused on errors and fabrications in the book.

This Wikipedia article is correct, as far as I know the facts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arming_Ame ... un_Culture" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can follow the sources from the Wikipedia article if you don't believe it.

If you want an accurate picture of the prevalence of firearms and marksmanship in colonial America, please see Stephen Holbrook's The Founders' Second Amendment.

- Jim

[seamusTX]

So I have to wonder about the real motivation behind people opposed to relaxing the Texas training requirements, or want to deny the right to people who have licenses from states without a range test.

In the case of police officials, prosecutors, and some legislators, they are irrational.

They are the same people who resisted unlicensed car carry, which has led to what? nothing much.

- Jim