CHL requirements

[jtran987]

hey guys, just wanted to throw out a few thoughts ive been having for a while now and see what yall think about it.

so i work at a gun range that does CHL classes every week, and i see a lot of people i would not want to be carrying taking the class, and those who are completely incompetent taking the class and passing.

my suggestion would be the raise all CHL prices, to limit the number, as well as a way to make people really think about it before doing it and not just doing it cause they can and its not too expensive. also i wish the the requirement for the shooting portion should be at least 220 or higher, because if a person cannot score AT LEAST that under normal conditions, i would not want them out on the street under stress trying to shoot, because they might miss and hit me or my family

ok guys im done ranting let me know what yall think

[sjfcontrol]

Let me see if I understand what you want...

You want to further restrict a constitutional right, by
1) Increasing the fees (taxes) to exercise the right
2) Making the proficiency test more difficult, such that the elderly or mildly handicapped (arthritis?) cannot defend themselves.

Have I got that about right?

[longtooth]

There should be no restrictions on 2A. "shall not be infringed" With every right there is "responsibility".
Uninfringed right to keep & bear arms for the law abiding citizen. (Dont make this a thread on how criminal can you be & still carry)
I am responsibe to learn to use it safely. Careless, reckless, newbee, ... pay the consequences.

There should be no restrictions on "knife" keep & bear. (UK is restricting them now following the above.)
Careless, reckless, newbee, ... pay the consequences.

Burn leaves in your yard, Careless, reckless, newbee, ... pay the consequences. If you burn someones house, field, etc. Careless, reckless, newbee, ... pay the consequences.

We live in a world today that has forgotten & forsaken responsibility & judgement. Pass a law then let them out early.

No 2A restrictions on me. I am responsibly for my actions.

Now my rant is off.
LT

[TxKimberMan]

Let me see if I understand what you want...

You want to further restrict a constitutional right, by
1) Increasing the fees (taxes) to exercise the right
2) Making the proficiency test more difficult, such that the elderly or mildly handicapped (arthritis?) cannot defend themselves.

Have I got that about right?

I understand your concern, but increased fees could prevent some from exercising their rights, regardless of competency.

In my CHL class, the first words out of the instructor's mouth were "is there anyone here who has never fired a handgun?" Two people raised their hands...I was a little shocked. I don't think anyone would show up for a driver's license exam without ever having driven a car before, however driving is not a constitutional right. You can't legislate against poor judgement.

[aaangel]

i would not want them out on the street under stress trying to shoot, because they might miss and hit me or my family

how often does this happen?

PS. drunk drivers are out there all the time. i also don't want them driving and hit me.

which one do you think has the higher percentage?

[jtran987]

im just saying there are too many people who have a chl who dont deserve one and regardless of age, regardless of race, gender whatever i believe you need to know how to shoot if you are to carry a gun. regardless people who cant shoot cant shoot, pretty simple, so they need to learn how to shoot and learn with their handicaps if they have some, before they carry.

i still think that we should raise prices because people still take them with no knowledge or experience just because they can. raising the price by like 100 is nothing to most of us who understand the need. but to those who dont and just think it will be fun, it will keep those people away.

yall can scream 2A all you want and im all for it, i just need to toss a bit of common sense in there, if you dont mind all the people who have never shot before in their lives, and can still pass the proficiency test, carrying a gun thats your call, if it were up to me thered be none of that, you either can or cannot shoot

[txmatt]

The fees+class costs in Texas are already higher than most states. Kind of sounds like you want a system like CA or NY where only the privileged/special/connected can get a permit to exercise their constitutional right.

It is my understanding that most self defense shootings are very close range. Raising the minimum score would have the effect of requiring people to be accurate further out, which may not be realistic. Further, how indicative is shooting under the calm and controlled conditions of a range of the ability to perform in a life threatening situation?

I think you might get somewhere talking about requiring or encouraging more training, but the idea of raising fees or further restricting who can get a chl is elitist and disgusting. "common sense" is really an awful justification for any law.

[MasterOfNone]

I still don't see how you connect the price of the CHL and the competency of the applicant. The price of a thing rarely has any correlation to the competence of those who use it. Have you ever noticed how many poorly-driven high-dollar cars are on the road?

[texanron]

I would like to see the prices for obtaining a CHL cut it half. The shooting test seems to be adequate as well since I have yet to hear about a CHL holder drawing his weapon, firing a shot at an attakcer, missing and striking an innocent bystander. I'm not saying it hasn't happened....I just haven't heard of it happening. Those are my thoughts on the issue that the OP asked for.

Happy Texas Independence Day Y'all!

[Beiruty]

For one thing, more range time, and a better qualification test is not a bad idea.

How about a 1 hr of range time with a good instructor to cover basic handgun handling, drawing from concealement it is concealed license) and then shooting some 200 rd iin trainning hiting slow moving targets ( offenders are not standing still either), learn to reload their pistol. All of those are not in the current qualification.

More training is not a bad idea. If it is matter of cost, then some pay more, others get a discount.

[aaangel]

how about we raise prices on all "unhealthy" foods. cause we all know obesity kills more than chl holders!

i could go on and on!

[RPB]

Raising it to $5,000.00 might keep more socioeconomic classes (colors) of people from being armed (Jim Crowe)

Some struggle to afford it now, some can't afford it now.

Here are fees I could agree with as determined by the DPS for photography and licenses etc ..:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/DriverLicense/dlfees.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Original Driver (or CHL) License
(under 18 yrs of age) $16.00 (Not applicable to CHL)
(age 18 and above) $25.00 (Same for 21+ CHL)
(age 85 and above) $9.00 (Same for CHL)

Fee Exemption for Disabled Veterans


Expiration 6 years
Expiration 2nd birthday after application date

(CHL or) Driver License Renewal
(under 18 yrs of age if license obtained before September 20, 2010) $6.00 (Not applicable to CHL)
(age 18 and above) $25.00 (Same for 21+ CHL)
(age 85 and above) $9.00 (Same for CHL)

Fee Exemption for Disabled Veterans


Expires on next birthday
Expiration 6 years
Expiration 2 years from expiration prior to renewal

I don't see a need for an Indigent/Disabled exception at $25.00 rate, but wouldn't oppose it.

As far as CHL Class costs, the High Schools teach driver education with my tax dollars. I propose a government funded CHL class free or reduced cost for Indigents in each city with population over some set number annually if there are enough (two or more persons) persons signing up for class who really can't afford it. Non-Indigent people can shop the free market for prices of classes.

The cost of photos, printing, laminating, mailing a driver's license and a CHL, and administering the Databases should be about the same, so why is one cheaper? Perhaps background checks should be run when they pass out driver's licenses/renewals? Might get updated addresses on someone they lost in the system who had warrants elsewhere

[Crossfire]

im just saying there are too many people who have a chl who dont deserve one and regardless of age, regardless of race, gender whatever i believe you need to know how to shoot if you are to carry a gun. regardless people who cant shoot cant shoot, pretty simple, so they need to learn how to shoot and learn with their handicaps if they have some, before they carry.

i still think that we should raise prices because people still take them with no knowledge or experience just because they can. raising the price by like 100 is nothing to most of us who understand the need. but to those who dont and just think it will be fun, it will keep those people away.

yall can scream 2A all you want and im all for it, i just need to toss a bit of common sense in there, if you dont mind all the people who have never shot before in their lives, and can still pass the proficiency test, carrying a gun thats your call, if it were up to me thered be none of that, you either can or cannot shoot

Common sense gun control laws? Isn't that what the Brady campaign is all about?

You know, you don't need to demonstrate proficiency to carry in your car, or keep a gun in your home, or to get a hunting license. I guess you want to take away the rights of those people, as well?

And please explain to me how raising the price so that fewer people can afford the CHL increases the proficiency of those that can?

[Justin Franklin]

I understand where the OP is coming from, but I have to disagree with him. I already feel that having to take a class and pay for a license is an infringement on the Second Amendment. In retrospect, when I lived in Georgia all I had to do was fill out paperwork and submit to a background check; no training or education was offered. I was young then and didn't realize the full capacity of what I was getting in to. I now wish something more had been offered. I know that's a contradiction in statements, but I'm stuck in the middle when it comes to required education on this matter.

There are many people who cannot pay their property taxes, child support, made bad choices in their early years or whatever and now they can't exercise their rights to defend themselves. I understand and support the fact that rules need changing as society evolves, but our right to keep and bear arms shouldn't be infringed as much as it has been. I love my state and we are less strict compared to others when it comes to self defense, but we still have many rules in place that could land a good person behind bars who is simply exercising their constitutional right.

I feel it is my duty to help others and offer continuing education or training for those who need it. If they choose not to do it, then that is their right to do so. If they choose to take further training and receive more education, then I will put my heart and soul into it. All I can do is offer to help.

[WildBill]

im just saying there are too many people who have a chl who dont deserve one ...