Is The CHL Proficiency Test Sufficient?

[TomsTXCHL]

I find it disturbing that some in this thread are confusing Training and Gun Safety with the CHL testing requirements (which are primarily about being exposed to Texas law), and who feel that more needs to be done by the Government before people can get-or-keep their CHL. And this from gun people i.e. members of the texaschlforum.



As Chas has mentioned, there is "statistically insignificant" support for such a position.

I do recall that gun safety was presented and re-iterated in my own class, and there was some valuable assistance in the range session for some of the trainees who had little prior experience with their firearms, but it's then up to the individuals, not the State, to continue their pursuit of knowledge, gain (and maintain) further proficiency, and learn situational awareness in preparation for that awful day that might come when they are carrying.

I don't think you can legislate that, or at least, I don't want to live in a place where some bureaucrat has that responsibility over me!

[TVGuy]

I find it disturbing that some in this thread are confusing Training and Gun Safety with the CHL testing requirements (which are primarily about being exposed to Texas law), and who feel that more needs to be done by the Government before people can get-or-keep their CHL. And this from gun people i.e. members of the texaschlforum.



As Chas has mentioned, there is "statistically insignificant" support for such a position.

I do recall that gun safety was presented and re-iterated in my own class, and there was some valuable assistance in the range session for some of the trainees who had little prior experience with their firearms, but it's then up to the individuals, not the State, to continue their pursuit of knowledge, gain (and maintain) further proficiency, and learn situational awareness in preparation for that awful day that might come when they are carrying.

I don't think you can legislate that, or at least, I don't want to live in a place where some bureaucrat has that responsibility over me!

For the record - I don't believe that there should be more training in the CHL class, but I don't think that someone that has never shot or handled a gun in their life should be able to pass the proficiency test. I've seen multiple people as described above pass the class each time I've taken it on the first try and not even come close to failing.

To those equating this to a driver license test, it's essentially the same as being able to turn the key and put the transmission in drive.

The proficiency test should be difficult enough that you have to have some skill to be able to pass it.

[mojo84]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

[TVGuy]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

Hit a human size target at close range?

[mojo84]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

Hit a human size target at close range?

Pretty much.

Good

[Mel]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.
The driving test does the same thing.

Hit a human size target at close range?

Sure seems that way sometimes!

[Cedar Park Dad]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

I have difficulty seeing how that test determined we can handle a gun in a safe manner very much though. In the two times I qualified there were some really scary "shooters."

[mojo84]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

I have difficulty seeing how that test determined we can handle a gun in a safe manner very much though. In the two times I qualified there were some really scary "shooters."

Maybe that has more to do with the instructor than the test itself. There is no perfect foolproof way.

I've seen cops handle guns in an unsafe manner. Matter of fact, I've had a cop I know pull his loaded Wilson combat 1911 and hand it to me after I complimented him on it. We were in a room full of people. Nothing is perfect. The test is based on the minimum standard.

[joe817]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

I have difficulty seeing how that test determined we can handle a gun in a safe manner very much though. In the two times I qualified there were some really scary "shooters."

s

This reminds me of when I was taking my CHL class. We were at the range doing our qualifications. A guy 2 lanes over from me was having all sorts of problems with his brand new Kimber. Multiple FTF's. Our instructor stopped the class from firing, and went over and I guess, showed him how the gun worked, and some VERY basic safety instructions. I just kind of smiled to myself thinking that the guy had spent about $1,000 for a very nice gun and didn't know how to work it, and here I was, who spent $185 on a used Ruger P-95 and had no problems. Scored 248 though. I attribute that to the first single action round throwing me off a couple of times.

[K5GU]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.

The driving test does the same thing.

I have difficulty seeing how that test determined we can handle a gun in a safe manner very much though. In the two times I qualified there were some really scary "shooters."

s

This reminds me of when I was taking my CHL class. We were at the range doing our qualifications. A guy 2 lanes over from me was having all sorts of problems with his brand new Kimber. Multiple FTF's. Our instructor stopped the class from firing, and went over and I guess, showed him how the gun worked, and some VERY basic safety instructions. I just kind of smiled to myself thinking that the guy had spent about $1,000 for a very nice gun and didn't know how to work it, and here I was, who spent $185 on a used Ruger P-95 and had no problems. Scored 248 though. I attribute that to the first single action round throwing me off a couple of times.

I'm not a CHL class instructor, but if I was, I'd feel very bad if one of my applicants I signed off on was later involved in an accidental shooting incident because he/she couldn't safely handle the gun. Many CHL instructors apparently are just reading from a book and scoring a written test and then counting some holes in a target. And I suppose the term 'instructors' as used here is a misnomer.

[TVGuy]

I'm not a CHL class instructor, but if I was, I'd feel very bad if one of my applicants I signed off on was later involved in an accidental shooting incident because he/she couldn't safely handle the gun. Many CHL instructors apparently are just reading from a book and scoring a written test and then counting some holes in a target. And I suppose the term 'instructors' as used here is a misnomer.

Or be in a rare situation where they have to defend themselves and can't due to the fact they've only shot 50 rounds in a proficiency test. They passed it because it's what the law says, but really couldn't hit the broad side of a barn from three yards.

I have over 85 hours of tactical, real world training in the last six months alone and only hope I could. That's not counting target practice on a stationary Indoor range.

I feel bad for someone that carries and doesn't train regularly, you might as well throw your pistol at them.

[K5GU]

I want to add that, for those who don't read my posts as carefully as needed, and/or take my comments out of context, that I am NOT anti-CHL laws..instructors..etc. Many of my friends furnish training and instructions on safe firearm topics and do a very good job. And I know for all you probability experts out there, some issues I bring up may not happen, or may only happen randomly, but when it comes to handguns and the safe carry and management of them in public, it's not me I worry about, it's the other 25.99 million (Texas) opportunities for something happening!

[K5GU]

Apparently, you and those that passed have sufficient skill. They aren't wanting to make sure we are marksmen. The intent is to determine if we can handle the gun in a safe manner and shoot we enough to hit a human size target at close range.
The driving test does the same thing.

Hit a human size target at close range?

Sure seems that way sometimes!

...As long as you stop to render aid...!

[WildBill]

I want to add that, for those who don't read my posts as carefully as needed, and/or take my comments out of context, that I am NOT anti-CHL laws..instructors..etc. Many of my friends furnish training and instructions on safe firearm topics and do a very good job. And I know for all you probability experts out there, some issues I bring up may not happen, or may only happen randomly, but when it comes to handguns and the safe carry and management of them in public, it's not me I worry about, it's the other 25.99 million (Texas) opportunities for something happening!

And there are 25.99 million other Texans worrying about you.

[K5GU]

I want to add that, for those who don't read my posts as carefully as needed, and/or take my comments out of context, that I am NOT anti-CHL laws..instructors..etc. Many of my friends furnish training and instructions on safe firearm topics and do a very good job. And I know for all you probability experts out there, some issues I bring up may not happen, or may only happen randomly, but when it comes to handguns and the safe carry and management of them in public, it's not me I worry about, it's the other 25.99 million (Texas) opportunities for something happening!

And there are 25.99 million other Texans worrying about you.

Sometimes, I worry about me too!