Texas HB 47

This is a discussion on Texas HB 47 within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by dldeuce This is the result you expect. I think it's fair to assume that you oppose that result. Why do you oppose ...

Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 228
Like Tree73Likes

Thread: Texas HB 47

  1. #166
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post

    This is the result you expect. I think it's fair to assume that you oppose that result. Why do you oppose Texans carrying under CHL who are not as well prepared or well versed in these laws?
    It is a given if less time is spent teaching/learning material, the result will be people being less prepared or knowledgeable. Why would I oppose folks being less knowledgeable about carry laws or anything else for that matter? Well lets see. The less knowledgeable you are about something the more likely you are to get it wrong, and have to suffer the consequences.

    You know what happens when you assume don't you.

    Why do you support people being less knowledgeable about the laws that they are carrying under?
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #167
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    So instead if clarifying whether or not you believe it is effective, or Constitutional, or appropriate, you fall back on....it's what the govt demands?

    Paycheck or preference to accept the govt's restrictions on ou rights without question?
    Read the title of the thread and the text of HB 47, yes that is what the thread is supposed to be about.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  4. #168
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    It is a given if less time is spent teaching/learning material, the result will be people being less prepared or knowledgeable. Why would I oppose folks being less knowledgeable about carry laws or anything else for that matter? Well lets see. The less knowledgeable you are about something the more likely you are to get it wrong, and have to suffer the consequences.
    So by suffer the consequences you mean they are more likely to violate the law right? They are more likely to commit crimes against society right? You think that's more likely, and you oppose that right?

  5. #169
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Hmm, lets see, do I oppose people violating the law?

    Why yes, yes I do oppose people violating the law.
    Hopyard likes this.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  6. #170
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Read the title of the thread and the text of HB 47, yes that is what the thread is supposed to be about.
    We have asked, politely, for you to support reasons for that mandatory training. And I quoted your answer...because the govt mandates it.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  7. #171
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    We have asked, politely, for you to support reasons for that mandatory training. And I quoted your answer...because the govt mandates it.
    Whether I don't like it, you don't like it or whomever doesn't like it, mandatory training is a reality, and that isn't likely to change any time soon. Living in a dream world and simply wishing it wasn't so does no good. That isn't reality.

    It is sort of like discussing what coinage the tooth fairy should leave.

    If you want me to say, yes, I support mandatory training for CHL's, I will. Are you happy? Or would you be happier if we had no mandatory training and no CHL like it was before 1995? Because that is the reality of the situation, without the mandatory training there would be no CHL, and I prefer we have CHL in Texas.

    Which would you prefer? I know you would prefer no training to get the CHL. Guess what that is pretty much fantasy, you are free to have all of it you want.
    Hopyard likes this.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  8. #172
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Whether I don't like it, you don't like it or whomever doesn't like it, mandatory training is a reality, and that isn't likely to change any time soon. Living in a dream world and simply wishing it wasn't so does no good. That isn't reality.

    It is sort of like discussing what coinage the tooth fairy should leave.

    If you want me to say, yes, I support mandatory training for CHL's, I will. Are you happy? Or would you be happier if we had no mandatory training and no CHL like it was before 1995? Because that is the reality of the situation, without the mandatory training there would be no CHL, and I prefer we have CHL in Texas.

    Which would you prefer? I know you would prefer no training to get the CHL. Guess what that is pretty much fantasy, you are free to have all of it you want.
    Thanks.

    The support of training to enable cc permits.

    Your fantasy is my reality here in WA. And we dont seem to be the worse for it. I guess that is my point. I commend you for being a teacher of important material and skills for TX permit holders....it IS important stuff.

    Where we differ in opinion I guess, is in it's necessity. If you think its necessity is because it's the only way you are allowed to exercise a right...well, dont know what to say. IMO that should never be a goal but something that is continually challenged with a goal of being overcome.

    I am not being arrogant...I, now more than ever, see the possibility that such infringements (and more) will be brought down on me in my state. The knee-jerk acceptance of it elsewhere...with no necessity founded in reality....depresses me.

    For the record, I believe in Hopyard's online testing...and would support that. Knowing the laws does protect us as individual carriers AND may lessen the possibility of more accidentally breaking laws (both legitmate and 'socially acceptable') that make us ALL look bad and put our rights to carry at risk. (Imagine that...a RIGHT being at risk. )
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  9. #173
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Hmm, lets see, do I oppose people violating the law?

    Why yes, yes I do oppose people violating the law.
    You support the specific number of hours mandated for training, not just because the state mandates it like you've claimed, but because you believe CHL holders will commit crimes against society without at least that much training. Despite all your fantasy land comments, you oppose this bill that you've admitted will allow more people in society to exercise their 2A rights, and you oppose that because you believe law abiding citizens will become criminals without the mandated training. You can weave, bob, and evade all you want, but there are two camps in this thread, and many others I've participated in over the years, and it's clear which camp you're in.

  10. #174
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    You support the specific number of hours mandated for training, not just because the state mandates it like you've claimed, but because you believe CHL holders will commit crimes against society without at least that much training. Despite all your fantasy land comments, you oppose this bill that you've admitted will allow more people in society to exercise their 2A rights, and you oppose that because you believe law abiding citizens will become criminals without the mandated training. You can weave, bob, and evade all you want, but there are two camps in this thread, and many others I've participated in over the years, and it's clear which camp you're in.
    You really need to stop trying to think for other people and conscentrate on that they actually say.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  11. #175
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,773
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    Thanks.

    The support of training to enable cc permits.

    Your fantasy is my reality here in WA. And we dont seem to be the worse for it. I guess that is my point. I commend you for being a teacher of important material and skills for TX permit holders....it IS important stuff.

    Where we differ in opinion I guess, is in it's necessity. If you think its necessity is because it's the only way you are allowed to exercise a right...well, dont know what to say. IMO that should never be a goal but something that is continually challenged with a goal of being overcome.

    I am not being arrogant...I, now more than ever, see the possibility that such infringements (and more) will be brought down on me in my state. The knee-jerk acceptance of it elsewhere...with no necessity founded in reality....depresses me.

    For the record, I believe in Hopyard's online testing...and would support that. Knowing the laws does protect us as individual carriers AND may lessen the possibility of more accidentally breaking laws (both legitmate and 'socially acceptable') that make us ALL look bad and put our rights to carry at risk. (Imagine that...a RIGHT being at risk. )
    Your state and a few others that don't require any type of training are the minority. For better or worse, that is the reality of what each state legislators have decided.

    For the states that require such training, that is the only way concealed carry was going to be allowed. If it is a question of not carrying at all, or carrying after certain requirements, certainly you would agree that meeting those requirements and carrying beats the alternative.

    Taking Texas as an example, the initial law that allowed concealed carry in 1995, has undergone quite a few changes, almost all being for the good. As long as things head in that direction, and things don't start coming up that head the other way, we are making progress.

    If your state chooses to put more restrictions in place for whatever reason, it will be because those elected by the people make the changes. Hopefully they don't get knee jerky over this past incident. Knee jerk is never good IMO.

    HB 47 has the language for online testing in it, if it passes, we will have to see if that is left in there. One question though. You would support the online requirement as an alternative to the classroom portion of the training, isn't that still mandating they spend the same amount of time learning the same materials before they are eligible to get their CHL?

    If I offer the online course, I will still have to test them for both proficiency and knowledge, and sign off on the CHL 100 before it is valid. At that point, we really are simply splitting hairs.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  12. #176
    Member Array jrclen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Central Wisconsin
    Posts
    342
    What amazes me is how many here seem to think the American people are to stupid to understand the law without taking a formal state approved course. And that the approved course must contain a government mandated minimum number of hours. Some states enjoy constitutional carry no required course. Can someone please provide proof or examples of the severe problems being suffered by the people of those states due to the lack of a mandate for training?
    Shall not be infringed means - shall not be infringed.
    Member - NRA
    John

  13. #177
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    You really need to stop trying to think for other people and conscentrate on that they actually say.
    I'll leave it to the other readers who have already called you on it just like I have.

  14. #178
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by jrclen View Post
    What amazes me is how many here seem to think the American people are to stupid to understand the law without taking a formal state approved course. And that the approved course must contain a government mandated minimum number of hours. Some states enjoy constitutional carry no required course. Can someone please provide proof or examples of the severe problems being suffered by the people of those states due to the lack of a mandate for training?
    It just so happens that Texas is one of those states. It's been that way for almost 200 years. There is no prohibition on possession of long guns in Texas. If you want to take a stroll with an AR-15, loaded up with a fresh 30 round magazine, you're good to go. No training or licensing is required. Also, no training or licensing is required to carry a handgun in your car. It's only if you take the 38 special with five rounds out of your car to stand at the gas pump that all of the sudden you need all this training.

    It doesn't have anything to do with training. The intent was to continue the tradition of prohibiting most of the citizens from exercising their rights.
    jrclen likes this.

  15. #179
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,657
    Quote Originally Posted by dldeuce View Post
    It just so happens that Texas is one of those states. It's been that way for almost 200 years. There is no prohibition on possession of long guns in Texas. If you want to take a stroll with an AR-15, loaded up with a fresh 30 round magazine, you're good to go. No training or licensing is required. Also, no training or licensing is required to carry a handgun in your car. It's only if you take the 38 special with five rounds out of your car to stand at the gas pump that all of the sudden you need all this training.

    It doesn't have anything to do with training. The intent was to continue the tradition of prohibiting most of the citizens from exercising their rights.
    re: Part in bold--- IMO what you wrote is complete and total nonsense. (5 paragraph rant deleted)
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  16. #180
    Member Array WarMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    364
    Wow 4 hours! That should be for renewals only. If its the persons first time they should have to sit through an 8 hour class.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

bill hb 47 texas
,
did hb 47 pass
,
did texas hb 47 pass
,
did texas hb 47 pass?
,
hb 47 texas
,
house bill 47 texas
,
texas h.b. 47
,

texas hb 47

,
texas hb 47 status
,
texas hb47
,

texas house bill 47

,
tx hb 47
Click on a term to search for related topics.