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 farronwolf ' The Texas legislature disagrees with you. Fortunately, the Texas legislature is not God. It's not lead by a totalitarian dictator, ...
Please do not misconstrue my position. I merely believe 4 hours is not enough instruction time. If there were not a mountain of legal issues one must consider when they decide to take an active approach to providing safety for their family, than the time might not be an issue. There is so much involved, and responsibility taken on by arming oneself, than I feel can be conveyed in a 4 hour class. Its my opinion and mine alone. I'm not speaking for anyone else.
I am not engaging in the discussion, in this thread, on the authority or regulatory power of a state to mandate training.
So after my experience, no, 4 hours would not be enough. Others might not have had a good experience like I had.
I just took my class about a month ago. First, I don't think 10 hrs is asking too much when you consider the responsibilities involved. Driving instruction, at least back in my day, was much longer then 10 hrs. However, with that being said, I think the time could have been better utilized. Learning the Laws can be done by reading a book; more time should be given to SAFE GUN HANDLING and DEFENSIVE SHOOTING TACTICS. These are two areas that are virtually non-existent from the CHL class. I don't think it is reasonable to assume that licensed CHL carriers will make the effort to get additional training or instruction regarding the proper use and safety of their weapons, that's just human nature. People are lazy and just want that permit in their wallet!I also think the penalties for carrying concealed WITHOUT a permit should be MORE stringent in Texas. They need to incentivize more people to go through the course and be held accountable and background checked. Most infractions are simple misdemeanors for being caught carrying a gun without a permit. There are probably thousands of people carrying without any background checks or additional accountability.
I think any mandatory training is stupid. What about all of the folks here that support it but profess to support the 2A? Thought the goal was to get Consitutional carry for everyone in all states....guess not.
In NH we did just fine without classes. VT and other states did just as well.
And..if you do think that training is mandatory then I would suggest that you are not ready at 10 hours. No 10 hour training session would pass my standards to allow someone to carry if that was a requirement.
Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
Second, since the Texas Constitution says that they can regulate the wearing of arms, it falls under the same scope as driving in that it can be regulated. Which means that even though your or I don't think we need to follow the same rules as everyone else because we are more skilled at whatever is being regulated, it makes no difference, we still have to follow the same rules as what the Texas Legislature puts forth.
Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
The goal in Texas was to get around the 46.02 law that's been on the books since 1871. The strategy to do that was to pass a concealed carry law, so restrictive that only a small small percentage of people would ever take advantage of it. You know, appease the most vocal opponents to the 46.02 law. That and only allow those least likely to ever commit any crime, much less a gun related crime. There is no goal from any of the political leaders in Texas to repeal the unconstitutional 46.02 law.Thought the goal was to get Consitutional carry for everyone in all states....guess not.
In Texas, we did just fine for over 150 years without training classes. Those without a CHL have done fine carrying handguns in their car in Texas for several years without any training. For two years, those same non-CHL folks have done just fine carrying handguns into their employer's parking lots without training. That's not the point. The point is that training is one of the biggest barriers to everyone being able to exercise their 2A rights freely. If we let that happen, surely there would be blood in the streets! So much for the rational basis argument for gun control.In NH we did just fine without classes. VT and other states did just as well.
It's not about the training. It's about power.And..if you do think that training is mandatory then I would suggest that you are not ready at 10 hours. No 10 hour training session would pass my standards to allow someone to carry if that was a requirement.
Florida Statute 790.06 (2) (h) training requirements:
1. Completion of any hunter education or hunter safety course approved by the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission or a similar agency of another state;
2. Completion of any National Rifle Association firearms safety or training course;
3. Completion of any firearms safety or training course or class available to the general public offered by a law enforcement, junior college, college, or private or public institution or organization or firearms training school, utilizing instructors certified by the National Rifle Association, Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, or the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services;
4. Completion of any law enforcement firearms safety or training course or class offered for security guards, investigators, special deputies, or any division or subdivision of law enforcement or security enforcement;
5. Presents evidence of equivalent experience with a firearm through participation in organized shooting competition or military service;
6. Is licensed or has been licensed to carry a firearm in this state or a county or municipality of this state, unless such license has been revoked for cause; or
7. Completion of any firearms training or safety course or class conducted by a state-certified or National Rifle Association certified firearms instructor.
The basis hand gun course presented by a certified NRA instructor that meets Florida state requirements is one hour in length at a cost of $40 to $75 and, IMO, does infringe on your 2nd Amendment rights. In the state of Florida to obtain your initial vehicle drivers license you must attend a four class, pass an eye test, pass a short road sign and basic driving laws test and demonstrate driving proficiency on a very short (< 1/10 mile) enclosed driving course without any other vehicle traffic. On completion the driver with little or no road experience is free to travel on any road/highway in North America. Very scary IMO.
US Army 1953-1977
‘‘We, the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts — not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution.’’
— Abraham Lincoln
Whether the Texas constitution mandates "Shall not be infringed," the US constitution still says that, and Texas is bound by the 14th amendment to abide by it. On what basis would you argue that training is a mandatory requirement to prevent crime? Would you give us a weak unfounded irrational basis argument that flies in the face of well established facts like they did in the Illinois case? Apparently the judges got quite a chuckle out of that.
Now, let's get serious. We're talking about the only legal means to bear one of the most common forms of firearms for 24 million people. You're supporting a regulation of the right that mandates training. Can you make an argument that would pass the judicial standard of intermediate scrutiny? How about strict scrutiny? Just your irrational basis argument? Sorry, you lost. It's unconstitutional.
You're forgetting that 46.02 prohibits the public possession of handguns altogether. The government can't prohibit a fundamental right and then give it back to the people as a privilege regulated a the whim of the majority. No law that violates the constitution is a valid law.Second, since the Texas Constitution says that they can regulate the wearing of arms, it falls under the same scope as driving in that it can be regulated. Which means that even though your or I don't think we need to follow the same rules as everyone else because we are more skilled at whatever is being regulated, it makes no difference, we still have to follow the same rules as what the Texas Legislature puts forth.
Is 10 hours of training too much to ask? Well, they don't want just 10 hours. They want our AR-15s. They want the 30 round clips. They want our Ruger 10-22s that can hold that 30 round clip. They want all our semi-automatic handguns and shotguns. They want the pump shotguns too. They want our bullets, and they want to literally brainwash our whole society into believing that only the government should be allowed to have guns. So much for the common sense rational basis (ie mob rule) for regulating guns. Fortunately, for now, the Supreme Court has held that unconstitutional, by one vote.
You just stereotyped and insulted almost 26 million people. Nice! You've got it all wrong. There is no intent to "incentivize" the citizens in Texas to exercise the 2A rights. The intent is to prohibit by far the bulk of the population from exercising their rights, and they are still succeeding nicely.People are lazy and just want that permit in their wallet!I also think the penalties for carrying concealed WITHOUT a permit should be MORE stringent in Texas. They need to incentivize more people to go through the course and be held accountable and background checked. Most infractions are simple misdemeanors for being caught carrying a gun without a permit. There are probably thousands of people carrying without any background checks or additional accountability.