Texas HB 47 - Page 5

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 farronwolf It appears that there will be a bill introduced this legislative session in Texas, HB 47, which will change the required ...

Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 228
Like Tree73Likes

Thread: Texas HB 47

  1. #61
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,663
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    It appears that there will be a bill introduced this legislative session in Texas, HB 47, which will change the required time for CHL instruction from a minimum of 10 hrs, maximum 15 hrs for first time, to a maximum of 4 hours of instruction required for both first time and renewals and then the range time.

    Folks in the know think this has a good chance of passing. It has the NRA support as well. The thought is to bring Texas requirements more in line with some of the other states time requirements.


    83(R) HB 47 - Introduced version - Bill Text

    I am not so sure I agree with this proposed legislation. We will be required to teach all the same material for first time students, but will have 4-6 hours less to teach it. I don't think the material can be covered adequately if you are simply spitting it out there for them with no time for any discussion.

    The instructor/student would have the option of offering longer sessions, but the student would not have to stay. The material would have to put out there, the test given, and then if they want to leave they can. If they wanted to stay for additional classroom time, it would be up to them and the instructor to do more time.

    So, for those who have endured the 10+ hrs of a Texas CHL course, what are your thoughts on a speed class that simply highlights the minimum stuff to pass the test and then send you on your way?
    Just went through my second renewal. I'm with you. Here's what i'd like to see. 1) The initial course a full 15 hours; not 10-15.
    Do it right. Make sure folks get it. 2) First renewal, 4-5 plus range test. 3) Second and future renewals, no range test and
    4 hours class BECAUSE, over a 5 year time period the legislature will have changed the laws at least 2 times and if someone
    doesn't actively follow them, or doesn't really read the CHL manual they swore they read, they won't know the changes.

    Alternatively, go to constitutional carry and forget all of this stuff.

    What I'm saying is either do it right or don't do it. A 4 hr class for newcomers would be a sham of a sham and a big shame.
    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


  2. #62
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,663
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    You might actually read the Texas Constitution.
    And in the past they did heavily and heavy handedly regulate the carrying of handguns. Anyone in TX prior to the mid
    1990s knows what a tough law we actually had; it wasn't the wild west of movie fame, that's for sure.
    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

  3. #63
    Member Array jrclen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Central Wisconsin
    Posts
    342
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Alternatively, go to constitutional carry and forget all of this stuff.
    Now there is an idea I can support 100%.
    suntzu likes this.
    Shall not be infringed means - shall not be infringed.
    Member - NRA
    John

  4. #64
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by jrclen View Post
    State and local law does not trump the Bill of Rights. Please read the 14th Amendment.
    So, are you saying that all laws which regulate firearms are now null and void? I hope not.

    From the syllabus of Heller.

    2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues.
    This thread has gone way, off topic. This discussion should probably be moved the the 2A portion of the site.

    The original question was whether or not 4 hrs is enough time for an instructor to teach what is mandated by the State of Texas for a CHL. We are mandated to cover the following.

    1) the laws that relate to weapons and to the use of
    deadly force;
    (2) handgun use[, proficiency,] and safety;
    (3) nonviolent dispute resolution; and
    (4) proper storage practices for handguns with an
    emphasis on storage practices that eliminate the possibility of
    accidental injury to a child.
    If we don't cover all the required material and sign the form saying we have, we have committed a Class A midemeanor for each offense. Just like any student who signs their form would be guilty of if they don't receive all the required training and sign thier form.
    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

  5. #65
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,882
    @Farronwolf: the problem sir is that , and correct me if I am wrong, you beleive that training should be mandatory.
    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!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  6. #66
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    And in the past they did heavily and heavy handedly regulate the carrying of handguns. Anyone in TX prior to the mid
    1990s knows what a tough law we actually had; it wasn't the wild west of movie fame, that's for sure.
    That is absolutely correct. However, Texas now is making great progress in expanding the 2A rights of individuals, which is a good thing.
    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

  7. #67
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,788
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    @Farronwolf: the problem sir is that , and correct me if I am wrong, you beleive that training should be mandatory.
    I didn't say that. You are implying that.

    The problem is that the state mandates a certain amount of training, and is possibly going to cut the time available for their mandated traing by 60% or more.

    If the state should remove the mandated training or not is a whole other argument. Some here seem to get the two confused. That discussion should take place in the 2A portion of this forum and has nothing to do with my original post or the intent of this thread. Several of the members have hijacked the original thread and tried to turn it into that debate for the sake of arguing I believe.
    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. #68
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Seems like a 'feel good' measure to me, without any basis in if it will be effective.

    As far as I know, there is no difference in crimes committed by legal gun owners and gun accidents in states without any training requirements and those with. There's no data indicating this.

    No one says training isnt good...but who says how much is enough? What if people think that 15 hours of training actually make you competant with a firearm in a real life situation?
    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. #69
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    How many hours does it take to understand that gaggle of dangerously complex laws? Or do you advocate that people not understand the laws at all, and simply issue a permit to anyone who isn't prohibited and then deal with it as it hits the fan? Just because the required time may be limited, the gaggle of complex laws still stay the same. That isn't going to change.

    Based on the currently extremely low percentage of CHL holders who get into trouble in Texas, vs the rest of the population, I would say that something is being done right.
    So how does TX compare with the states with no requirements? Like WA? Like PA? Like VT? And there are others.
    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)

  10. #70
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by eipo View Post
    The regulation concerns concealed carry. Is open carry illegal in your state?

    Arguing about the legality or Constitutionality of a states requirement for citizens to obtain permits to conceal carry is a separate topic.
    Why? I use my gun under the same laws and conditions legally whether it is concealed or not. I have to know the laws if I open carry too. And it's my responsibilty to know them.
    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)

  11. #71
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    Does that also mean that if I am confident that I can drive 130 mph on public roads, I should be able to ignore speed limit signs. Nope. The laws are put in place based on what is considered reasonable for the general public.

    The RKBA, at the state level, comes with whatever restrictions each state places on them. That is the simple truth. If the people of that state don't like the restrictions or lack of them, they either enact new laws or remove old ones.

    That is exactly what will happen with this Bill. Whatever the outcome, I will abide by the law.
    The Constitution says we have the right to BEAR arms. So just IMO, that does not leave room for the state to override it. The Const. didnt limit 'bearing' arms to your own property.
    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)

  12. #72
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    So, are you saying that all laws which regulate firearms are now null and void? I hope not.

    .
    Sure, I'd be fine with that.

    There should be no blanket restrictions, IMO.

    We already take certain freedoms away from people but that is based on their individual behavior...not before they've committed an offense.

    Sounds like alot of people want 'freedom from' rather than 'freedom to.'

    I'm sticking with my signature.
    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)

  13. #73
    Senior Member Array Jemsaal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    az
    Posts
    748
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    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.
    There's a difference between constitutional carry and concealed carry, at least there is in my state. Right now, I constitutional carry. I am getting ready however, to take the concealed carry training course mandated in Arizona if I want a concealed weapons license. It allows me to enter more places, and also gives me the right to carry in other states that recognize reciprocity.

  14. #74
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,663
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    Why? I use my gun under the same laws and conditions legally whether it is concealed or not. I have to know the laws if I open carry to. And it's my responsibilty to know them.
    Yes. But, and there is a big one---
    WA has no training requirement (unless something has changed recently). I have BIL who has had his
    license for about a decade or more. He is totally and utterly unfamiliar with very many aspects of handgun
    laws and use of force laws which are almost universal across the states. He would be better off if he had some
    training. I wish for his sake he had some training.

    OT, but this part irritates me, he with no training has a license TX accepts, but WA won't accept a TX license
    which is way harder to get than the one WA issues. Just another example of the irrational crazy quilt of gun laws
    and reciprocity problems across our country.
    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

  15. #75
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    Quote Originally Posted by farronwolf View Post
    However, Texas now is making great progress in expanding the 2A rights of individuals, which is a good thing.
    How does the Texas government expand a God given right? Should I thank them for that?

Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast

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.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors