CHL class too easy??

[mmoses]

Yes it is way too easy. A woman in my class tried picking up other people's guns and shot multiple rounds into the ground from the shortest distance. She passed.

Does the 2nd give the right to conceal carry...and now open carry?

I think open carry should have been passed with a requirement of a level 3 retention holster.

YES

Keep and Bear ARMS.

[TXHUNT3R]

The point of the second amendment was for the people to protect themselves from a tyrant government. PERIOD.

I get that and as of now, thank god, we still can and do.

I just don't mind going through what is needed to obtain a carry permit. I have been handling guns since I was a very young boy, its just that I know MANY who have not and its a scary thought to think of them carrying ON person.

I don't think it should be harder though, you give the information about the laws and make them pass a shooting test. Thats all you can do

[krisw]

The government would make the same amount or even more if they did away with the class completely. The only fees they get are from the license and renewal fees.

If that is the case, both the instructor and the students could be prosecuted. The law is very clear on the shooting distances required as well as the class length.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

The point about the government making money from the class has to do with regulating the right to carry and defend yourself.

yes, but if folks are gonna be carrying where my family and friends hang, I would like assurance that they are safe.

Can't believe that's the argument you are tossing out. Do you keep your family off of the road?

You can't have it both ways. Pick one and stick with it.

Yup.

if your incompetent to shoot half way accurately u should not be allowed to carry,,, your viewing it one sided,,, what if that boob was shooting at someone next to your wife or child? would it make you feel better that they were shot by someone who had the right, but was incompetent? sorry Mr I was shooting at the bad guy, it was an accident i hit your child, but i had a right to do it!
i am all for concealed carry, but yes you should have to pass a shooting test.... i feel have a better chance as a hostage than with a poor shot trying to save me... getting killed by good intentions will not make me feel any better...

You've got a much better chance of accidentally being shot by the police than you do a chl holder.

[okrattler]

I think by not having a CHL Class there'd be alot less goobers out there that feel qualified to carry a weapon. I know several people that never even owned a pistol,much less shot one until a Concealed Carry class came about. But after they got one and got that stupid card now they're the rootinist,tootinest,shootinest cowboy in the West. I hope I'm not around if they ever have to shoot in a self defense situation. Everyone within two blocks of them will be leakin.

[Jspradley]

Revolver.
Wheel guns are much less complicated, much easier to load..
And that said revolver would perform about 50x better being shot while hidden from view inside a purse?
Pretty strong option for the ladies, imo.

Wheel guns are not less complicated and they are much more difficult to reload under stress

[xman59]

The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.....unless you are a crappy shot.

James Madison must have ran out of ink.

if memory serves me correctly there were no semi auto pistols or revolvers in 1776,, and they were all single shot muzzle loaders,,,, they grew up using their tools and really new how to use them,,, what you said is a lame excuse for incompetence ,, some people just never will have a clue about reality, i hope you will survive it.... the acceptance of horrific abilities is why the country is sinking now, we have learned to accept anything,, including people carrying guns that can not load or safely use them,,,, i pray that none of my family gets killed by good intentions,

[xman59]

The point about the government making money from the class has to do with regulating the right to carry and defend yourself.

Can't believe that's the argument you are tossing out. Do you keep your family off of the road?

Yup.


You've got a much better chance of accidentally being shot by the police than you do a chl holder.

having been an leo and firearms instructor for 30 years , your ignorant of reality,,, back up your claim,,,,

[35remington]

So how far would you like our government to take it? Once again there are ignorant people who drive irresponsibly, who have more kids than they can afford, who vote.
My point is it is awful hard to regulate ignorance.

A person must demonstrate driving proficiency in order to earn a driver's license, and those who endanger the lives of others while driving lose their driver's licenses.

People who are terrible parents have their children taken away from them. Your point is interesting though—in this situation you inherently have the freedom and only lose it upon a finding of incompetency.

[Pullersboy]

Just some comments:

1.) The state makes no money on the class other than the instructors license, the instructor and range do. The state would make more if they did away with the class as more people would apply. The only money the state makes is on the license fee and renewal.

2.)The state wouldnt be held liable anyway. The class was put into the law to appease the anti's and the requirements for the class have been steadily reduced.

3.)This I agree with. Our instructor basically said he wasnt there to teach us how to shoot. He was there to teach us the basics of the law and to make sure we knew the absolute basics of firearm safety. If you wanted to know more, research the laws and take a self defence class.

I agree completely on your last comment. If someone is not comfortable carrying, they should not carry, but that should be left up to the individual, NOT THE GOVT!



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Well, I stand corrected on a couple of points. And, for the record, I agree that it isn't the government's place. We have the second ammendment and that is good enough for me.

[35remington]

having been an leo and firearms instructor for 30 years , you['re] ignorant of reality,,, back up your claim,,,,

Police are 6 times more likely to commit misdemeanor and felony crimes than CHL holders. See here
and here.

[Tex]

A person must demonstrate driving proficiency in order to earn a driver's license, and those who endanger the lives of others while driving lose their driver's licenses.



People who are terrible parents have their children taken away from them. Your point is interesting though—in this situation you inherently have the freedom and only lose it upon a finding of incompetency.

Correct. And if a person does something stupid with a firearm they will lose their LTC and face other punishment as well. All the LTC class does is state that on one day they knew enough about the regulations to pass a test and hit a target enough to pass as well.
The truth is none of us know how we will respond to a bad situation until we have to do it. I was in EMT school with several people that consistently did well in class. They aced their written exams. Yet when we started making runs they were useless. Another guy barely got by and couldn't make a pretty sling to save his life but when the s hit the fan he was a machine. Who do you want working on you when you need an ambulance?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[krisw]

having been an leo and firearms instructor for 30 years , your ignorant of reality,,, back up your claim,,,,

This may obviously come as a surprise to you, but police shoot in the line of duty more than chl/ltc do. Weird I know. Since you are Leo, have you or anyone you known ever shot in the line of duty? Did all of the rounds hit their mark?

[Mike D]

The point of the second amendment was for the people to protect themselves from a tyrant government. PERIOD.

And back then citizens had the same weapons the government had. Again WE have LET them restrict our rights to what they are today.


"An honest government has no fear of an armed population".

[Mike D]

CHL class too easy??

A person must demonstrate driving proficiency in order to earn a driver's license, and those who endanger the lives of others while driving lose their driver's licenses.



People who are terrible parents have their children taken away from them. Your point is interesting though—in this situation you inherently have the freedom and only lose it upon a finding of incompetency.

Driving is not a right guaranteed by the Constitution. By your comparison you are reducing a right to a privilege granted by the government.

As far as losing driving privileges .........



It's not like we have multiple DUI offenders driving around or even illegals without license and insurance.


"An honest government has no fear of an armed population".

[hoythitman]

I don't know if it needs to be any harder test wise, I mean that part is pretty simple really. But when you go out to the line and you sweep people, can't load your gun, can't clear a jam, can't keep your dang finder off the trigger, things like that you should be failed, required to take a safety class before being able to retake the LTC class. I saw a lot of people who didn't even know how to use their weapon properly walk out with passing paperwork.