TexasCHLforum.com

Where is that barf smilie?

It is getting deep in here.

tomneal wrote:Of course my real goal is:

Alaska Carry


Pack Em if you got Em
Get a CHL for instant check if you want.



Making Renewals easier is just a step along the way.

DING DING DING!!!!! Folks, we have the winner. If you can get this passed, everyone will buy you a gun. Well, except me, umm I'm poor and expecting a baby (well the wife is, I just look like I am).

The more I ponder the advanced CHL idea, the more I don't like it.

Given that special treatment is already given for LEOs and CHL one would assume that this advanced CHL would be more for civilians.

As stated in my previous post, this new license would probably be much more expensive, not to mention the cost of training to reach the level of proficiency proposed as a requirement for the special CHL, why should someone that enjoys more financial freedom be allowed greater carry privilege that someone who is on a tighter budget?

Please don't take this as a personal jab, because it most certainly is not intended in that fasion, but to me, the idea of different classes of CHLs smacks of elitism. It is very close to another ..ism. The places that you are allowed to carry would almost be based on how much you can afford.

Sally "feed the children" Strother played Gloria.

Ok back on topic.

Of course I should not be able to afford all the guns I buy.

Your right. You cops are overpaid as it is. They should reduce your salaries.


This is not serious people!

For 2007 I only have a few wishes, along with many already posted.

1. Employee parking area exemption or protection despite company policy

2. I would like to see the S.A / NSA restrictions removed. What was the purpose for implimenting these in the first place? What bearing does the action of the firearm have?

That is all for now.

The advanced CHL sounds like a terrific idea, but it leaves a few questions.

1. How long for the license term. With the current term of (soon) 5 years, would you envision an advanced CHL to last longer, shorter, or the same?

2. I can see the state charging a hefty fee for the "Schooling 40+ hours, skill level about that of an Air Marshal, and mental stability evaluation and interviews with co-workers, friends, relatives, etc. "

What are you willing to pay? The schooling won't be cheap. Should someone that meets all of the criteria that you've set forth be excluded because the cost of the schooling and increased fees won't fit in thier budget? As evident by the polled thread elsewhere on this forum, current cost is one of the factors preventing many people from obtaining a "basic" CHL now. What is a fair fee for an advanced version.

3. Would LEOs automatically qualify for an advanced CHL since most already go through the training, intense background checks, and mental evaluations just to obtain the job?

I am not trying to be argumentative, just a little food for thought.

On a more personal note, I would be opposed to anyf advanced CHL or anything similar. Maybe I am naive and see things too black and white, but IMO you either have the right to carry or not. By gaining this right (CHL or similar) a person should be allowed to carry just about anything or anywhere. If you abuse that right, then you will loose that right. The creation of CHL divisions seems more prohibitive that productive.

LEOs already enjoy benefits from reduced fees and, correct me if I am wrong, training requirements. LEO already carry a weapons as part of thier jobs. One would believe that they already have the training. Thier employing agancy has already paid the bill for training, background checks, and mental checks so I see no problem with the reduced fees.

P.S. I hope noone takes this a "cop bashing" It certainly isn't intended that way. It is also not my style.

The cut off date is Sept. 2 1971. I remember that because I miss the cut off by 7 days. Sept. 9 1971.