TexasCHLforum.com

paxton25 wrote:

gdanaher wrote:Hunter education might be taught in small districts in the hill country, but in the large cities it is unheard of. Even if taught, you can't presume that everyone allowed to carry in Texas also attended a Texas high school where gun safety was taught. I believe that the second amendment should apply to everyone eligible, but owning a weapon and carrying it in public are different matters. Some people just need to stick with the gun range if you know what I mean. Carrying in public presumes a higher level of knowledge and responsibility that not all gun owners share equally. OCT may have its roots in a well meaning and directed effort, but it has like a magnet, pulled the fringe elements in allowing the rest of us to see what could happen. They have some scary folks there, and having some in their group carrying openly without any sort of licensing or standardized training simply scares the bejeebers out of me.

I have been at ranges and seen enough people finishing their CHL class scare me to where there is no way I believe a license grant is anything other than at best a marginal improvement over handing out guns at random to strangers in the street. Too often I have seen a CHL lead to a dirty harry complex where someone that hasn't fired off many more shots than their CHL class required is walking around hoping a guy in a ski mask will jump out at them. I have also seen inadvertant mag drops at the shooting qualifier for a CHL class, the instructor move the target closer than what I thought would be required so a lady could actually get enough rounds on paper to qualify, even saw someone look down the barrel of their gun after a malfunction and yet all of those people are walking around with a gun and a CHL and we are supposed to think they are superior to the average Schmoe on the street? I am not buying it. Plus we all know that some unscrupulous instructors will go ahead and pass their buddies without going to the class, I know I was offered that before and I know several people who have. I was trained from youth by military veterans, I put in hundreds of hours in range time to practice proper and accurate shooting, have read numerous books and been to several classes I opted for and not because the government said I had to.

gdanaher wrote:Constitutional carry may or may not exist in those terms, but I believe that it far more defensible to require anyone carrying in a public location to have experienced the minimal training offered by the CHL class. Even if you required non-CHL folks to read a book, take a test, and pass it prior to open carry was allowed, it would be an improvement over no training whatsoever.

RedRaiderCHL wrote:I live in Texas and I drive through Oklahoma and Missouri to see my family. The thing that I wish Texas would do is adopt a similar outlook on OC as Oklahoma and Missouri. In those states anyone that has a valid CHL from that state or a recognized state may concealed carry OR open carry. I feel it should just be a "carrying permit." OC is a convenience and sometimes more practical than CC. when I am going through Oklahoma and Missouri i OC. I feel if you have to receive training to carry concealed you are just as qualified to carry openly. Maybe add a little to the CHL class on holsters or even state in the Bill that to open carry you must have a level 2 or level 3 holster. Idk... just brainstorming. bottom line though.. Texas needs to legalize Open carry.

Charlies.Contingency wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:

Charlies.Contingency wrote: Fair enough. I agree to an extent of course. The only differ is that I want some way to ensure that gun owners know how to safely carry and shoot. I have personal reasons for that, and cannot be swayed. I just wish there was a way to give all gunners training for free so that nobody else get hurt like me. Any suggestions on that? I just want some way of getting the stupid out of those who are going to have guns... To bad there isn't a cure for stupid.

You can. Get the school board or state legislature to require firearms safety in grade schools and firearms training in jr high and high schools. It would be nice to see school firearm championships for the state. A type of biathlon where each contestant runs a quarter mile with a 25 lb pack including their firearm and ammo, then have to shoot 5 targets, repeat this for a mile. Or 2 or 5 miles.

That is an excellent idea! Pushing firearm safety at the school level! Too bad it seems like most schools will expel you for doodling a gun. If we ever did pass "Constitutional Carry," I will demanding that this become implemented in school. They can have my 10yr old to go through Sexual Education and see naked bodies, and talk about sex and give out condoms and lubricant. We should have Gun Education, where they teach firearm safety, and the realities of the dangers, and hand out trigger locks and gun oil.

(Pardon my explicitness, and I may be stretching it, but I did it for humor and and make similarities to create the analogy desired.

TXBO wrote:

Wolverine wrote:

txglock21 wrote:Sorry to hijack this thread, but the last line of the article mentions a proposed bill to make the last weekend of August a tax free weekend on firearms and hunting equipment. I see long lines at the gun counters if passed.

The feds should repeal the excise tax on guns and ammo. Can you imagine the uproar if they put an excise tax on bibles?

That excise tax is a result of the Pittman-Robertson Act. All monies collected must be separated from the general fund and used only for the purpose of preserving wildlife, habitat as well as shooting ranges. 50% of all revenues collected from the sale of handguns must be used to support firearms training and gun ranges.

Charlies.Contingency wrote: Fair enough. I agree to an extent of course. The only differ is that I want some way to ensure that gun owners know how to safely carry and shoot. I have personal reasons for that, and cannot be swayed. I just wish there was a way to give all gunners training for free so that nobody else get hurt like me. Any suggestions on that? I just want some way of getting the stupid out of those who are going to have guns... To bad there isn't a cure for stupid.

ralewis wrote:

txglock21 wrote:

Dragonfighter wrote:

srothstein wrote:

Charlies.Contingency wrote:I'm talking about the barring of CHL holders.

This is actually easy to explain. If it is my property, it is mine and I get to decide what I want on it or not. I do not have to explain to anyone why I want to bar CHLs, just the mere fact that it is my right to control my property. This is the same as the state not asking you why you want to carry a gun, just the mere fact that it is your right.

As long as we have private property and property rights, we will need to allow business owners to control their property. And yes, I do have problems with many of our zoning laws that already do infringe on that right.

And THAT is the ONLY argument that can be made, and I agree if there's limited access (controlled entry, non-commercial property). But when you allow anybody and everybody to enter and exit your "private property" with absolutely no access control (read as: any thug that wants to come in, can) then THOSE types of public "private property" should have there ability to forbid the law abiding access curtailed.

Yes, I know I am in the minority, but that's the way I see it.

You may be in the minority, but I'm right there with you. To me, there is a BIG difference between "private property" and private property open to the public, ie. movie theaters, stores, etc...

Seems to me this is where the debate ought to be. 2 Kinds of Private property. The concept of a "Public Accommodation" is different than your house. My opinion (as a small business owner subject to various laws/regulations) is it's a very different thing excluding certain kinds of people from a "Public Accommodation" vs. personal private property. I can exclude people from my house with green ears, but perhaps not my business...