Utah CHL Instructor Story on WFAA

[KFP]

Question

Does anyone know why Ohio recognizes Utah’s license but not a Texas CHL?

Also I seem to remember at one time Ohio did not recognize a Texas CHL but Texas recognized an Ohio license. Now Texas does not recognize an Ohio license. Anyone know what happened?

Anyone know how the reciprocity thing works?

We do not recognize Ohio because they lack an FBI check, meaning that they do not recognize us in compliance with their laws.

[jester]

We do not recognize Ohio because they lack an FBI check, meaning that they do not recognize us in compliance with their laws.

That's how reciprocity should work.

[KFP]

We do not recognize Ohio because they lack an FBI check, meaning that they do not recognize us in compliance with their laws.

That's how reciprocity should work.

I can't say that I agree at all.

[Liberty]

Now, doesn’t the mental image of a totally blind person in a parking lot or apartment complex blasting away just give you a warm fuzzy feeling?

My concern is that this would give the Brady Bunch and the media some great fodder. Headline “It is possible for someone to get a license and carry a gun in 32 states without even being able to see what they are shooting at.”

Most states just recently permitted people to legally carry and a few still don’t. I would not want to see us lose ground because of this. Governments do not give people certain rights but they sure can take them away.

By the way, I am disabled and will probably soon be in a wheel chair but even I wouldn’t carry if I couldn’t see what I was shooting at or what was behind behind my intended target.

Texas has a couple of legally blind folks with CHLs .. As far as I know there hasn't been any blood flowin' in the streets. The 2nd amendment didn't exclude blind people.

Most blind people are pretty aware of what they can do and what their limmitations are.

[CollinLeon]

Texas has a couple of legally blind folks with CHLs .. As far as I know there hasn't been any blood flowin' in the streets. The 2nd amendment didn't exclude blind people.

Most blind people are pretty aware of what they can do and what their limmitations are.

Unless you are directly attacking a blind person with a gun, the odds of getting shot by one are probably fairly remote... Probably about the same odds as if I walked outside my house right now and just fired in a random direction... Yeah, it could happen, but it is pretty unlikely... I'm sure that they are aware of their surroundings enough that they would only fire when they are directly attacked... It's not like they are going to be shooting someone who is breaking into their car, right?

[Deltaboy]

The State Media created an issue where none were before. The State Leg man named Lon from FW graps it and hollars Utah stealing 1.5 million. So like Chicken Little Lon will go to Austin and fearing gun toting folks will use the Money club since we have no out breaks of Utah CHL holders in TX shooting up the State. We all need to follow Charles advice and the Utah teachers need to go back to be low keyed about it.

[tacticool]

But how can we be losing anything when the CHL fee was supposed to be revenue neutral? It was to pay the cost of the program only, not make any money for the state. But this does show the politics of the problem.

It does show the real motivation is greed and it also shows a possible political solution in November.

[CollinLeon]

It does show the real motivation is greed and it also shows a possible political solution in November.

As in most things in life, if you want to find the real reason for something, all you have to do is "follow the money"...

The people who are making a big deal of this are either against concealed carry completely (and just want to use this to nibble away at our 2nd Amendment rights) or they have a financial interest in having Texas only accept the CHLs from other states if they are not Texas residents.

[Charles L. Cotton]

It does show the real motivation is greed and it also shows a possible political solution in November.

As in most things in life, if you want to find the real reason for something, all you have to do is "follow the money"...

The people who are making a big deal of this are either against concealed carry completely (and just want to use this to nibble away at our 2nd Amendment rights) or they have a financial interest in having Texas only accept the CHLs from other states if they are not Texas residents.

I'm not happy that the Utah license has become the "Utah problem" but I'm very happy that you are wrong about the motive behind the growing opposition. The simple fact is one Utah instructor started the problem with their irresponsible advertising. He/she blatantly advertised the Utah CFP was a way to circumvent the requirements to obtain a Texas CHL. Other equally irresponsible Utah instructors followed suit and the problem is now out of control.

It has nothing to do with money; a handful of jerks thumbed their noses at the Texas Legislature and now all of us are going to pay the price for their arrogance and stupidity. It's as simple as that and it doesn't do gun owners any good to look for conspiracies where none exist.

Chas.

[CollinLeon]

It has nothing to do with money; a handful of jerks thumbed their noses at the Texas Legislature and now all of us are going to pay the price for their arrogance and stupidity. It's as simple as that and it doesn't do gun owners any good to look for conspiracies where none exist.

I say just look at who is against it... If they are CHL instructors, then they have a financial interest in Texas residents being required to get a Texas CHL since any Utah instructors are taking away their business. The media makes a bid deal about it because for the most part, the media is full of a bunch of leftist pinko's who are against the 2nd Amendment anyway. Which legislators have spoken out against it? I suspect that any that might have spoke out are Democrats and as such, they are probably completely against the 2nd Amendment and as such, their motives are definitely suspect.

The Texas CHL program was supposed to just be a stopgap in our restoration of our complete 2nd Amendment rights. Unfortunately, some people have lost sight of this and others have discovered that there is money to be made with only partial restoration of our 2nd Amendment rights. If we make it so that a CHL is not required for concealed carry (i.e. our 2nd Amendment rights are fully restored, then these people will start losing money. Even discounting the Utah license, there are CHL instructors right now who are complaining that some of the Texas CHL instructors are not charging enough for the class. I know an instructor that charges $100 for the class and he says that he gets complaints from other instructors all the time concerning his pricing it $50 or more less than what they charge.

[blue]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

--Even more reasons to go Alaska, Vermont!!!! ---ASAP!---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TX MPA allows carry with:

-NO- CLASS,
-NO- SHOOTING TEST,
-NO- PAPERWORK,
-NO- FEES

---------and seems to be working just fine! -----
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Kinda like the 2nd should be honored!)

-Shouldn't CHL be LESS expensive, and LESS hassle?
We have Earned that after all these YEARS!


Blue

[The Annoyed Man]

It has nothing to do with money; a handful of jerks thumbed their noses at the Texas Legislature and now all of us are going to pay the price for their arrogance and stupidity. It's as simple as that and it doesn't do gun owners any good to look for conspiracies where none exist.

{snip}

Which legislators have spoken out against it? I suspect that any that might have spoke out are Democrats and as such, they are probably completely against the 2nd Amendment and as such, their motives are definitely suspect.

I say just look at who is against it... If they are CHL instructors, then they have a financial interest in Texas residents being required to get a Texas CHL since any Utah instructors are taking away their business.

HEY, I'm against bank robbery, not because I keep my money in a bank, but because it's AGAINST THE LAW. I'm against people trying to, as Charles put it, thumb their noses at the intent of the Texas legislature.... ....and I am NOT a CHL instructor who has any financial stake in the outcome. People aren't always motivated by profit, you know. Some times they stand on principle - whether or not it affects their pocketbooks. You're not getting the reaction you want, so you feel the need to demonize those with whom you disagree. It is an argumentum ad hominem, and a logical fallacy. Furthermore, it is obnoxious when it is used against some long standing members of this board, who happen to be CHL instructors for many years now, and whom I know personally to be people of high moral fibre and character.

But, since you think that tactic is OK to use, let's use it on you. Since you have difficulty obtaining a Texas CHL (isn't that what you said previously?), then perhaps you have a reason for being intellectually dishonest in the debate because it is your ox being gored. See how that works? It has a bitter taste when argumentum ad hominem is used against you, doesn't it?

Now, if we can dispose with that kind of tactic, and you can agree that people can act on principle, independent of their wallets, your apparent ignorance of what is happening at the level of the legislature is startling. This is what Charles does for a living. He knows more about what is going on at the legislative level, in fine detail, than probably anybody else on this board, and has done so for a while now, both as the incumbent TSRA executive director, and as a member of the National Board of the NRA. Now you can choose to disregard his insider knowledge and experience, but in so doing, you're challenging the owner of this board in a way to imply that you know more about what is happening at that level than he does. Not a smart move.


Somebody get me a lawn-chair and a big bowl of popcorn. This one is going to be fun to watch.

[Hoi Polloi]

Somebody get me a lawn-chair and a big bowl of popcorn. This one is going to be fun to watch.

[CollinLeon]

But, since you think that tactic is OK to use, let's use it on you. Since you have difficulty obtaining a Texas CHL (isn't that what you said previously?), then perhaps you have a reason for being intellectually dishonest in the debate because it is your ox being gored. See how that works? It has a bitter taste when argumentum ad hominem is used against you, doesn't it?

Nope... I have not had a difficultly obtaining a Texas CHL... I said that it took about 5-6 months for my wife to get hers, but that was just because of how slow the Texas system was running at that time... Not that having or not having a CHL has ever stopped me from carrying anyway.

Now, if we can dispose with that kind of tactic, and you can agree that people can act on principle, independent of their wallets, your apparent ignorance of what is happening at the level of the legislature is startling. This is what Charles does for a living. He knows more about what is going on at the legislative level, in fine detail, than probably anybody else on this board, and has done so for a while now, both as the incumbent TSRA executive director, and as a member of the National Board of the NRA. Now you can choose to disregard his insider knowledge and experience, but in so doing, you're challenging the owner of this board in a way to imply that you know more about what is happening at that level than he does. Not a smart move.


Somebody get me a lawn-chair and a big bowl of popcorn. This one is going to be fun to watch.

Although I suspect that there might be some people in the world who are altruistic, I have yet to ever meet anyone who is truly that way. People work towards things that they at least believe to be in their self-interest. That doesn't mean that it always is in their self-interest, but at least they thought it was at the time. Sometimes they extrapolate this belief to include their belief in an afterlife that is affected by the actions that they do in this life. Sometimes it is just that they value what others think of them more than what might actually be good for them. I'm a grumpy old man and I say it like I see it. Unfortunately, my views sometimes get censored on this forum since it seems that I'm not politically correct enough for the moderators (aka "censors").

[baldeagle]

Although I suspect that there might be some people in the world who are altruistic, I have yet to ever meet anyone who is truly that way. People work towards things that they at least believe to be in their self-interest. That doesn't mean that it always is in their self-interest, but at least they thought it was at the time. Sometimes they extrapolate this belief to include their belief in an afterlife that is affected by the actions that they do in this life. Sometimes it is just that they value what others think of them more than what might actually be good for them. I'm a grumpy old man and I say it like I see it. Unfortunately, my views sometimes get censored on this forum since it seems that I'm not politically correct enough for the moderators (aka "censors").

I see this kind of attitude on many internet forums - that moderators are censors. It stems from a misunderstanding of the first amendment. Free speech does not extend to privately owned forums. The owners have every right to not only "censor" your speech but to remove you from the forum entirely. It behooves you (and all of us) then, the "play by the rules" or go somewhere else. You have every right to express your views, no matter how odious, anywhere you like. But private forum owners, just like home owners, have every right to demand that you either shut up or leave.

I'm curious to know what you think Charles' self-interest is in this particular case. He is both a Texas CHL Instructor and a Utah CWP Instructor. His expressed desire is to avoid legislative action that would constrict our rights by asking those who promote the Utah CWP as a substitute to the Texas CHL to stop promoting that way. What does he stand to gain from that?