A little curious......

[txbirddog]

I have noticed when I get on sites like this one that there are many questions regarding legality of carrying in certain places and whether it is prohibited or not, questions regarding signage, etc. These questions are often asked and then asked again a few months later.

What my question relates to is whether during CHL courses; are these subjects not covered? When I took my initial and renewal, the laws of where you could not carry, signage, printing (it has changed since my renewal) were covered in detail. If these topics are not being addressed, will the shortening of the course only exacerbate these uncertainties.

[Texsquatch]

Forums are intended to be a place for open discussion so I'm not surprised there is some diversions egree of churn in the topics.
Also, I think some laws can be ambiguous or difficult to apply to every possible situation. This gets considerably more complicated when you get conflicting views from instructors or law enforcemen.

Prime example would be the carrying while consuming alcohol. There is no legal definition or BAC limits explicitly described as far as I know. The day before my CHL class, I was buying ammo, and the shop owner who is also an instructor, mentioned the alcohol thing. He said, "don't let your instructor lie to you and say you cannot have a drink." Then, 12 hours later in class, my instructor said just no alcohol allowed.

So, that's why I read this forum. I like the discussion. I like the humor. And, sometimes I like to see what opinions and experiences others have had on things I'm searching for clarity on. I by no means think everything in here is gospel, but it a good place to look for some direction to find the answers.

[troglodyte]

Additionally, lots of information in a relatively short amount of time. If the student zones out for any amount of time they may have difficulty recalling exactly what was said and intended.

Then throw in that they may hear differing information from their gun buddy, LEO friend, or gun store clerk...or anyone else, "expert" or not, and if they aren't sure they start doubting themselves. So they come here to verify what they do or don't think. Throw in a few grey areas and it really muddles one's mind.

I'll agree that sometimes it gets a little redundant but I try to be patient and move on. Afterall, I don't always catch onto something the first or fifth time.

[cb1000rider]

Then, 12 hours later in class, my instructor said just no alcohol allowed.

If I was an instructor, I think that's what I'd teach also as you might want to teach to the lowest common denominator.. Teaching anything else could land a student in trouble. The reality is that you'd need to prove that you were not intoxicated if a LEO for some reason says that you are.. And unlike DWI, there isn't going to be much for physical evidence to support your assertion.

[switch]

Actually, carrying a gun and driving have 'exactly' the same definition.

The problem is, the DA has a stack of DWI cases and he likes the .08 BAC scientific test. He does not want to clog up his docket by litigating a DWI when some trooper claimed that driver was impaired.

He will probably only have a few cases where someone was drinking and carrying. An anti-gun DA is much more likely to prosecute said case. (And some LEO will arrest anyone w/a gun and any drinking.) That said, most judges use .08. I have a problem w/'most'. What if I get in front of some teetotaler that does not like CHL's.

The problem is Sgt Bamsch, the DPS instructor for CHL instructors 'implies' there is zero tolerance. He was real careful to say he never used the term 'zero tolerance' but he sure 'recommended' it.

I do not have a problem discouraging drinking and carrying. But that's NOT the law. You need to know your own limits.

If you are involved in a shooting, your judgement will be called into question. The more alcohol you have in your system....

They are real quick to say they just follow the law. I don't have a problem with that. The law is pretty clear - all instructors had to be NRA certified or it's equivalent. However, the law is real clear - NO grace period for renewals. You can drink and carry, just can't be impaired (there used to be a statement to that effect in the FAQ section of the handbook). I have a problem when they select/choose which laws they want to follow. They want me to follow all of them, by golly, so should they.

[C-dub]

I would be another example. About a year or so after getting my CHL we were going to a Dallas Stars game and I couldn't remember if professional sporting events were off limits. On top of that, I knew that the American Airlines Center was city owned. I did remember that school sporting events were off limits, but couldn't remember about the pros. This forum did not exist yet back then.

There is so much stuff that it is easy to forget some things. Sometimes they can be the easiest thing. And sometimes instructors either don't cover a particular thing or they go by it so fast that most don't catch it anyway. Not all instructors are the same. And neither are students.

BTW, I got my license in 2002 and the LEO outside of the AAC that I asked if a person with a CHL could carry inside didn't even know what it was after seven years of it being around. He was a Dallas PD Sargent. When I told him what it was, he asked me where I got it. I told him the state of Texas issued them and he then asked, "Why would they do that?"

[sjfcontrol]

I would be another example. About a year or so after getting my CHL we were going to a Dallas Stars game and I couldn't remember if professional sporting events were off limits. On top of that, I knew that the American Airlines Center was city owned. I did remember that school sporting events were off limits, but couldn't remember about the pros. This forum did not exist yet back then.

There is so much stuff that it is easy to forget some things. Sometimes they can be the easiest thing. And sometimes instructors either don't cover a particular thing or they go by it so fast that most don't catch it anyway. Not all instructors are the same. And neither are students.

BTW, I got my license in 2002 and the LEO outside of the AAC that I asked if a person with a CHL could carry inside didn't even know what it was after seven years of it being around. He was a Dallas PD Sargent. When I told him what it was, he asked me where I got it. I told him the state of Texas issued them and he then asked, "Why would they do that?"

Bwahahahaha - classic!

[WildBill]

I have noticed when I get on sites like this one that there are many questions regarding legality of carrying in certain places and whether it is prohibited or not, questions regarding signage, etc. These questions are often asked and then asked again a few months later.

What my question relates to is whether during CHL courses; are these subjects not covered? When I took my initial and renewal, the laws of where you could not carry, signage, printing (it has changed since my renewal) were covered in detail. If these topics are not being addressed, will the shortening of the course only exacerbate these uncertainties.

Learning and retention are different issues. IMO, most people who take a class such as the Texas CHL are a bit nervous, so they "learn" to pass the test. After the initial stress of taking the class, more questions come up. Actually I think it's great that the people continue to ask the questions, next week or a few months later. That tells me that they are serious about learning.

Every so often Charles Cotton gives a free seminar on the use of "Deadly Force." In addition to taking three classes where he covers this subject, I have attended his seminar five times. Every time I learn something new. Never stop learning.

[rotor]

In spite of the courses we take the signs are confusing. This week I was just about to go into a city owned building that had a 30.06 on it. I had to stop, turn around, leave my gun in my car and come back to the building. I keep a picture of a valid 30.06 on my cell phone. That's the only way I can remember the verbage of the 30.06. Why was the city building off limit, it was a court annex. How many of us can actually tell if a 30.06 sign is really a 30.06 by memory alone? And take the post office stuff. Did your course say the post office parking lot was illegal? Mine didn't. How many non-chl have a gun in their glove box while going into a post office? How many then go to pick up their kids at school. Many very confusing laws.

[txbirddog]

Thanks for the well thought out replies. I guess each instructor has different skills as does each student.

[C-dub]

In spite of the courses we take the signs are confusing. This week I was just about to go into a city owned building that had a 30.06 on it. I had to stop, turn around, leave my gun in my car and come back to the building. I keep a picture of a valid 30.06 on my cell phone. That's the only way I can remember the verbage of the 30.06. Why was the city building off limit, it was a court annex. How many of us can actually tell if a 30.06 sign is really a 30.06 by memory alone? And take the post office stuff. Did your course say the post office parking lot was illegal? Mine didn't. How many non-chl have a gun in their glove box while going into a post office? How many then go to pick up their kids at school. Many very confusing laws.

Picking up kids at school with a concealed handgun is okay if you have a CHL from the state you're in and you don't go in any buildings.

[thatguy]

I have noticed when I get on sites like this one that there are many questions regarding legality of carrying in certain places and whether it is prohibited or not, questions regarding signage, etc. These questions are often asked and then asked again a few months later.

What my question relates to is whether during CHL courses; are these subjects not covered? When I took my initial and renewal, the laws of where you could not carry, signage, printing (it has changed since my renewal) were covered in detail. If these topics are not being addressed, will the shortening of the course only exacerbate these uncertainties.

Learning and retention are different issues. IMO, most people who take a class such as the Texas CHL are a bit nervous, so they "learn" to pass the test. After the initial stress of taking the class, more questions come up. Actually I think it's great that the people continue to ask the questions, next week or a few months later. That tells me that they are serious about learning.

Every so often Charles Cotton gives a free seminar on the use of "Deadly Force." In addition to taking three classes where he covers this subject, I have attended his seminar five times. Every time I learn something new. Never stop learning.

Well said sir.