TexasCHLforum.com

tacticool wrote:

Hoi Polloi wrote:Thanks for posting this! It gave me an idea which I just posted in the Instructor's Corner about CHL instructors voluntarily offering 1 seat per class or some other variation of reduced cost to anyone who qualifies for the indigency rate with the state.

If this is something you believe in, you could become certified and teach free classes. Did you know you can become an instructor without having a CHL?

I think this is actually more relevant to the other thread than this one so I'm going to move my response over there.

Hoi Polloi wrote:

81aggie wrote:Somehow I think a lot of people in the inner city zip codes might not qualify for a CHL based on an inability to pass a background check or just a simple disregard for doing things in the manner that the law prescribes. I'd have to wonder how many individuals in those areas carry concealed firearms illegally. Apologies if that's making assumptions but it's the way I see it.

Thanks for posting this! It gave me an idea which I just posted in the Instructor's Corner about CHL instructors voluntarily offering 1 seat per class or some other variation of reduced cost to anyone who qualifies for the indigency rate with the state.

As I posted in that thread, I think it is much more likely that it isn't on the radar of the poor and minorities or part of their culture because of a strong, clear, and intentional history of our nation keeping them away from guns than it is that large numbers of them can't pass a background check. I think many of them are completely unaware of the aims of gun control being primarily to keep them in their place and they don't know other people in their circles who introduce them to that knowledge. Instead, they are put in defenseless positions and then told that they are weak and defenseless so that they rely on the government to protect them instead of realizing how strong they are in their numbers and being willing to counter the same.

That's why I like coming to these forums, always someone who can come at an issue from a perspective I hadn't considered. Thanks and a for showing me another option.

I would like to see a map like the article showed, but with the the criteria to show by zip code the statistics of individuals that are not qualified to get a CHL. The following criteria may just disqualify many more of the under poor underprivileged. Think that may have something to do with it?

TEXAS CONCEALED HANDGUN LAWS GC §411.172. 3***

ELIGIBILITY

(a) A person is eligible for a license to carry a concealed handgun
if the person:
(1) is a legal resident of this state for the six-month period
preceding the date of application under this subchapter or is otherwise
eligible for a license under Section 411.173(a);
(2) is at least 21 years of age;
(3) has not been convicted of a felony;
(4) is not charged with the commission of a Class A or Class B
misdemeanor or an offense under Section 42.01, Penal Code, or of a
felony under an information or indictment;
(5) is not a fugitive from justice for a felony or a Class A or Class
B misdemeanor;
(6) is not a chemically dependent person;
(7) is not incapable of exercising sound judgment with respect to
the proper use and storage of a handgun;
(8) has not, in the five years preceding the date of application, been
convicted of a Class A or Class B misdemeanor or an offense under
Section 42.01, Penal Code;
(9) is fully qualified under applicable federal and state law to
purchase a handgun;
(10) has not been finally determined to be delinquent in making a
child support payment administered or collected by the attorney
general;
(11) has not been finally determined to be delinquent in the
payment of a tax or other money collected by the comptroller, the tax
collector of a political subdivision of the state, or any agency or subdivision
of the state;
(12) has not been finally determined to be in default on a loan
made under Chapter 57, Education Code;
(13) is not currently restricted under a court protective order or
subject to a restraining order affecting the spousal relationship, other
than a restraining order solely affecting property interests;
(14) has not, in the 10 years preceding the date of application,
been adjudicated as having engaged in delinquent conduct violating a
penal law of the grade of felony; and
(15) has not made any material misrepresentation, or failed to
disclose any material fact, in an application submitted pursuant to
Section 411.174 or in a request for application submitted pursuant to
Section 411.175.

I'm kinda scratching my head here wondering. There seems to be belief that if one is poor, one is a criminal. While I can understand that there are many people who are poor and who are also criminals, one does not presuppose the other. That is, being a criminal doesn't necessarily mean one is poor, and being poor doesn't necessarily mean one is criminal. I grew up in very difficult financial straits, but neither of my parents were criminals and neither had criminal backgrounds.

Just a reminder that not all of our biases are reality.

being a criminal doesn't necessarily mean one is poor, and being poor doesn't necessarily mean one is criminal

True, but I think his point was that the other info supplied was generalized and statistical in nature... just like being poor doesn't make you a democrat, but the voting maps are pretty clear as to the majority. If you looked solely at the percentage of population with some disqualification, the higher percentage might also be in the statistically poorer areas.