TexasCHLforum.com

I agree that you should talk with him 1 on 1, and try to straighten things out, after all if he asked you to assist him teaching others, then he should expect you to teach the law and the truth. Just maby he knows the law but doesn't agree with it so he teaches what he believes.

I was under the impression that should this instructor be de-certified all his students would lose thier licenses.

Is this correct?

txinvestigator wrote:I think I should write DPS.

I think you should as well...

40FIVER wrote: BTW, what is the evil black rifle board?

I believe that is a reference to http://www.ar15.com

Is he willing to change his ways? If so, let him. If not, call him in

+1 I'd give him the opportunity first.

I would write them also....

I was told the same thing about the alcohol and carrying.

Is he willing to change his ways? If so, let him. If not, call him in

I think it is always best to talk with the person first, and then follow-up however necessary.

I was told some time ago, by the office staff at DPS that 95% of their complaints are from instructors complaining about other instructors(usually their competitors), and that DPS usually pays little or no attention to complaints coming from instructors for this reason.

I don't know how true this may be, but if you can resolve things one to one, it wouldbe better for everyone. Just my 2cents.

wrt45 wrote:

Is he willing to change his ways? If so, let him. If not, call him in

I think it is always best to talk with the person first, and then follow-up however necessary.

I was told some time ago, by the office staff at DPS that 95% of their complaints are from instructors complaining about other instructors(usually their competitors), and that DPS usually pays little or no attention to complaints coming from instructors for this reason.

I don't know how true this may be, but if you can resolve things one to one, it wouldbe better for everyone. Just my 2cents.

That is pretty much exactly what we were told at this year's chl instructor class.

He is not going to change his teaching. He was argumentative when I tried to discuss it with him.

I think I can make DPS pay attention.

txinvestigator wrote: 2. Because there is no "legal limit" of intoxication for carrying while intoxicated, it is illegal to drink any amount of alcohol while carrying. He explained this to me at break that regardless of the law, the CHL holders don't need to be drinking if they carry. so by misinforming them, they think they cannot drink at all.
.

This is what I was taught at my class I guess I need to review my manual.

Just how does that UCW thing work?

JKDubb wrote:

txinvestigator wrote: 2. Because there is no "legal limit" of intoxication for carrying while intoxicated, it is illegal to drink any amount of alcohol while carrying. He explained this to me at break that regardless of the law, the CHL holders don't need to be drinking if they carry. so by misinforming them, they think they cannot drink at all.
.

This is what I was taught at my class I guess I need to review my manual.

Just how does that UCW thing work?

You know, there is so much of this that is subject to interpretation. And how you teach it comes down to:

Who taught your instructor class?

How did they say it on that day?

What did you write down in your notes?

I used to teach that no amount of alcohol was legal, because I would have sworn that was what I heard. Next instructor update, it was explained a little better... that BAC is not the determining factor in whether or not you are intoxicated; it is up to the officer to decide at the time based on several factors. And, I changed the way I taught it.

So, my opinion is, that's a small point of infraction. Not understanding the 51% rule is a bigger one. Not being open to correction is the deal breaker. We should all be changing what we teach, as we go. Anyone who is teaching exactly the same thing, in exactly the same way, for several years, is not giving his students what they deserve.

You do what you think is right, TXI. If you have talked to him, and he refuses to change, then he has received fair warning.

TxI and I took our last renewal at the same time and he will remember that we heard Instructor's asking the same question's that our student's have been asking for year's, question's they should have been answering.

None of us know it all but if a student ask's a question I don't know or I'm not sure of I'm not going to wait until the next inst. renewal class to find the answer.

I'll probably throw it out here and get a lot of good answers from Ya'll

fadlan12 wrote:I was under the impression that should this instructor be de-certified all his students would lose thier licenses.

Is this correct?

according to GC §411.191
The procedures for the review of a denial, revocation, or suspension of a license under Section 411.180 apply to the review of a denial, revocation, or suspension of certification as a qualified handgun instructor. The notice provisions of this subchapter relating to denial, revocation, or suspension of handgun licenses apply to the proposed denial, revocation, or suspension of a certification of a qualified handgun instructor or an applicant for certification as a qualified handgun instructor.

If this instructor's authority to teach the CHL class is revoked then I take this to mean that all current CHL holders that went thru this instructors class might be or will be revoked!

EEEKK!

Was this in Dallas proper?

llwatson wrote:

JKDubb wrote:

txinvestigator wrote: 2. Because there is no "legal limit" of intoxication for carrying while intoxicated, it is illegal to drink any amount of alcohol while carrying. He explained this to me at break that regardless of the law, the CHL holders don't need to be drinking if they carry. so by misinforming them, they think they cannot drink at all.
.

This is what I was taught at my class I guess I need to review my manual.

Just how does that UCW thing work?

You know, there is so much of this that is subject to interpretation. And how you teach it comes down to:

Who taught your instructor class?

How did they say it on that day?

What did you write down in your notes?

I used to teach that no amount of alcohol was legal, because I would have sworn that was what I heard. Next instructor update, it was explained a little better... that BAC is not the determining factor in whether or not you are intoxicated; it is up to the officer to decide at the time based on several factors. And, I changed the way I taught it.

So, how do you teach it now, please.
In my first class 4.5 years ago, I was taught no alcohol...period.
In this last class, they said not intoxicated.

To me, as a reasonable citizen, it still means no alcohol.

40FIVER wrote:

BTW, what is the evil black rifle board? Question

Freedom4all wrote:

I believe that is a reference to http://www.ar15.com

Freedom4all is correct. Its their way of referencing ar15 style rifles in a tongue in cheek way. Kind of a play on the way the news outlets and anti gunners refer to them.

Dan