TexasCHLforum.com

G26ster wrote:Both SB 864 and HB 47 have the same language below:

" (j) For license holders seeking to renew their licenses, the
[The] department may offer online, or allow a qualified handgun
instructor to offer online, the classroom instruction part of the
handgun proficiency [continuing education instruction] course and
the written section of the proficiency examination [required to
renew a license]."

So basically, it's up to DPS to set up an on-line course, or individual Instructors to do so. Any insights as to anyone's (DPS or Instructor) plans to do this? I need to renew in the next 10 months so I'd like to have some insight, if available.

That's not new; it was just put in a different section. There are no plans to offer online courses primarily because of the range portion of the class.

Also, is is unclear if an automated online course is statutorily authorized, or if a webinar would be required so students could ask questions. The bottom line is online classes are unlikely as long as students are required to shoot in the course. Such a course could also prove to be problematic for reciprocity. Reportedly, many states are reconsidering reciprocity with Virginia due to the availability of online courses.

Chas.

I do not see anything in HB48 (an act) that indicates one has to take an online course to renew a license. If I am reading HR48 correctly, basically you apply, send in your money, DPS does background investigation and you subsequently get your license in the mail. What am I missing.

stash wrote:I do not see anything in HB48 (an act) that indicates one has to take an online course to renew a license. If I am reading HR48 correctly, basically you apply, send in your money, DPS does background investigation and you subsequently get your license in the mail. What am I missing.

I think what you are missing is that SB 864 is on its way to the Governor for signature. It will probably become the law of the land on Sept 1st. HB48 has not made it out of the Senate yet, and may die there.

Thanks for the clarification 2firfun. I misinterpreted the word "engrossed" in HB48.

I wonder if those 12 instructors are going to quit teaching on Sept. 1st, since they have publicly stated that they are incapable of teaching a class in compliance with the law that will become effective on that date?

No, you can't teach your current 10 hr. class in 4 to 6 hrs, but the law doesn't say "teach Instructor John Doe's class!" It gives four subjects to be covered and specified an entirely arbitrary number of hours (10 - 15) within which you must teach that subject matter. I feel like John the Baptist ("the voice in the wilderness") repeating this, but we've been teaching the statutorily-required material in 4 hours since 1998, so I wonder if these 12 instructors have been violating the law by teaching a renewal class that lasted more than 6 hours?

At the end of the day I'm convinced that the miniscule opposition is based upon one of three factors, or a combination thereof: 1) fear of reduced revenue due to lower class fees; 2) inability or unwillingness to revamp one's current CHL course (some instructors purchase courses); and/or 3) a belief that students cannot do without the 4 to 6 extra hours of material each of us has had to develop on the 4 subject areas.

Chas.

I highly disagree with those who say that if we as instructors can't get it all in, then we need to re-evaluate. I did some evaluating--based on the test that is currently in use.
Of the 4 required subjects, I found the following
Safety/Storage--5 questions
Non-Violent Dispute resolution--6 questions
Use of Force/Lethal Force--7 questions
Basic Handgun--0(that is ZERO) questions

That is a total of 18 questions(out of 50) If that was all I taught--just what do you think the pass rate would be?

The remaining questions? the NOT required topics?

Administrative rules--7 questions
Licensing/Eligibility--10 questions
MPA----4 questions
Carrying(signage, no carry, etc)--11 questions

Now--if I were a person who "teaches the test"--sure--I could do that in an hour! BUT, I'm not--I teach the material & the test takes care of itself.

With no prerequisites to taking the class(no evidence of any gun experience), I get people who have little to no experience. Even tho this is not a "firearms class", you better believe they are going to have enough knowledge to be safe before I put a loaded gun in their hand! I intend to go home!

I know that based on the above results, I WILL be reevaluating my lesson plans--and I will give you 3 guess(and the first 2 don't count!) which areas will be trimmed substantially!

One report I read said that "no CHL instructors objected". Well, I for one wrote & called my Sen & Rep

And yes, I know this is contrary to what some on this board think or promote. And before you say it, this is NOT my source of livelihood--so don't insinuate that "i don't want to lose money"

Am I the only one that believes a CHL class shouldn't be an "Introduction to Firearms" class?

I do agree with you--but right now because of how it is structured, sometimes that is EXACTLY what it is!

JustMe wrote:I do agree with you--but right now because of how it is structured, sometimes that is EXACTLY what it is!

I actually see opportunity in the upcoming changes. I would stress to students when they pre-register that with the reduced class time they need to be proficient with firearms prior to taking the class. I would offer a separate basic handgun course for those who are new to firearms which could be scheduled prior to the CHL class.
I would move the shooting portion of the class as close as possible to the beginning of the class. Those who did not demonstrate a minimal level of competency would be asked to schedule the basic firearms course the end of which they would have another opportunity to complete the shooting portion of the class.
This provides the opportunity for people who need additional training to obtain it and provides an additional revenue stream for instructors.

Better yet, two classes in one day. 7:00 to 10:00 Basic Handgun class. 11:00 to 12:00 Shooting. 1:00 to 5:00 CHL classroom instruction.

I'm working on doing a weekend program--4 hours friday night-8 hours saturday-4 hours Sunday afternoon. Do the NRA Basic Pistol, Home Firearm Safety & the CHL class. Don't have all the logistics together yet. Will also do the classes seperately for those who don't want it all in 1 weekend

superchief wrote:As a gun owner, "shall not be infringed" means just that. I've never thought this whole program is in line with the second amendment.

This is something that I believe too many instructors forget or ignore. We are dealing with two constitutional rights, 1) the right to keep and bear arms; and 2) the right to preserve one's one life. The requirements to obtain a CHL must be the least restrictive possible and 10 hour classes do not meet that requirement. This isn't theory, it a fact. Contrary to the arguments of some, we've been teaching all of the required material in less than four hours for 16 years. During that time CHLs have garnered an incredible track record, so we are not debating in a vacuum.

I've been a firearms instructor for over 40 years in some form or another. I can teach a one day course or a one month course, depending upon what I choose to include. I conduct seminars that range from 1 hour to a full day, depending upon what I include in the course. It simply isn't necessary to keep students in a class for 10 hours to cover the statutorily-required material.

I teach classes other than the CHL class and they range from basic handgun skills for beginners to advanced handgun skills. I'm certified to teach all NRA classes other than muzzle loader and shotgun and I'm going to be doing more of them in the coming months. I believe strongly that people should get firearms training and I encourage all of my CHL students to do so. However, I will not let my personal opinions about training interfere with the constitutional rights of others.

Some instructors are so smitten with themselves, that they believe they are God's gift to the Texas CHL system. They aren't! The most prolific of CHL instructors has trained only a small fraction of the 600,000+ CHLs so their impact is nonexistent. Before we decided to push for the hour reduction, we contacted more active instructors in various parts of the State and asked for their input. Not one opposed the reduction and all agreed that the core material does not support a 10 hour course.

I am not suggesting that any instructor's 10 hour course isn't "good," but I am saying it isn't necessary to achieve a legitimate legislative goal while respecting constitutional rights. I find it frustrating that not one single instructor who opposes the change has answered my question as to whether they are going to stop teaching on Sept. 1st. If they truly believe what they are saying, i.e. that the course cannot be taught in 4 to 6 hours not counting range time, then why would they continue to teach when they have admitted they are not up to the task? Not one single instructor has answered my other question; i.e. do you feel your renewal students are not being properly trained now?

Chas.

jmra wrote:

JustMe wrote:I do agree with you--but right now because of how it is structured, sometimes that is EXACTLY what it is!

...I would move the shooting portion of the class as close as possible to the beginning of the class. Those who did not demonstrate a minimal level of competency would be asked to schedule the basic firearms course...
Better yet, two classes in one day. 7:00 to 10:00 Basic Handgun class. 11:00 to 12:00 Shooting. 1:00 to 5:00 CHL classroom instruction.

I think this is a great answer to those who believe they need all the time currently allowed. Make it $50-$60 for chl only, and maybe $100 for chl and basic handgun. Id have done the full course for my girlfriend and then met her at the range to start the second half for chl only. Sounds like a win win. Those who don't need the help don't waste their time, and those who do can still get it for the same price as before.

I think Mr. Cotton is dead on with this post.

I thought -I HAD answered you--Yes-I will continue to teach. I am in the process now of redoing my lesson plans. Non-violent dispute resolution will be DRASTICALLY cut!(only 6 questions on the test) and because of that obviously the state doesn't think it deserves as much attention as I currently pay to it. Likewise with the other "required" subjects. Handgun use & safety will be moved to the range(no limit there!) and I will continue to present all of the other information that I currently teach. Because of the way my classes have been structured I have not had true "renewal" students --I have had students who allowed their CHL to lapse & were repeating the entire class.