The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://mail.texaschlforum.com/
From what I have witnessed, many business owners are concerned about not being able to tell the good guys with guns from the bad guys with guns.TxAggieEngineer wrote:Interesting responses so far. A question from one of my follow-ups... Do you think businesses that post 30.06/07 signs don't trust that LTC holders are adequately trained and qualified (meaning, they don't start shaking in their boots when a LEO walks in) or are they just trying to make a political statement? If it's the former, how do we address that?
I guess one that points a gun in your face and one that shops at the business with a properly holstered handgun is pretty indiscernible to the average business ownerv-rog wrote:From what I have witnessed, many business owners are concerned about not being able to tell the good guys with guns from the bad guys with guns.TxAggieEngineer wrote:Interesting responses so far. A question from one of my follow-ups... Do you think businesses that post 30.06/07 signs don't trust that LTC holders are adequately trained and qualified (meaning, they don't start shaking in their boots when a LEO walks in) or are they just trying to make a political statement? If it's the former, how do we address that?
The good guys with a gun are not robbing them.v-rog wrote:From what I have witnessed, many business owners are concerned about not being able to tell the good guys with guns from the bad guys with guns.TxAggieEngineer wrote:Interesting responses so far. A question from one of my follow-ups... Do you think businesses that post 30.06/07 signs don't trust that LTC holders are adequately trained and qualified (meaning, they don't start shaking in their boots when a LEO walks in) or are they just trying to make a political statement? If it's the former, how do we address that?
Now there's something I've wrestled with forever, both as an LTC holder and an instructor. While I completely support the idea of any gun any where in principle, I've always felt that if we're going to bother to have a "certification" or "qualification" it should mean something.nightmare69 wrote: Add timed shooting from anchor point, reloads, and shooting from 40yrds. When my fiancé took her CHL course I went along and go to shoot during their proficiency. It was like taking a 1st grade spelling test.
TVGuy wrote:Sounds like a recipe for disaster in a civil suit if you ever had to use your weapon.
"He was an ADVANCED LTC, he should have been able to shoot him in the leg"
This has been discussed previously on this forum and has not gotten any support.TxAggieEngineer wrote:I was curious how much support there would be for that among LTC holders. Any input?
Ski masks and pantyhose over the face are usually a good indicator as well.casp625 wrote:I guess one that points a gun in your face and one that shops at the business with a properly holstered handgun is pretty indiscernible to the average business ownerv-rog wrote:From what I have witnessed, many business owners are concerned about not being able to tell the good guys with guns from the bad guys with guns.TxAggieEngineer wrote:Interesting responses so far. A question from one of my follow-ups... Do you think businesses that post 30.06/07 signs don't trust that LTC holders are adequately trained and qualified (meaning, they don't start shaking in their boots when a LEO walks in) or are they just trying to make a political statement? If it's the former, how do we address that?
WildBill wrote:This has been discussed previously on this forum and has not gotten any support.TxAggieEngineer wrote:I was curious how much support there would be for that among LTC holders. Any input?
The right to self defense is not determined by a marksmanship contest that decides who can carry and where they can carry.
The as-filed version of HB308 would have put CHLs in the same "Not applicable" section of §46.15 as peace officers. In short, we could carry everywhere a LEO can carry.TxAggieEngineer wrote:If I'm reading that correctly, HB 308 (46.15(5)(a)(5) would essentially invalidate 30.06 signs. Is that correct?Pawpaw wrote: Instead, in the 2017 legislative session, look for a bill similar to last session's HB 308.
I was not aware of that bill.
Charles L. Cotton wrote:The as-filed version of HB308 would have put CHLs in the same "Not applicable" section of §46.15 as peace officers. In short, we could carry everywhere a LEO can carry.TxAggieEngineer wrote:If I'm reading that correctly, HB 308 (46.15(5)(a)(5) would essentially invalidate 30.06 signs. Is that correct?Pawpaw wrote: Instead, in the 2017 legislative session, look for a bill similar to last session's HB 308.
I was not aware of that bill.
Chas.
I'd love to see a similar bill be supported in 2017. Unfortunately my no show Rep and my liberal senator don't represent me or my interests at all at the state level...Charles L. Cotton wrote:The as-filed version of HB308 would have put CHLs in the same "Not applicable" section of §46.15 as peace officers. In short, we could carry everywhere a LEO can carry.TxAggieEngineer wrote:If I'm reading that correctly, HB 308 (46.15(5)(a)(5) would essentially invalidate 30.06 signs. Is that correct?Pawpaw wrote: Instead, in the 2017 legislative session, look for a bill similar to last session's HB 308.
I was not aware of that bill.
Chas.
You are working hard at answering responses. I really don't know why stores want to prohibit concealed carry. I am not sure if they think there is a liability issue or if they are just anti-gun. Before I retired I welcomed people with guns. There are states that don't require any permit or training for concealed carry. I think Texas does an adequate job of making sure that licenses are in the right hands, that there is adequate training on the legal issues involved, there is minimal but probably adequate testing of capability to use a handgun. The LTC license only minimally tests gun proficiency. It leaves the true training for gun proficiency to the individual. That does not mean though that even a minimally trained person is not capable of successfully saving himself and his family if needed. Nothing against LEO but they are doing a job with a paycheck, retirement, etc. LTC holder is doing it to save his/her life. The level of extra training is up to each individual. My daughter was in the LEO system, had to re-certify with a weapon every so often. Believe me, you would not want to be near her with her weapon. She hates guns and could barely pass her re-certification. So LEO in my mind does not equate to proficiency. Over 60 years of gun familiarity helps.TxAggieEngineer wrote:I understand what you're saying. I too think the 51% rule is silly since it's already illegal for an armed LTC holder to be intoxicated. No, not all LEO's are of equal skill but I would say the average LEO is better than the average LTC holder.rotor wrote:Do you really want to break down LTC as superior and inferior holders? Are all LEO of equal skill? I am for expansion of our ability to enter facilities but I don't support a 2 standard class of LTC. I never did understand the red 51% alcohol sign. I don't drink, why should I not be able to carry?
Do you think all the 30.06 signs (I'm specifically excluding anything related to OC now) are because people feel that LTC holders are not adequately trained or do you feel they're just trying to make a political statement? If it's the former, how would we as an LTC community address that and obtain additional benefits?
cbunt1 wrote:Now there's something I've wrestled with forever, both as an LTC holder and an instructor. While I completely support the idea of any gun any where in principle, I've always felt that if we're going to bother to have a "certification" or "qualification" it should mean something.nightmare69 wrote: Add timed shooting from anchor point, reloads, and shooting from 40yrds. When my fiancé took her CHL course I went along and go to shoot during their proficiency. It was like taking a 1st grade spelling test.
I think most if not all instructors are better teachers than what the proficiency exams (written AND practical) allow us to show. If I tried, I could get insulted by the level to which I have to "dial it down." Of course, I don't want to "raise the bar" to legal carry either.
It's a paradox.
I have long advocated a test similar to IDPA's classifier as a practical exam. It's 90 rounds, some on the move, some standing, different targets, different positions, several draws and a couple of reloads. The problem I come up with is where to draw the pass/fail mark. I'd like to have everyone who carries a gun with a mind toward self defense to run that stage, just to understand what it's all about and the necessary manipulations. It's not hard, but it's no cake-walk either. It's nothing that the average person couldn't perform after a solid day with a decent instructor.
I now step off my soapbox and return to the thread topic.
I'm all about LEO and LTC carrying in the same places. I'm nameable to an on-duty/off-duty distinction in that context...I think.
And as for the 51% issue: Tennessee has no such restriction, but does have the caveat of no alcohol on board while carrying. I think I am OK with that too...the zero alcohol line removes any "officer's discretion" from carrying under the influence. It works for commercial drivers and pilots just fine.