TexasCHLforum.com

Breny414 wrote:

thatguyoverthere wrote:My instructor for my CHL class had the same philosophy for the same reasons as stated by the OP, but my instructor went even further. He did not allow us to take photos of our targets, did not allow us to hold our targets long enough for us to count our own score (just take them down and hand them to him), and would not tell us our score after he checked our targets. All I knew at the end was that I passed. Seemed slightly overcautious to me, but I was ok with it all in all.

Seems to be a bit over the top... unless he was trying to teach a lesson. Like, be careful of the things you do, say, post, bumper stickers on your car, etc, etc, because these things could be used against you in a prosecution.

I can understand being careful about disclosing certain things. I was raised the same way. Not because these things could be used against me as a prosecution, but just not advertising that you own a gun or things that aren't any one's business. For example, I have been an NRA Life member for 30+ years, but don't have an NRA sticker on my car. I am not afraid of prosecution, but don't want to advertise to a thief.

Breny414 wrote:

thatguyoverthere wrote:My instructor for my CHL class had the same philosophy for the same reasons as stated by the OP, but my instructor went even further. He did not allow us to take photos of our targets, did not allow us to hold our targets long enough for us to count our own score (just take them down and hand them to him), and would not tell us our score after he checked our targets. All I knew at the end was that I passed. Seemed slightly overcautious to me, but I was ok with it all in all.

Seems to be a bit over the top... unless he was trying to teach a lesson. Like, be careful of the things you do, say, post, bumper stickers on your car, etc, etc, because these things could be used against you in a prosecution.

I don't recall him going that direction so much, talking about those other things. But I do recall him specifically talking about the hypothetical prosecutor using a good qualification score against you in a court of law. I thought it was a little overdone also. But his class - no reason for me to argue with him about. I figured he could run his class like he wanted to.

WildBill wrote: I can understand being careful about disclosing certain things. I was raised the same way. Not because these things could be used against me as a prosecution, but just not advertising that you own a gun or things that aren't any one's business. For example, I have been an NRA Life member for 30+ years, but don't have an NRA sticker on my car. I am not afraid of prosecution, but don't want to advertise to a thief.

That's a good point. Anyway, If I were to ever have a bumper sticker it would probably be something i thought was funny rather than something political.

But in my post I was thinking more along the lines of the "Terrorist Hunting Permit" bumper sticker or others that could be interpreted as provocative, depending against whom you used your firearm in self-defense.

Breny414 wrote:

WildBill wrote: I can understand being careful about disclosing certain things. I was raised the same way. Not because these things could be used against me as a prosecution, but just not advertising that you own a gun or things that aren't any one's business. For example, I have been an NRA Life member for 30+ years, but don't have an NRA sticker on my car. I am not afraid of prosecution, but don't want to advertise to a thief.

That's a good point. Anyway, If I were to ever have a bumper sticker it would probably be something i thought was funny rather than something political.

But in my post I was thinking more along the lines of the "Terrorist Hunting Permit" bumper sticker or others that could be interpreted as provocative, depending against whom you used your firearm in self-defense.

I see your point. There is no way I would have that on my car or home. Some consider it funny or clever, but I think they are tacky. But that's just me talking.

thatguyoverthere wrote:

Breny414 wrote:

thatguyoverthere wrote:My instructor for my CHL class had the same philosophy for the same reasons as stated by the OP, but my instructor went even further. He did not allow us to take photos of our targets, did not allow us to hold our targets long enough for us to count our own score (just take them down and hand them to him), and would not tell us our score after he checked our targets. All I knew at the end was that I passed. Seemed slightly overcautious to me, but I was ok with it all in all.

Seems to be a bit over the top... unless he was trying to teach a lesson. Like, be careful of the things you do, say, post, bumper stickers on your car, etc, etc, because these things could be used against you in a prosecution.

I don't recall him going that direction so much, talking about those other things. But I do recall him specifically talking about the hypothetical prosecutor using a good qualification score against you in a court of law. I thought it was a little overdone also. But his class - no reason for me to argue with him about. I figured he could run his class like he wanted to.

It is his class. Everyone has their opinions. As long as they state it's their opinion rather than the law or fact I can't complain too much.

WildBill wrote:It's hard to believe that rumor is still alive and well.

My instructor said this very same thing to my class last year. He told us not to keep our targets and to stay away from pro gun stickers on our vehicles and "trespassers will be shot" type of signs around the house. So I did some research and is not so much a rumor from what I've found.

And just for the record, they can't use those signs or past awards or training or anything like that "as proof" or "evidence" against you in any criminal cases but they can used against you in a civil case.

They can be used to "paint" a picture of the "type" of person the people suing you wants the jury to see you as...

JayStation3 wrote:

WildBill wrote:It's hard to believe that rumor is still alive and well.

My instructor said this very same thing to my class last year. He told us not to keep our targets and to stay away from pro gun stickers on our vehicles and "trespassers will be shot" type of signs around the house. So I did some research and is not so much a rumor from what I've found.

And just for the record, they can't use those signs or past awards or training or anything like that "as proof" or "evidence" against you in any criminal cases but they can used against you in a civil case.

They can be used to "paint" a picture of the "type" of person the people suing you wants the jury to see you as...

Well then I have nothing to worry about.

Does this mean I have to give up my "I'd rather be killing Communists" t-shirt and my Soldier of Fortune "Kill 'em all and let God sort them out" one?

I have had them since the A-Team and Miami Vice were on and no one's used them in a civil trial yet...

Maybe that's why my umbrella policy got canceled...or maybe it was the speeding tickets...

Some of that stuff is like a beware of dog sign on your front gate post. If you didn't know your dog was dangerous why did you put a beware of dog sign up?

WildBill wrote:The post reminds me of a very old rumor about professional boxers and martial artist black belts having to register their hands as deadly weapons.

You mean I didn't have to register?????????

puma guy wrote:

WildBill wrote:The post reminds me of a very old rumor about professional boxers and martial artist black belts having to register their hands as deadly weapons.

You mean I didn't have to register?????????

You still have to register, but only with Chuck Norris.

WildBill wrote:

puma guy wrote:

WildBill wrote:The post reminds me of a very old rumor about professional boxers and martial artist black belts having to register their hands as deadly weapons.

You mean I didn't have to register?????????

You still have to register, but only with Chuck Norris.

That was the requirement in California in certain counties during the late 60's.

MeMelYup wrote:

WildBill wrote:

puma guy wrote:

WildBill wrote:The post reminds me of a very old rumor about professional boxers and martial artist black belts having to register their hands as deadly weapons.

You mean I didn't have to register?????????

You still have to register, but only with Chuck Norris.

That was the requirement in California in certain counties during the late 60's.

This thread is getting way off topic [thanks to me].
I grew up in California during that time period and heard that claim, but was never able to see any evidence of a law that talked about it.
There was talk about making all prize fighting [boxing] illegal because it was too brutal and barbaric and they wanted to curtain betting on matches.

There were laws written to regulate prize fighting in California, but I can not find any requiring "registration" as a deadly weapon. If you can provide a link I will be grateful.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displ ... =403-420.1

WildBill wrote:

MeMelYup wrote:

WildBill wrote:

puma guy wrote:

WildBill wrote:The post reminds me of a very old rumor about professional boxers and martial artist black belts having to register their hands as deadly weapons.

You mean I didn't have to register?????????

You still have to register, but only with Chuck Norris.

That was the requirement in California in certain counties during the late 60's.

I grew up in California during that time period and heard that claim, but was never able to see any evidence of a law that talked about it.
There was talk about making all prize fighting [boxing] illegal because it was too brutal and barbaric.

There were laws written to regulate prize fighting in California, but I can not find any requiring "registration" as a deadly weapon. If you can provide a link I will be grateful.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displ ... =403-420.1

I don't know, that is what I was told by a young martial arts person from the LA area.

MeMelYup wrote:Some of that stuff is like a beware of dog sign on your front gate post. If you didn't know your dog was dangerous why did you put a beware of dog sign up?

I run/own a dog rescue, so I deal with more dogs in a week than most deal with in a lifetime. Here in Houston, a beware of dog sign is just a warning to bypassers that there may be a dog on the premise.

These signs do not constitute no trespassing.

My buddy had a beware of dog sign up and a meter guy jumped the fence anyway and got bit pretty bad. Police were called. Animal control was called. My buddy showed shot records to police later and police left.

A month later, meter guy sued my buddy. My buddy ended up winning BECAUSE the sign was there.