TexasCHLforum.com

goose's perspective mirrors my own, especially this: "I also suspect that there is a fair amount of "If I claim my CHL instructor said it, I'll carry more weight in this debate." And the poor CHL instructor never said squat."

FWIW.
The state only requires the Instructors to teach the class in person and orally, following the syllabus the state has given each instructor with at least a minimum amount of time spent covering each defined section. The state does not tell the Instructors how to say it or how much they can charge. Instructors are also to give and grade the state test and do the proficiency test personally and in the manner the state requires, using the target that the state has approved (B27). All instruction must be given by a certified Instructor.

I am an Instructor I teach orally but I also teach using PowerPoint and give each student a handout that contains all PowerPoint slides. The student also receive the CHL16, a pen to write with all is included in class cost. I have had several folks who have their CHL but want to attend to become aware of changes in the Law since they received theirs. If they are attending with someone else there is no charge. If they want a copy of the handouts and CHL16 then I ask them to donate to cover the cost. In my records I also keep a copy of the PowerPoint used in that class. (I do update or rearrange the content from time to time)

My fine print on class application also states:
While class instruction will cover the requirements made by the State of Texas. I realize that this class is not designed to teach the student how to shoot a handgun and there are many aspects of the Law that I must review and will be responsible for knowing. Such as, changes and additions to such Laws affecting LTC holders. I also realize, it is also the responsibility of the LTC license holder to read and understand the existing law and stay current with the law and changes in the law as they occur.

I also agree to listen and follow all instructions and conduct myself in a safe and responsible manner. I agree not to hold instructors, students or other parties responsible for any accidents or injuries caused by my failure to follow instruction or failure to act in a safe and responsible manner. I also agree that not following instruction or failing to act safe and responsible, the Instructor may discontinue my presence, without refund, resulting in no credit given for time in class. Followed by dated student signature.

The few Instructors that I have assisted have been as thorough as time allows. Like them I do not feel I can morally teach what the class needs to understand in the minimum 4 hours, my goal is less than 5 the state allows up to 6.

Abraham wrote:goose's perspective mirrors my own, especially this: "I also suspect that there is a fair amount of "If I claim my CHL instructor said it, I'll carry more weight in this debate." And the poor CHL instructor never said squat."

It would be very childish to do such a thing.

gthaustex wrote:TAM, your recollection is correct. No renewal class is required anymore (classroom or proficiency).

That said, and in keeping with this thread, I wonder how many out there who don't frequent this forum will actually stay up with changes in the law now that they don't have to go to a class to renew their plastic??

That may make a class worthwhile. OTH, I frequent this forum a LOT (as I make a not so oblique reference to my post count).

WildBill wrote:

Abraham wrote:goose's perspective mirrors my own, especially this: "I also suspect that there is a fair amount of "If I claim my CHL instructor said it, I'll carry more weight in this debate." And the poor CHL instructor never said squat."

It would be very childish to do such a thing.

Agreed. But I think that we've seen it on the forum. I also suspect that on average it is newer members. As Liberty said/implied (not putting words in their mouth), it only takes a little while for folks to realize our community is fairly self correcting. In effect most of our posts are peer reviewed. Keeps us honest (if we're open to it), informed and to some extent vetted.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

gthaustex wrote:TAM, your recollection is correct. No renewal class is required anymore (classroom or proficiency).

That said, and in keeping with this thread, I wonder how many out there who don't frequent this forum will actually stay up with changes in the law now that they don't have to go to a class to renew their plastic??

That may make a class worthwhile. OTH, I frequent this forum a LOT (as I make a not so oblique reference to my post count).

Give or take a bit, eight and a half years, that's about 7 posts a day. Assuming some made up number like twice that many threads are read, I think you'll be fine without the class. :-)

goose wrote:

WildBill wrote:

Abraham wrote:goose's perspective mirrors my own, especially this: "I also suspect that there is a fair amount of "If I claim my CHL instructor said it, I'll carry more weight in this debate." And the poor CHL instructor never said squat."

It would be very childish to do such a thing.

Agreed. But I think that we've seen it on the forum. I also suspect that on average it is newer members. As Liberty said/implied (not putting words in their mouth), it only takes a little while for folks to realize our community is fairly self correcting. In effect most of our posts are peer reviewed. Keeps us honest (if we're open to it), informed and to some extent vetted.

I agree that our community is "fairly self correcting." After being here a while and reading and learning I gained the confidence to post "your instructor was wrong."

The problem is that people do not do their homework. I know several individuals that take the class, get their chls and that's it. They don't know anything about the laws other than what their instructor taught them. They don't even target practice. They think because they got their chl, they know everything there is to know about carrying and that they'll automatically know what to do when the time comes. They don't consider breaking the law or that they will lose the gun fight if their in one.

I've learned so much about the laws on carrying and tactics since taking my class. This forum has been a great source for knowledge as well. Training and reading about laws are very necessary after getting your license.

Javier730 wrote:The problem is that people do not do their homework. I know several individuals that take the class, get their chls and that's it. They don't know anything about the laws other than what their instructor taught them. They don't even target practice. They think because they got their chl, they know everything there is to know about carrying and that they'll automatically know what to do when the time comes. They don't consider breaking the law or that they will lose the gun fight if their in one.

I've learned so much about the laws on carrying and tactics since taking my class. This forum has been a great source for knowledge as well. Training and reading about laws are very necessary after getting your license.

I was fortunate in that I had a law enforcement background, so I was already familiar with most laws regarding use of force etc., but also that I was able to pull up the information and interpret any new laws. There is definitely a learning curve to reading the penal code, and it can get confusing, if you are unfamiliar with the format.
But I have met a lot of LTC holders who were totally unaware of any new laws, especially regarding OC, and it astounded me that they didn't take any more time to read and learn them, but relied on word of mouth info, which was often incorrect, but they would repeat it like it was gospel truth.

I have also met several LTC holders who haven't been shooting since they took their LTC class, some of them for years. I know how quickly skills deteriorate, especially as I get older, so consistent practice is a must for me, and I can definitely see a drop off, if I go too long without practice.

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Here's a partial list of the kinds of thing I'm talking about:

• [My instructor said] "you MUST show your CHL to any officer." (Not true.....you must show CHL/LTC only if asked for ID)

I'm pretty sure though that you must show your CHL/LTC only if asked for ID AND you are carrying?

In my profession in aviation I am responsible for teaching very technical and complex rules, regulations, and procedures. And I work with other instructors. In my position as being responsible for training I have students come to me with many questions just like this..."this instructor said I had to do this"...that instructor said I can't do that".

I give each new student this advise...

1) the only way to inoculate yourself from receiving counterfeit information is to know the information precisely. Then when you are told something you immediately know if what you are hearing is true or bogus. There are many we'll know books and studies on this very subject.

2) when someone tells you something and uses words or phrases like..."have to"..."got to"..."you can't"..."you're supposed to"..."must"...they are, in effect, saying "there is a rule that requires you to do it this way"! This is easy to verify because if "I have to..." There must be a rule that says "I have to...".

I generally find that many times there is no such rule, or the rule has been distorted through interpretation, assumption, or hand-me-down generational modification and the like.

If it is a requirement for a passenger to show a license when asked how you are doing then THERE MUST BE A RULE THAT REQUIRES THAT!...a rule that, if it exists, can be found, researched, and, against which, the assertion can be tested.

I have found that what usually happens is that someone asks someone else to get their opinion as if to rely on that opinion for their education on the subject rather than going to the source themselves and making themselves expert on that subject. Relying on others opinion about a subject in a technically precise field such as the precise law governing our field, LTC, inevitably introduces error because not everyone can resist giving their interpretation of what a law means. When learning one should not want anyone's "opinion" of the rule but a study Of what the rule ACTUALLY says.

Learn the precision of the rule or law FIRST...then seek out opinions or advise SECOND. And never confuse interpretation with fact or actuality. This is why it is important to study before taking any class on anything so that you are prepared with expertise and are more likely to recognize counterfeit teaching. Imagine that...the principle of studying material prior to class. The same holds true for any learning environment.

Grown ups play the children's game of 'Telephone' with more abandon the kids do! AND with important subjects.

Shame on instructors who fail to separate the fact from the self generated fiction.

tex

Two responses
After more than 30 years of briefing, trianing, lecturing to High School graduates, college educated, career politician, military leaders of all ranks.. i can say for sure, people often do not hear what was said..it is filtered by them, or outright not heard.
And
Often, instructors who know implicitly the materiel they are teaching or briefing allow personal experiences or bias mix in with the program of instruction.
I deal with both of these things literally every week.

E.Marquez wrote:Two responses
After more than 30 years of briefing, trianing, lecturing to High School graduates, college educated, career politician, military leaders of all ranks.. i can say for sure, people often do not hear what was said..it is filtered by them, or outright not heard.
And
Often, instructors who know implicitly the materiel they are teaching or briefing allow personal experiences or bias mix in with the program of instruction.
I deal with both of these things literally every week.

That's also a big factor...not listening or hearing incorrectly which is often caused by unfamiliarity of the subject. If I teach a student that in some cases pulling back on the controls of an aircraft will make you go down without also teaching them about reverse command and power curves they will come away with the wrong learned behavior. And swear that their instructor said that "he said if I want to go down in an airplane then pull up!" ( which actually is partially true )!!

tex

thetexan wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:Two responses
After more than 30 years of briefing, trianing, lecturing to High School graduates, college educated, career politician, military leaders of all ranks.. i can say for sure, people often do not hear what was said..it is filtered by them, or outright not heard.
And
Often, instructors who know implicitly the materiel they are teaching or briefing allow personal experiences or bias mix in with the program of instruction.
I deal with both of these things literally every week.

That's also a big factor...not listening or hearing incorrectly which is often caused by unfamiliarity of the subject. If I teach a student that in some cases pulling back on the controls of an aircraft will make you go down without also teaching them about reverse command and power curves they will come away with the wrong learned behavior. And swear that their instructor said that "he said if I want to go down in an airplane then pull up!" ( which actually is partially true )!!
tex

Yep! That's why I keep the FARs within arms reach. When I give answer, especially on a forum, I always try to reference the regulation.

Glockster wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Here's a partial list of the kinds of thing I'm talking about:

• [My instructor said] "you MUST show your CHL to any officer." (Not true.....you must show CHL/LTC only if asked for ID)

I'm pretty sure though that you must show your CHL/LTC only if asked for ID AND you are carrying?

Correct, and thank you for the reminder.