Page 3 of 3
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:04 pm
by Oldgringo
Vic wrote:(Continuation from above)
...a retired DPS and current Deputy, was anti-CHL and said so...
This anonymous instructor wasn't so anti-CHL that he refused money for the class fee, was he? There are several words/names for people who "do it" for money.
The more I read these type posts and think back on the scanty instruction Mrs. Oldgringo and I received, the more I think there should be a grading system for instructors and their grades should be made public. Quite frankly, what I know about the laws, liabilities and responsibilities appertaining to a Texas CHL holder, I learned from this forum.
A CHL is not a right. It is an earned privilege that requires understanding and comes with responsibilites.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:07 pm
by pbwalker
Oldgringo wrote:A CHL is not a right.
I think the Second Amendment would like a word with you...
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:10 pm
by DONT TREAD ON ME
I agree a CHL is not a right...its a permission slip for a right that we are being denied.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:30 pm
by A-R
XtremeDuty.45 wrote:I agree a CHL is not a right...its a permission slip for a right that we are being denied.
NIcely put.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 7:45 pm
by A-R
Vic wrote:While I agree that the instructors should be covering all the material or otherwise be reported, I don't want to turn this thread into a discussion of reporting instructors. I meant my posts merely as an example of how it is possible to go to the class, pay attention, have an interest in learning the material, and still come away with an incomplete understanding due to poor instruction.
As for the reporting, the instructor for the first class made it abundantly clear that this was one of his final classes, maybe the final one. He expounded on his health concerns for a while. I don't want that to sound callous, I did feel for his plight, but then again, that's not the subject of the class. In any case, I believe that particular problem took care of itself. I don't believe that instructor is still teaching.
As for the second, I'm not going to be the one to make a case out of it. The instructor is a 28-year veteran DPS trooper. I find it patently unrealistic to think that there would be any real inquiry. In an ideal world, that wouldn't enter into it, but we all know this isn't an ideal world.
Vic,
What these instructors are doing is against the law. If they do not teach the required subjects or do not teach for the minimum required time, then by signing off on the forms that they did fulfill the requirements, they are falsifying government records. This is a serious crime. I believe this falls under Chapter 37 of the Penal Code, 37.10 Tampering with Government Records and penalties range from a Class B misdemeanor to a third-degree felony.
Would you not report a retired law enforcement officer for committing some other crime with a Class B -to- 3rd degree felony punishment range?
The DPS officer in charge of the division that monitors this made it very clear at the latest instructor class that they take this kind of thing VERY seriously.
I strongly encourage you to report these instructors.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 8:53 pm
by glbedd53
Don't think that's something Charles Cotton will ever be accused of.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:02 pm
by jester
austinrealtor wrote:I strongly encourage you to report these instructors.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:05 am
by Medic218
I'm not one to push the legal envelope and push a LEO's opinion on the subject. I know I'm probably going to catch some flack for this but here we go anyways......
30.06 is 30.06-correct wording or not(unless it is obviously WAY off). I'm just not wanting to have to try to defend myself on a technicality.
JMO
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:04 am
by bdickens
It seems as though there are some "instructors" out there who are stealing people's money.
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:18 am
by bdickens
My next question is: Have they stopped giving out the little booklet with all of the CHL-relevant laws in it?
Re: quick is this sign valid or only the 30.06?
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:01 pm
by Texas Size 11
TxLobo wrote:bdickens wrote:My next question is: Have they stopped giving out the little booklet with all of the CHL-relevant laws in it?
I didn't get one at my last class.. (May 2010) I was only provided a link to a web site that has an adobe booklet for downloading..
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/ftp/forms/chl-16.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I received it...it travels with me everyday in my laptop bag.