TexasCHLforum.com

I think it's not such a horrible idea to require students to demonstrate safe gun handling as part of the practical test.
I would also support a rule that prohibits instructors and other people from "helping" students pass the practical test.

But I think a separate class/certification/annoyance/hoop/timewaster/moneywaster/infringement is a horrible idea.

boomerang wrote:I think it's not such a horrible idea to require students to demonstrate safe gun handling as part of the practical test.
I would also support a rule that prohibits instructors and other people from "helping" students pass the practical test.

But I think a separate class/certification/annoyance/hoop/timewaster/moneywaster/infringement is a horrible idea.

Are you saying that older arthritic people should not be able to qualify with with a Semiauto because they are incapable of reloading or charging their weapon?
How does the lack of ability to charge their weapon make them more dangerous to the public! These people who have these dificulties have more need to protect themselves than the healthy male under 60. I realize that in our Obamian society that we are now giving less respect to older people, and forcing them to be to be defenseless, might help resolve the social security health crisis. But this is just cold!

Again I ask?
How does the inabilty to load or charge ones weapon cause a person to be more dangerous to others?
What is the harm in helping an older person reload their handgun, on charge their weapon.

I simply think that if that if someone is physically incapable of charging or unloading their weapon they need a different solution. This is for safety more than any thing else, I mean if you can't unload your pistol, what if you need to clean it, unload it to take into a range or gunsmithm etc...? I wouldn't carry or own any weapon that I'm physically incapable of operating. I've been on the range many times and watched terrified as some individual struggles to pull a slide pointing the weapon every which way but downrange! I've also seen it with DA autos and revolvers where someone doesn't have enough strength to pull the trigger and they spasmically point the gun all over creation trying to fire it. That in my opinion endangers the public. But its none of the gov's business to determine this. I just think that the chl instructors out there have a duty to society to disqualify people who cannot safely operate a weapon on their own. It's just common sense, maybe they can suggest alternative weapons to these folks? My grandma at 70yrs young (who grew up shooting and enjoys shooting with me) needed a pistol. Early on I realized a conventional pistol or a revolver wasn't going to work for her, so I sourced a Beratta 380 with a tip up barrel. She can unload it and handle it easily, and shoot it accurately and safely. Everyone has the right to be armed, and its even more important for the disabled or elderly. It just needs to be done prudently, to protect them and us.

Liberty,
You don't see the danger in a person having a firearm who does not know how to properly load it or charge it???> I can't believe that a person who is a gun owner/handler would make such a statement.
As I stated before, rights come with responsibilities.

dac1842 wrote:Liberty,
You don't see the danger in a person having a firearm who does not know how to properly load it or charge it???> I can't believe that a person who is a gun owner/handler would make such a statement.
As I stated before, rights come with responsibilities.

Just because someone is not able to load or charge their handgun doesn't mean that they don't know how.

Liberty wrote:Are you saying that older arthritic people should not be able to qualify with with a Semiauto because they are incapable of reloading or charging their weapon?

Are you saying that someone who can't qualify with a semiauto without help should get a SA license?

As long as there's a difference between SA and NSA then I think people shouldn't cheat to "pass" the SA test when they only have the skills to pass the NSA test honestly.

jorge wrote:As long as there's a difference between SA and NSA then I think people shouldn't cheat to "pass" the SA test when they only have the skills to pass the NSA test honestly.

The law requires that the applicant shoot the course of fire with a semi-automatic pistol accurately and safely.

It does not require charging magazines, unloading, field-stripping, cleaning, or any other maintenance procedure.

IMHO, there's nothing wrong with someone bringing six magazines loaded with the correct number of rounds. Most pistols lock back when the magazine is empty, eliminating the need to operate the slide.

Probably 90% of CHL holders will never draw their weapon in self defense, 95% will never fire, and 99% will never need to change magazines in a gunfight. The legislature knew this when it passed the bill establishing CHL.

Requiring a certain skill level is a slippery-slope issue that we have to tread carefully. As soon as we acknowledge that the state has the power to set a standard for exercising the RKBA, we have opened the door to making the requirements so stringent that no one can meet them.

That said, if an applicant engages in unsafe behavior, the instructor has the duty to stop the test. The CHL instructors that I know either personally or on this forum seem to agree with that.

- Jim

The sight picture is basically the same for a revolver and a semiauto.

Operating the trigger is basically the same for a revolver and a semiauto especially if we compare DAO to DAO.

The big differences in operation are loading the gun, making safe, and clearing a malfunction. I don't see anything wrong with someone coming to class with a dozen loaded magazines or speed loaders. I do see something wrong with someone else loading the gun for a student on the line or doing the other things during the test to "pass" someone who isn't able to pass on their own. It's cheating.

What's next? Letting someone else help pull the trigger if your finger is weak? Letting someone else help aim the pistol if you have bad vision? Letting someone else take your written test if you have a weak memory?

To bring this back into focus. I am referring to folks that show up at a CHL class and that is the first time they have taken the weapon out of the box. I believe that students should have to demonstrate the fact they know the basic functions of the weapon. If a person does not know the basic functions of a weapon how is that person not a danger to themselves or others

seamusTX wrote:Requiring a certain skill level is a slippery-slope issue that we have to tread carefully. As soon as we acknowledge that the state has the power to set a standard for exercising the RKBA, we have opened the door to making the requirements so stringent that no one can meet them.

I remember being taken a bit aback a few years ago when the range procedures for my class called for us to work in tandem with a "buddy," and the buddy did all your magazine charging for you while you shot. I'm sure it sped things up considerably, but like any good Airborne Ranger I would always prefer to pack my own 'chute, as it were. I have my own little rituals--like smacking the charged mag against the palm of my left hand to make sure all cartridges are aligned and seated against the primer-side--that really aren't necessary...but they make me feel better.

I agree with Jim about the slippery slope of additional skill requirements. The current requirements are explicit, and they are what they are. That said, however, from a practical standpoint I could never advise someone carry a firearm for which they cannot perform basic administrative procedures. If you can't clear a failure-to-feed on a Glock 26, don't carry a Glock 26.

The good news is that there are a lot of handguns to choose from. The way the regulations are written, there really is no reason to qualify on anything but SA. But for many, a good revolver may be a better option for daily carry.

dac1842 wrote:To bring this back into focus. I am referring to folks that show up at a CHL class and that is the first time they have taken the weapon out of the box.

I literally can't imagine how someone can do that, though I know they do. I practiced like my life depended on it until I felt halfway competent.

But people do what they can and will do in a free country.

A certain CHL instructor that I know asks people who want to take his course how much shooting they have done. If it seems insufficient, he gives them private instruction before he lets them take the course.

IMHO, that's how it should be.

If a person does not know the basic functions of a weapon how is that person not a danger to themselves or others[?]

Being a danger to oneself and others is a condition of human life. This realization is one of the differences between libertarianism and the more widespread political philosophies.

- Jim

flynbenny wrote:I simply think that if that if someone is physically incapable of charging or unloading their weapon they need a different solution. This is for safety more than any thing else, I mean if you can't unload your pistol, what if you need to clean it, unload it to take into a range or gunsmithm etc...? I wouldn't carry or own any weapon that I'm physically incapable of operating. I've been on the range many times and watched terrified as some individual struggles to pull a slide pointing the weapon every which way but downrange! I've also seen it with DA autos and revolvers where someone doesn't have enough strength to pull the trigger and they spasmically point the gun all over creation trying to fire it. That in my opinion endangers the public. But its none of the gov's business to determine this. I just think that the chl instructors out there have a duty to society to disqualify people who cannot safely operate a weapon on their own. It's just common sense, maybe they can suggest alternative weapons to these folks? My grandma at 70yrs young (who grew up shooting and enjoys shooting with me) needed a pistol. Early on I realized a conventional pistol or a revolver wasn't going to work for her, so I sourced a Beratta 380 with a tip up barrel. She can unload it and handle it easily, and shoot it accurately and safely. Everyone has the right to be armed, and its even more important for the disabled or elderly. It just needs to be done prudently, to protect them and us.

"I simply think that if that if someone is physically incapable of charging or unloading their weapon they need a different solution. "
Why? Just because they lack the strength to pull the slide doesn't mean. The person know the safety rules. or can't aim accurately. All it means is if they run out of ammunition or have a failure the gun battle is lost. The question to ask is "would they have been better off unarmed?"

"This is for safety more than any thing else, I mean if you can't unload your pistol, what if you need to clean it, unload it to take into a range or gunsmithm etc...?:
I keep my guns loaded at all times. They are kept holstered and never unloaded. Unloaded guns are the most dangerous kind. I suppose if one needs to have their guns loaded cleaned or repaired they can find someone they trust to do it for them, just as they would at their CHL qualification. That is what my wife does. If she has a gun on her, you can be assured it is loaded and charged. She has never had reason to unload it.

"I wouldn't carry or own any weapon that I'm physically incapable of operating. "
That is you. Being capable of of operating the safety features and hitting the target one intends on hitting should not be confused with the ability to charge said weapon.

"I've been on the range many times and watched terrified as some individual struggles to pull a slide pointing the weapon every which way but downrange! "
Being incapable of charging a weapon doesn't equate to pointing a gun every which way. Folks can be incapable of charging their weapons yet be perfectly safe at a range or even on the street.

"I've also seen it with DA autos and revolvers where someone doesn't have enough strength to pull the trigger and they spasmically point the gun all over creation trying to fire it. That in my opinion endangers the public. But its none of the gov's business to determine this. "
This is a whole different issue than being able to load and charge their weapon. The inabilty to pull the slide doesn't mean that the person can not properly control their gun and operate the controls on their gun.

"I just think that the chl instructors out there have a duty to society to disqualify people who cannot safely operate a weapon on their own."
I almost agree with you on this point. I do believe if a student makes minor errors in safety that the instructor can correct that there is no reason to fail the students. We do have major disagreement though on what constitutes being safe though.

"My grandma at 70yrs young (who grew up shooting and enjoys shooting with me) needed a pistol. Early on I realized a conventional pistol or a revolver wasn't going to work for her, so I sourced a Beratta 380 with a tip up barrel. She can unload it and handle it easily, and shoot it accurately and safely. Everyone has the right to be armed, and its even more important for the disabled or elderly. It just needs to be done prudently, to protect them and us."
That is all well and fine, but it is only a .380 after all. It may be the best solution for her particularly if she doesn't have someone available that can load and clean the gun for her. The Beretta might not be the best gun for everyone.

jorge wrote:

Liberty wrote:Are you saying that older arthritic people should not be able to qualify with with a Semiauto because they are incapable of reloading or charging their weapon?

Are you saying that someone who can't qualify with a semiauto without help should get a SA license?

As long as there's a difference between SA and NSA then I think people shouldn't cheat to "pass" the SA test when they only have the skills to pass the NSA test honestly.

Arthritics may have more problems loading revolvers than they do with revolvers. I personally have a difficult time loading revolvers.(dropping the ammo). I have no problems with most semis or mags.
No one has yet been able to explain how the inability to charge a semi-auto makes them of more danger to the public.

dac1842 wrote:To bring this back into focus. I am referring to folks that show up at a CHL class and that is the first time they have taken the weapon out of the box. I believe that students should have to demonstrate the fact they know the basic functions of the weapon. If a person does not know the basic functions of a weapon how is that person not a danger to themselves or others

You specifically claimed that they needed the ability to rack the slide and field strip their handguns.

jorge wrote:

Liberty wrote:Are you saying that older arthritic people should not be able to qualify with with a Semiauto because they are incapable of reloading or charging their weapon?

Are you saying that someone who can't qualify with a semiauto without help should get a SA license?

As long as there's a difference between SA and NSA then I think people shouldn't cheat to "pass" the SA test when they only have the skills to pass the NSA test honestly.

That is exactly what I am saying.
The ability to load Magazines or rack a slide has nothing to do with how safe someone is. If they can handle the SA safely, If they can hit the target, If they understand and can operate the controls on the gun why shouldn't they be allowed license? Are we better off letting these folks be victims?