Calibers for proficiency

[skeathley]

I had an interesting question come my way recently. I always believed that the reason for the minimum caliber of .32 was to keep anyone from using a .22 (rimfire), and for most normal people, .32 is the smallest centerfire cartridge. Someone recently asked about using an FN pistol, which fires a 5.7 x 28. I also own a Tokarev pistol (7.62 x 25). Both of these are smaller than a .32, but much more powerful. I doubt that the folks in Austin were trying to keep these out of the game when setting that rule, but it would be very unusual for someone to even bring it up.

What say you? Should those be excluded, by the letter of the law? Is this covered anywhere?

[Charles L. Cotton]

HB284/SB179 will likely pass and people will be able to use .22rimfire for the course. I agree with the change.

Chas.

[Middle Age Russ]

I am not a CHL instructor, but I can assure you of my stance based on what I understand as the requirements for demonstrating proficiency. If I as a CHL instructor had to sign off that the student demonstrated proficiency and I knew that that student used a 5.7 or 7.62 pistol (or any other caliber pistol that fails to meet the established caliber threshold), I could not sign off that they passed. To me, it is a bad rule, but until it is changed (thankfully, Charles points out that it may soon be) it is still a rule that the instructor must execute.

[skeathley]

I might agree on the 5.7, but not the Tokarev. Though the bullet is small, it is a powerful cartridge, and will go through the two lowest levels of body armor. I believe the .32 cal rule was intended to keep people from using a gun that requires little control, and that may deceive people into thinking they have a gun with real stopping power. Clearly, the Tokarev fits neither of these.

I don't think the rulemakers took these calibers into account.

[Pawpaw]

I have a friend with a .30 carbine autoloader (AMT, I think). It's a smaller diameter round than a .32ACP, but it's bigger in all meaningful ways.

[wally775]

Turned into a discussion for entertainment only.
The rule says .32 caliber or larger. It does not say unless you think it will suffice.
When asked the question about caliber I just say what the rule states and remind them that is for
qualification only and you may carry what you want after you receive your license.
Side note. I would agree with a rule change.

[Charles L. Cotton]

I've never had a student use anything "smaller" than a .380ACP, so I've never faced the issue. When SB60 (1995) was drafted, the minimum calibers were 9mm for semi-autos and .38 for revolvers. Everyone discussing this provision in the bill was thinking 9mm Luger and .38 Special, not the diameter of the bullet, but that's not the way it was written. We were all gun guys, so "9mm" and "38" were slang for 9mm Luger and 38 Special. I don't know that DPS has had to face the issue with an instructor, but it could well have happened.

Chas.

[Crossfire]

We have had more than one student show up with a FN 5.7. That have been terribly disappointed when they find they can't use then for qualification. Looking forward to that change!

[Captain Matt]

The rule says .32 caliber or larger. It does not say unless you think it will suffice.

Agreed. The current requirement is based on caliber not energy. Someone could shoot downloaded .38 wadcutter rounds as long as they're powerful enough to make holes in the target.

[kg5ie]

I've only had one student show up with an FN 5.7. I loaned him my Ruger SR9c for the proficiency and he stayed after the class to let me shoot his 5.7. Sweet little gun.

[puma guy]

I hope the law is changed.

[AF-Odin]

Skeathley,
Why the issue with the 7.62x25 Tokarev. That round has been used extensively in eastern bloc sub-machine guns and several pistols. It will penetrate most level II body armor in the FHJ version and if you look at the ballaitics, it is close in velocity to a .3457 magnum. it is most assuredly much more powerful than the .32 ACP. Are you perhaps confusing it with the 9mm Makarov? It is pretty anemic, but even it outshines the .32

[V-Tach]

Bill: SB 179 , which currently being considered in the State Senate would drop the caliber requirement to .22 from .32.

If you approve, call your Senator and Congressman to support it...if you don't, then call your Senator and Congressman to oppose it....

But do call, email and contact them.......please....

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup ... Bill=SB179

[V-Tach]

The Bill has passed the Senate.....

[RonW956]

Me personally I feel it would be very wise to pass the test, practice & carry the exact pistol and/or caliber you plan on carrying. My concern is newbies passing their proficiency with a .22 target pistol then going out & buying a .40 and carrying it without much practice.

With that being said, I passed my proficiency test easily with my M&P Shield 9, I practice with weekly,and I plan on carrying it daily, love it.