...I am not sure the instructors have the proper time to dedicate the safety part of it.
KellyAsh, do you consider the abillty to have and carry firearms a right (as in the 2A right to bear arms) or a privelege? If it is a right, then we should not be required to even take the CHL class or get a license, etc, etc. in the first place. If it is merely a privelege, then by all means, let the government make more rules and requirements. I understand that alot of people think for example that the shooting portion of the test is far too easy. After doing it myself yesterday, I agree that it is easy. However I also think it is violation of our rights as American citzens for them to even have the test in the first place. BTW, look at the requirements of other states. Many other states only require 2-3 hours class time and NO shooting test. What is required here in TX is above and beyond many other programs. Personally, I think that if I can legally purchase and own a gun, I should be able to keep it on me for the protection of myself and my family at all times.
...I'd like to see stoves regulated. The stuff some of my relatives have cooked up has to be criminal.
KellyAsh, do you consider the abillty to have and carry firearms a right (as in the 2A right to bear arms) or a privelege? If it is a right, then we should not be required to even take the CHL class or get a license, etc, etc. in the first place. If it is merely a privelege, then by all means, let the government make more rules and requirements. I understand that alot of people think for example that the shooting portion of the test is far too easy. After doing it myself yesterday, I agree that it is easy. However I also think it is violation of our rights as American citzens for them to even have the test in the first place. BTW, look at the requirements of other states. Many other states only require 2-3 hours class time and NO shooting test. What is required here in TX is above and beyond many other programs. Personally, I think that if I can legally purchase and own a gun, I should be able to keep it on me for the protection of myself and my family at all times.
My interest in this is purely public safety.
Education does not equal responsible.
KellyAsh, do you consider the abillty to have and carry firearms a right (as in the 2A right to bear arms) or a privelege? If it is a right, then we should not be required to even take the CHL class or get a license, etc, etc. in the first place. If it is merely a privelege, then by all means, let the government make more rules and requirements. I understand that alot of people think for example that the shooting portion of the test is far too easy. After doing it myself yesterday, I agree that it is easy. However I also think it is violation of our rights as American citzens for them to even have the test in the first place. BTW, look at the requirements of other states. Many other states only require 2-3 hours class time and NO shooting test. What is required here in TX is above and beyond many other programs. Personally, I think that if I can legally purchase and own a gun, I should be able to keep it on me for the protection of myself and my family at all times.
Even if you expose people to more information, it doesn't guarantee anything. How many people have been to driver's school, defensive driving, and seen all the news coverage an accident gets but still are bad drivers?
Education does not equal responsible.
As of right now, purchasing a handgun and obtaining a CHL is a priveledge under Texas law. If you've been a bad boy or girl, ie Class B misdemneaor or greater among other things, your priveledge to purchase a firearm and obtain a CHL is taken away.
My interest in this is purely public safety. I want people to prove that they arent likely to shoot themselves or others on accident to what I consider a reasonable degree. Holstering and unholstering is the #1 activity a handgun carrier will participate in and argueably one of the most likely times to have a negligent discharge, yet it is not a required proficiency.
When the 2nd Ammendment was written guns were far more pervasive and parents, as well as people in general, were far more responsible in the rearing of their children. Firearms were considered tools and not made into toys like they are today. Changing times require changing rules.
What prompted this thread was a story I read about a guy who accidentally killed a man he thought was stealing from him because he had his finger on the trigger when the guy was laying face down.
Would one life saved be worth the extra requirement? I think so. I do know there is plenty of time to add this in the classes and into the curriculum without further incumbering the process.
It is my RIGHT to purchase and own a firearm - period. The only thing that can restrict that right is a felony conviction (of course, "spousal abuse" has been tossed into the mix now).
- Your own acknowledgement of an individual not being able to purchase a firearm due to a conviction of violation of the law, which you missed a few, demonstrates your acknowldgement of the ability to purchase a firearm as a priveldge and NOT a right. A right is inalienable. Your priveledge to purchase a handgun is contingent.
- A couple of convictions you missed; ANY class A or B misdemeanors and ANY assault convictions withint the past 5 years, among others. It looks to me that it is your education that is lacking.
MY interest is purely Constitutional, and I'll thank you to keep YOUR ideas out of MY exercise of MY rights. Because I've got news for you - you go practice all you want, and then we'll go to the range - and I will bet you $100 cash that I can bust you out of a course on a safety violation. Period. NOW - who do you want to "approve" you for carrying a firearm???
- I didnt ask you, personally, to get involved in this thread. You can just as easily get out of it, and PLEASE DO since you have the demeaner of a child, but it seems you want to try and demean and use personal attacks in order to win what you see as a contest. This is a discussion for mature minded people who arent intent on belittling others so please, step out of it.
NO sir - they do NOT.....unless it's to "liberalize" some of the restrictive rules that have been placed upon us. I don't need you or anyone else looking over my shoulder as to how I may raise my children. Period. Leave your nanny-state ideas OUT of my life!!! And maybe YOU consider a gun a "toy" - I certainly do not.
- Im not interjecting any "nanny-state" ideas into your life. You are making things up.
Sorry....but so what? The courts will deal with his actions. Because he failed to educate himself properly is NO reason to punish the rest of us.
- Im sorry you consider training a punishment.
Because YOU chose an instructor that was incompetent is not MY concern. We had ZERO "free" time in the course - both the one I initially took, and a second one taken w/the wife years later. Then again, I went looking for a GOOD instructor - not one based on price or ease of passing. It's my personal safety and livelihood on the line, and I'll minimize the risk to it in any reasonable way - but I will NOT listen to some "do-gooder" CLAIMING to be a "gun rights advocate" try to convince me that we need further restrictions - period.
- Again, you are making things up. You dont have a clue what basis I used to chose my instructor. If you dont want to listen GO AWAY.
I've carried a gun for 40 years now, and have raised 5 kids on safe gun handling. The fact that you, your family, or anyone else has failed in that regard is NOT something I need to somehow be penalized for. Period.
- Yet again, you make things up and try to belittle others. You dont know many facts at all, apparently.
But - the gun range offer stands. Bring your happy "I know what's best" self out and we'll set $100 each on the table. I'll even encourage other members here to be present to observe my handling of your safety abilities so that you'll know I'm being fair.
- I wouldnt set foot anywhere with someone like you who takes everything personally and cant participate in a discussion without using personal attacks to reinforce their case. You might be older than dirt but your personality is that of a spoiled 12 year old.
Oh, yeah - I'm NOT a current RO (have been in the past) or a CHL instructor. I'm just a CHL-carrying slob you have so little regard for.
- The only reason I have so little regard for you is for the above stated reasons. Everyone else seems to be participating in a grown up discussion.
Sorry for the rant, guys........
I pose the questions to all responsible gun owners, "Are the current requirements to get a CHL in Texas sufficient?"
Either way you vote, please provide some reationale and reasoning for your belief.