Renewal Class Scrubbed...

[Younggun]

Reciprocity.

So for the sake of reciprocity at this point, you are willing to infringe on the rights of other Texans.

Does that about sum up your stance on the issue?

 

[Charlie]

Reciprocity.

Either you just don't get it, or your trolling.

 

[TexasRedneck]

So for the sake of reciprocity at this point, you are willing to infringe on the rights of other Texans.

Does that about sum up your stance on the issue?

No....and if you think it does, then you've chosen to ignore what he, I and many others actively involved in all of this have said. A CHL gives us the ability to carry in this state under current laws - but more importantly, to do so in many other states, as well. Until such a time as CC is legal in any state I might wish to travel in, and a CHL will allow me to do so, I *will* have a CHL.

You might not like it, but you can sit in the corner and hold your breath 'til ya turn blue, but it ain't gonna change anything. Me, I'm gonna engage in the RTKBA fight, as well as do whatever it takes to be able to be armed when I wish to be. THAT is what an adult does.

 

[Younggun]

No....and if you think it does, then you've chosen to ignore what he, I and many others actively involved in all of this have said. A CHL gives us the ability to carry in this state under current laws - but more importantly, to do so in many other states, as well. Until such a time as CC is legal in any state I might wish to travel in, and a CHL will allow me to do so, I *will* have a CHL.

You might not like it, but you can sit in the corner and hold your breath 'til ya turn blue, but it ain't gonna change anything. Me, I'm gonna engage in the RTKBA fight, as well as do whatever it takes to be able to be armed when I wish to be. THAT is what an adult does.

I'm not sitting in the corner holding anything. I'm disagreeing on his idea of what should be required to obtain a CHL and his reasoning for feeling that way.

I feel the fees and classes associated are an infringement on our rights and support steps to correct it.

He feels that these infringements should be left in place for the sake of reciprocity.

How was I wrong?

Why should I be Ok with jumping through hoops to exercise what I believe to be a right just because another state does not believe its citizens are entitled to that right.

If Texas passes full constitutional carry and others choose to continue to pay for a license to carry in other states its fine by me, however, I don't believe that Texas should require all of it's citizens to jump through those hoops to exercise those rights and I will continue to support legislation that removes those hoops whether it's removing renewal classes, shortening class times, or going to full non licensed constitutional carry.

 

[TexasRedneck]

I'm not sitting in the corner holding anything. I'm disagreeing on his idea of what should be required to obtain a CHL and his reasoning for feeling that way.

I feel the fees and classes associated are an infringement on our rights and support steps to correct it.

He feels that these infringements should be left in place for the sake of reciprocity.

How was I wrong?

What part of reciprocity is so difficult to grasp? Without certain requirements, other states will withdraw their reciprocity agreements, making MORE states where Texas citizens may not have the means to protect themselves at hand. Why would YOU deprive them of that? There IS room for BOTH to exist - and in dealing with the realities of life, we need to recognize that.

KEEP the CHL insofar at it allows our citizens to travel outside our state armed - pass SEPARATE laws that will allow our citizens the right to keep and bear within our state lines without anything more than their God-given birthright. THAT is how you make it WORK for EVERYONE. You need to consider all the ramifications of what you say you want rather than go off half-cocked.

 

[Younggun]

I never went off half cocked, my beliefs have been carefully considered.

I understand you want reciprocity but at what cost to others. I realize that no CHL would mean waiting for NICS checks to by a gun. Not something I would love to deal with again but it would be part of the deal.

I do not tell you to just get an out if state CHL so that you can have reciprocity with other states yet you want me to sit and be happy with our current system.

I never said there was no room for both, but I do believe the current system is an infringement and no longer having to pay for an sit through a class for renewal is a step in the right direction.

Even if Texas were to lose reciprocity with every other state it would not be Texas infringing on your right to carry in other places, it would be the states who are continuing to deny that right.

 

[TexasRedneck]

I never went off half cocked, my beliefs have been carefully considered.

Even if Texas were to lose reciprocity with every other state it would not be Texas infringing on your right to carry in other places, it would be the states who are continuing to deny that right.

This is exactly what I mean. Maybe you never cross state lines - I do with regularity, and WANT that reciprocity. You, on the other hand, in your eagerness to shove your "rights" down EVERYONE's throat, are perfectly willing to force your fellow Texans to disarm at the state line, all the while piously proclaiming "It's THEIR fault". I've been heavily involved in the RTKBA movement for longer than you've likely been out of diapers, and frankly you have NO appreciation for the fights that've been fought just to get where we are today. Yet your "all or none" attitude is exactly what the anti-gun movement LOVES to see - because they'll kick your ass in a straight-on fight unless we can gradually make folks realize that an armed citizen is NOT their enemy.

Get used to the fact that a 100+ year old tradition isn't going to go away overnight, or easily. It's going to be a long battle of little victories, while we gradually win these rights back. You can sit over there and bitch all you want - but either learn how to fight the fight in a way that will allow us to win the fight, or be prepared to watch it blow up in our faces. Every time a new gun-friendly law is passed, we should celebrate and realize that more and more people will finally start to see the GREAT LIE that the anti-gun forces have promulgated over the years, and puts us that much closer to the time that folks will finally say "give us ALL our rights!".

 

[Younggun]

I was celebrating the fact that the law passed and did consider it a victory. I was not the one who said how bad it was going to be because we could renew online.

I'm glad you have been supporting the 2A for a long time, that doesn't mean the views of others are invalid. I believe it will be a decade or more before Texas has any chance of seeing constitutional carry and at that time the details will be worked out because I'm sure Texas will make an attempt to retain reciprocity of some kind with the other states.

I never said we should take an all or nothing approach and I believe commented previously in this thread that we would win this fight a little bit at a time.

I WILL continue to support each and every law that moves Texas closer to constitutional carry. That includes shortened or easier CHL classes, reduced fees, campus carry, open carry, or any other law that removes some of the hassle associated with getting a CHL and carrying a firearm.

But no, I don't believe we should be scared to death of losing reciprocity with other states. For you, getting a CHL is no big deal and reciprocity is. For many texans, the cost associated with it is a big deterrent due to income or time constraints. It took a long time to get myself in to a position where putting aside money for a CHL was not going to take away needed funds from my family. I don't think people should have to deal with that.

Have a license for reciprocity was sake, doesn't bother me a bit. But if the sole purpose of bashing a law that will make it cheaper and easier to obtain and renew a CHL is because it might cause us to lose reciprocity with a couple states you're being kinda ridiculous.

I am for moving Texas forward, that does not mean disarming you at the state lines but it does mean supporting laws that make it easier for Texans to defend themselves.

 

[TexasRedneck]

Then we agree on the mission, but methinks the details are being blurred. I have no issue w/relaxing the requirements as outlined, because from what I can see it has no effect on reciprocity. If it did, then I MIGHT prefer a different methodology, perhaps one that would allow for a more strict format of CHL licensing for those wishing to travel, and a simpler one for those that don't. Because, in that instance I'd be wanting a more "inclusive" sort of license - and I should be willing to pay for it, rather than expecting everyone else to, need it or not.

Now....can we go back ta bustin' on Glockster?

 

[Bithabus]

I am not talking about employer rules, I am referring to the government restricting my right to carry because of my job. Cops and guards are statutorily required to meet minimum standards.

Because our current law makes carry of handguns generally illegal. In a free state cops and guards would be able to carry, but there is no problem with an employer testing to ensure standards necessary to employment. There is a statutory requirement as a condition of employment because, as you know, the employment of cops and guards in Texas is regulated by the state. If a cop fails requal he could carry his weapon to the unemployment office.

It was stated wrong. We lost reciprocity with New Mexico for a while and we lost it with Washington State, both because Texas allows people under 21 to have a CHL.

It does not have to do with the background check alone. It has as much to do with the stringency of requirements if not more.

It was suggested that shortening the class time would lose us some states, because "stringency" is seen in hours sitting in the chair. I corrected that poster and stated that "stringency" in measured in the strictness of the backround check. I consider the age requirement part of the backround check. Shortening the class will lose no states.


What we should do is repeal TX PC 46.02 and 46.03 while maintaining the CHL program. That way we could have freedom within our state while preserving reciprocity with less enlightened states.

 

[txinvestigator]

Because our current law makes carry of handguns generally illegal. In a free state cops and guards would be able to carry, but there is no problem with an employer testing to ensure standards necessary to employment. There is a statutory requirement as a condition of employment because, as you know, the employment of cops and guards in Texas is regulated by the state. If a cop fails requal he could carry his weapon to the unemployment office.

I know the law. The question is an exercise. It is in response to the constitutiinal carry desire for Joe Citizen.

 

[Acesn8's]

I don't see where this has been signed by Perry ,but I believe it to be a good bill
especially for the disabled that cannot get out and take a renewal class.

 

[GRAYWOLF]

if they are disabled and can't get out they don't really need a CHL

 

[ZX9RCAM]

if they are disabled and can't get out they don't really need a CHL

I don't think he meant "at all"....

 

[mmabc]

I haven't read through this whole thread, but I'm curious how this bill will affect me. I'm up for my first renewal in early August. I would like to not have to take the renewal class. What happens if my license expires? Can I renew after Sept 1 or do I have to renew before the license expires? I don't see any reference to a renewal after expiration in the 411 code.

 

[GRAYWOLF]

I haven't read through this whole thread, but I'm curious how this bill will affect me. I'm up for my first renewal in early August. I would like to not have to take the renewal class. What happens if my license expires? Can I renew after Sept 1 or do I have to renew before the license expires? I don't see any reference to a renewal after expiration in the 411 code.

it won't go into effect until 9/1...if you want continuous active CHL...renewal class is in order

 

[GRAYWOLF]

I don't think he meant "at all"....

if they can't get out foe 4hr every 5 years...

 

[Charlie]

if they are disabled and can't get out they don't really need a CHL

Does one have to prove a need to exercise their Constitutional right to be armed?

 

[Acesn8's]

if they are disabled and can't get out they don't really need a CHL

I am disabled and I do get out and able to lead a semi-active life but, it would be a hardship to sit through
a renewal class.

 

[mmabc]

it won't go into effect until 9/1...if you want continuous active CHL...renewal class is in order

Obviously it would expire. The question was can it be renewed after Sept 1?