Starting my CHL Instructor's class tomorrow, July 19 in Georgetown.  Intent is to post daily comments and observations on the class.

7/18 - Arrived intact at the La Quinta in Georgetown. Room is okay and worth $62/nt (AAA rate). Hotel is just across the highway form the Georgetown C of C complex. More tomorrow after the first day!

7/19 – Class started off okay today.  First out of the box was a video of Suzanna Hupp’s testimony before the Senate in 1994 (younger Charles Schumer smirking the whole time-made me want to puke).  Instructors seemed to be pro-gun, pro-CHL

Topics today ranged from Program Integrity (don’t do short classes – the DPS is watching-; how to work with disabled folks if they are in your class; scoring targets, eligibility (unbelievable amount of questions); where you can carry; where you can’t carry (again, unbelievable amount of questions).  

Staff seems good and knowledgeable.  One of the attorneys that rules on eligibility seemed sort of tired of doing this, but she knows her stuff and her experience is evident.  A couple of beers with her and I bet you’d hear stories that would curl or straighten your hair.  I would appreciate some posts from seasoned instructors on how you handle it when somebody in your class gets turned down.

One thing I am now aware of is that this department is way underfunded.  We should make TSRA or NRA introduce some legislation to keep CHL money going to the CHL program instead of the general fund.

I only started dozing once after lunch, so the team is keeping it interesting.  Sorry, but the attorneys wouldn't bite on the knife and club question.  They don't want to issue rulings; that's for a jury to do.

Also, got my hotel rate lowered to $55/night by asking for the DPS rate, and found out I will be  getting a $50 refund from the  $100 I paid when I applied due to some website mixup.

since it is the topic of another thread can you ask them if your CHL also allows you to carry an illegal knife or club as well as a handgun?

we all know the law states that a CHL makes one exempt from UCW, so the way the law is written all CHL holders should be exempt from all portions of that law, not just a handgun.

but DPS attorneys keep saying it is not for clubs and illegal knives. could you please get clarification on this? thanks.

The point is; it does not matter what the DPS attorney says.  What matters is what the law reads.   You know she is a liberal.  Good grief man......

no, the point is, we would like to know DPS' position on the matter.  we already know what the law says.  we already know your interpretation of the law.  we are interested in hearing what DPS' opinion is.  to think that we are all closed minded as not to have any desire to hear what DPS has to say, the very entity that issues the licenses, is absurd.  you can discredit the DPS' interpretation all you want, but we are still interested in their position.

so, please ask.  TxInvestigator will tell you it doesn't matter what DPS thinks.  while i understand what the law says, i am interested in hearing what DPS has to say about it.  it is a germane question.

 I can get an "opinion" from DPS (well DPS officer, on DPS letterhead) that says all guns in the State of Texas are illegal...isn't worth the paper its written on.

So your going to take the "opinion" (second hand opinion) of a CHL instructor over those in the know and what they are telling you, and what the law says?

I think it's hillarious that people in ARFCOM keep encouraging others to carry illegal knives and clubs with their CHLs hoping that someone will eventually get arrested and go through the legal system to establish case law for others or something.

sure you can get a letter from a DPS Trooper.  i am referring to a DPS Attorney.  an attorney's opinion on legal matters clearly outweighs that of yours, mine, a trooper's, or TxInvestigators.

I would like to know DPS' opinion, which clearly outweighs TxInvestigator's opinion. while he is knowledgeable he certainly is not an attorney or any established authority.

he is just another CHL instructor, and if he is teaching things in contradiction to DPS, the very agency who issues not only the CHL but his own instructors license, I'd certainly be curious.

if in fact a CHL does allow us to carry illegal knives and clubs, how come exactly zero minutes is devoted in the class curriculum to the subject matter of illegal knives and clubs?  how come there is no proficiency test?  how come licensed security officers are required by Texas law to go through some sort of mandated training to carry a club, but a CHL holder is not required to, even after they receive a security (armed) commission?  keep in mind the DPS regulates both security officers and CHL holders, both through the Regulatory Licensing Bureau.

are we actually afraid of asking the question for clarification?  it seems to me here that we are afraid of knowledge.  what i can tell you is that DPS is saying one thing, which is in contradiction to the law as it is printed, but i don't want to get my ass in legal trouble for taking internet advice from someone who isn't a lawyer but a self-proclaimed expert on the law.

eh... nm.

If somebody post a thread to start a blog about something, don't come in here and take a shit in it. Anyone who opens this now will see a bunch of arguing right off the bat and not read it. If you want somebody to go ask questions on your behalf, send them a friggin' message. Stuff like this is downright rude to the OP

I agree arguing is impolite, but asking someone to ask a relevant question is not.

i didn't start the argument.....look who did. mr. self-proclaimed-lawyer did

you didn't just ask someone to ask a relevant question (which you can do through a private message.) You made your request then continued with a fact and then a "that's a no-no because they don't like it or don't understand it" argument in the same post. That in and of itself is inviting debate where its not needed.  If you agree that something is legal but not wise, then say "wow, I disagree, but to each their own."  You know what, its legal for me to walk into a bank with an RPG7 if its a registred DD. Not sure if I would open an account or not, depends on the interest rate. Guess what... its unwise and I wouldn't do it. That does not make it illegal.

I've read most of your post since you started on here and the majority are inflammatory or argumenative. Your attitude about your beliefs and need to always have the last word speak volumes to your character. Making fun of respected members who have put a LOT of personal time into researching the law and helping new members does as well. I apologize to the OP for crapping in his thread. If you feel the need to have the last word once again, feel free to make another thread.

eta: if anybody does open a new account with an rpg.. i'm in for pics!

Been reading these forum posts for a pretty good while now and i have never seen posted by txinvestigator (or anyone else)where he claims to be a lawyer or legal expert. What i have seen him do is to try to make sense out of seemingly sensless legal jargon and present it in a manner in which a non legal person can maybe understand some of it and make their own decision. He seems to have a better grasp of what the law is trying to do than i do and i for one appreciate the effort.

sorry OP for the hijack.

i dont write inflamatory posts.  i do speak my mind, and i am free to argue my side of a debate, wrong or right.  where does the 1st Amendment state that it doesn't apply on ARFCOM?  sounds to me like people here don't like dissenting opinions.  

and in regards to making fun of people, or one particular person as this thread is concerned, he does get very upset when someone disagrees with him.  however, as i said in a different post, don't kill the messenger.  i am not the one who interpreted that CHL's do not exempt a license holder and that they can also carry an illegal knife or a club.  the DPS attorney did.  TxInvestigator also states that he heard the same from the same attorney as well.  so i am not making this up.  the problem is that he interjects that there is no need to ask the question.  why not?  are we avoiding information here?  there is no advantage in ignoring information like this.  you don't have to agree with DPS but it is at least nice to know if they have changed their position on this matter.  it is a fair question to ask.  pardon me if you don't agree with them.  if you don't then simply disregard what they say.  but to simply not ask the question so you can't hear it is like the mentality of an ostrich.

and if you look at the threads, the person who started talking smack is him - not me.

i would agree if he allowed any room for discussion.  problem is, he does not.  what he says is right no matter what.  no room for discussion.  no room for other interpretation.  agree with him or be wrong.  i do admit he has a good grasp of the law but he certainly isn't an attorney and doesn't therefore possess the legal license in Texas to dispense legal advice.

i think it would be better if he said something like, according to what he believes, the law says this, and allow people to make a decision based upon all types of knowledge, not just his interpretation and not just what he feels is right.  what he does say is something like: I AM RIGHT, YOU ARE WRONG, THERE IS NO DISCUSSION.  and in the CHL licensing issue, if you look at the thread, it isn't ME making this interpretation.  it is the DPS Attorney.  so he is butting heads with an attorney, not me.  i am merely asking for clarification.  

TxInvestigator is not an attorney, and thus has no authority to dispense legal advice.  he surely can make known his interpretation of things, and he sure can have a discussion about it.  but to choke off any and all discussion doesn't make sense to me or anyone else who has any ability to think.

Student: if there is a 30.06 sign for a parking lot, and I enter the parking lot wih my carry concealed in the vehicle I am illegal?

DPS Atty: Yes you are illegal.

Student: But it is ok for a non-licensed to have a concealed weapon in their car under the MPA?

DPS Atty: Correct. The 30.06 only applies to CHL'ers.

Common Sense: MIA

i am the OP.  It is okay that my thread has been hijacked.  I love the interaction that democracy fosters.

The lawyer wouldn't bite on the club and knife questions.  they also agree that the MPA (not it''s real name) honked up the CHL regs.  the change on in-car concealed carry lead to the stupid 'you have to show your CHL when carrying, but there is no penalty for not showing it.  Is that stupid or what.

I think we need to use TSRA to write a complete clean up of the regs, make them plain and easy to use.   i think the staff thinks that, too.

now, get back to your 'who;s got the biggest pee pee contest, you rascals!

I'd love to stay and play, but  I've got to get back to studying my CHl rules and regs..

After 2007 it would not be unlawful.  30.06 only applies to those carrying UNDER the authority of a CHL.  When I car carry, I am not doing so under the authority of your CHL.  

;)

And someone here really needs to get the sand out of their mangina.  I cracks me up that he thinks he can tell when someome is "upset", then by arguing his point he thinks he is being different and not doing the same thing he is bitching that I am doing.

So, I am sorry I upset you.  I'll send some kleenex and massengill.  

I think it would be better if you take others advice and wash that sand out of your mangina.  (ETA: got beat on the mangina comment.....LOL)

An attorney gives advice, sometimes its legal advice.  That advice can be WRONG.  There are a shitload of attorney's who said that Heller was wrong.  There were a shitload of attorney's that said McDonald was wrong.  Guess what their legal advice was wrong.   Took what 25 years for all that bad legal advice to be challenged and struck down by the high court.  If you want a real opinion, without being the test case, I suggest you contact the States Attorney General and get it in writing from him, not some simple attorney at DPS.    

I think its time for you to head back to 6th Street, ya freak.

yes, but id much rather take legal advice from
a lawyer than a non-lawyer.

And I'd much rather take legal advice from txinvestigator than from somebody who posts about their illegal activities on the internet.

You don't?  I have to call

From another thread you participated in:



Looks inflammatory to me.





Hate to break it to you, but the 1st Amendment is a limitation on the powers of government.  ARFCOM is a a private enterprise and you have no rights here except for what  the ownership allows you to have.

I thought their team was quite entertaining.  I especially liked the team that covered the application process.  She was a HOOT!