Comments

  • You know what the difference between a massacre and a shootout is?

    If there is a shootout, one has a fighting chance of living.

    Only the law-abiding follow the law. Disarm the law-abiding, you make them defenseless sheep.

    Colleges are not without crime and they are not insulated from the rest of the world. Depriving the younger generation (my generation) the right to self-defense only makes for more victims.

    June 7, 2011 at 1:36 p.m.
  • jdztyler..."Multiple weapons (yes, handguns are primarily weapons) at an active crime scene only complicate the situation and further endanger the lives of civilians and officers alike by lengthening the time it takes an officer to determine who is and who is not present to do physical harm to the innocent."

    In a situation like the Luby's cafeteria shooting, if a person was available with a weapong and ended the shooting spree, I believe that by the time the police show up, there won't be a problem identifiying who the murderer was and who the hero is. The survivors will be thanking the one who saved them from the killer. The police can do what they do best...fill out the paperwork.

    June 7, 2011 at 11:53 a.m.
  • As I understand it the bill did not pass. I pray that we never have to live with armed individuals in our classrooms. I own guns. I think some guns are works of art. But in the long run the gun will only do what the holder tells it to do and there I question some folks motive or judgement. Life is not a video game. If the CHL holder is not careful they may just be providing another loaded weapon to the shooter.

    June 7, 2011 at 11:44 a.m.
  • jdztyler and vet43,
    At Columbine and VT both, the police huddled up outside until the shooting stopped. By the time they go in the shooting will be over and the civilian will be holstered and waiting.

    June 7, 2011 at 10:54 a.m.
  • vet43,
    "OK folks. Dial it down a notch"

    Actually, this has been one of the more civil discussions in which I've been involved. No name calling or anything. Too bad more discussions couldn't be conducted in this manner.

    BTW, I don't buy your arguments. If a shooter walked into my classroom at UHV, I wouldn't want to have to WAIT fifteen or more minutes for a response from the Victoria Police Department.

    Also, you're correct that the room is full of innocent people. If you wait for the police to show up, some or all of them may be dead.

    As to the places where you cannot carry, that's not germane to the discussion so why bring it up?

    Remember when danger is just a split second away, the police are minutes awa.

    Have a nice day (was that nice enough?).

    June 6, 2011 at 7:59 p.m.
  • Like it or not, police and other law enforcement people are those trained and designated to respond to situations involving risk to life and limb from others with apparent criminal intent. Multiple weapons (yes, handguns are primarily weapons) at an active crime scene only complicate the situation and further endanger the lives of civilians and officers alike by lengthening the time it takes an officer to determine who is and who is not present to do physical harm to the innocent. There is a much deeper issue at work here in a society that thinks that being armed to the teeth at all times is some kind of talisman against evil. In this life bad things do happen to good people, and guns are no deterrent to that.

    June 6, 2011 at 7:50 p.m.
  • Not sure if my memory is 100% since it was 8 eight years ago but I believe the class started out with 10. Four people left before the class started and one did not qualify on the range test.

    June 6, 2011 at 2:28 p.m.
  • OK folks. Dial it down a notch. I never questioner the right to own a gun or have a concealed handgun license. I really do not think many people that want to commit a crime worry much about fines.

    I do have a issue with people handling guns in a high stress situation in a room full of innocent bystanders. Then there is the police office comming into a shootout and has to take that second to see who is the bad guy. Then there are places that even the law has to respect the hazard of any firearm like a chemical plant. Then there is the courthouse, hospitals, banks or maybe a daycare.

    June 6, 2011 at 2:16 p.m.
  • vet43,
    You have to have a background check from both the FBI and the Texas DPS along with your sheriff in the county of residence. Fingerprints & photos are required. It is more strigent than a FFL (or at least when my parents had one back in the 70's). When you buy a firearm, you fill out a 4473 form and are checked at the state level. Very few are rejected because most felons don't buy guns through stores. For the same reason, most felons don't try to get a CHL. Ask yourself one question: if you are crazy enough to kill someone and possibly receive a death penalty, are you going to be concerned about a misdemeanor for carrying a handgun illegally?

    June 6, 2011 at 12:52 p.m.
  • I have had my license ever since the first year it was available and was a CHL instructor for a number of years. The course is not a test of accuracy but it does test your knowledge of the laws and it imposes some stress on the shooter during the live fire portion. People that take this class need to be competent shooters first and law abiding. The background checks are very comprehensive and you would not want to spend $140.00 if you had any kind of record.
    In some places, you can become an armed security guard easier than you can obtain a CHL. I have known of some people that would not have passed the background check that were security guards and these people carry a firearm openly. The beauty of the concealed carry is that a would be robber never knows who has one.

    June 6, 2011 at 12:19 p.m.
  • MelBel, Thank you for your comment. Do you remember how many were in the class and if others dropped during the class? I am still puzzled about a 99% + pass rate.

    June 6, 2011 at 11:10 a.m.
  • When I went and got my license we were well informed before the class started on what the laws were on being eligible. Four people got up and walked out because they were in question on if they were going to pass the background or not. They were instructed to call and check first to see before wasting the money on the class. Most CHL instructors will do that since the class is so expensive. This may be why there is such a high percentage of success.

    June 6, 2011 at 10:30 a.m.
  • An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.

    Thomas Jefferson

    June 6, 2011 at 10:15 a.m.
  • "You might think anyone just gets a licence, they don't".

    "In 2010, the Texas DPS issued 102,133 licenses and denied 530."
    That means that 99.5 % passed the requirements to carry a concealed handgun.

    "Last year in Victoria, 340 were issued and 3 denied."
    That means that 99.2% passed the requirements to carry a concealed handgun.

    Granted, it would seem that only citizens that were sure they would have no problem were the ones that applied. Still, that appears to be a very high percentage of success. How tight is this process? Is it as difficult as getting a dealers license?

    June 6, 2011 at 10:02 a.m.