HB11 - Would eliminate renewal training for CHPs

[Bearco]

LA House Bill 11 (Mcvea)
http://www.legis.state.la.us/billdata/byinst.asp?sessionid=11RS&billid=HB11

In its current text.

(4) A person who has been issued a concealed handgun permit pursuant to the provisions of this Section shall not be required to complete any handgun or firearms safety training courses as a requirement to renew that permit if the permit has never been suspended or revoked.

 

[Guate_shooter]

<---------------- NO like, not sure about the rest of Instructors but my renewal % compared to new aplications is about 15% (Maybe), and of those 15% probably 13.5% had a 3 hour class when they first apply and have NO clue of whats going ON.

 

[flamatrix99]

Woo hoo!! I likey...

 

[Bearco]

Part of my says that this is great, but the other part tells me that most people will benefit from the extra training as Guate_shooter has outlined.

 

[Hitman]

It would also mean that Veterans would never complete any CHP Training.

 

[SpeedRacer]

I am 100% certain I don't need any further training I would receive from a renewal class. However, based on the rest of the students in my CHP class I will GLADLY take a renewal class if it means they will have to as well. I say leave it as is, it's not a big deal to devote 4 hours every 4 years.

 

[DuckYou]

Extra Training Should Not Be Required.

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I am 100% certain I don't need any further training I would receive from a renewal class. However, based on the rest of the students in my CHP class I will GLADLY take a renewal class if it means they will have to as well. I say leave it as is, it's not a big deal to devote 4 hours every 4 years.

This is where most of the people on this board should be. I feel the same way.

 

[Tulse Luper]

I'll send emails supporting it when the time comes.

 

[SpeedRacer]

It would also mean that Veterans would never complete any CHP Training.

You know, I'll probably be in the minority here, but I think anyone applying for a CHP should be required to take the class. While 80% of the class would be laughable to anyone who has served in the military, the rules and legalities of carrying a concealed handgun are equally important to the actual gun safety and handling stuff that is taught. And last I checked that stuff is not taught in the military. At a minimum I think an abbreviated class without the silly "this is what a gun looks like" material would be a good compromise.

 

[charlie12]

They need to at least update people of changes in the laws. I have no problem with leaving it like it is and I've renewed 3 times.

 

[Tulse Luper]

They need to at least update people of changes in the laws. I have no problem with leaving it like it is and I've renewed 3 times.

People can read them for themselves. Everyone knows thou shalt not kill. The rest is enucleated ensilage fed to us anacoluthically in legalese.

 

[SpeedRacer]

People can read them for themselves. Everyone knows thou shalt not kill. The rest is enucleated ensilage fed to us anacoluthically in legalese.

I think you overestimate "people". For example, you completely lost me after "The rest is...". And I'm too lazy to look up all those fancy words, so I'll just assume you are wrong.

 

[Rahllin]

I don't think extra TRAINING is needed for renewal, but knowledge of the laws is definitely needed. I think a detailed exam covering laws and legalities as well as basic safety principles should be required for renewal. Trade 8 hours of a class for 1 hour of taking a test that you have to score well on. If you do not pass the test (I think a rather high percentage would be needed to pass), then a person should be required to take the class again.

 

[Tulse Luper]

I think you overestimate "people".

Nope, just don't have any tolerance for rules and laws made with the lowest common denominators in mind, nor do I believe they work to prevent anything but angst.

I'm right, you're wrong, stamp out.

 

[oleheat]

It's fun to discuss this, of course- but does it have an actual chance of becoming law?

 

[Gus McCrae]

It might be nice if you could substitue advanced training in place of the renewal. I don't see this bill as a good thing though.

 

[Hitman]

You know, I'll probably be in the minority here, but I think anyone applying for a CHP should be required to take the class. While 80% of the class would be laughable to anyone who has served in the military, the rules and legalities of carrying a concealed handgun are equally important to the actual gun safety and handling stuff that is taught. And last I checked that stuff is not taught in the military. At a minimum I think an abbreviated class without the silly "this is what a gun looks like" material would be a good compromise.

That was kind of my point. While I defintely enjoy the benefit of simply sending in the application w/ paperwork and a certified check to get a CHP, I didn't learn jack from the Marines about LA Concealed Carry Laws and Regulations.

I guess it is what it is

 

[ejt1469]

As long as it's a Constituional right, there shall be (should be) no infringment to excesising that right without due process.

 

[dzelenka]

LSA is discussing whether to take a position on this or not. I am torn on the issue as there is a conflict between my accept no infringement side and my reality side. Face it. There are a hell of a lot of gun owners who could use some remedial training in safety and gun laws. Personally, I believe that this training should be universal as part of the grade school and high school curriculum. Eddie Eagle for the kids and a gun safety class (probably without the live fire) for 15 or 16 year olds. It could be handled in 8 hours or less during P.E. Returning from Danutopia (my special place where I get to make all of the rules), I am confronted with the reality that adults who should be capable of doing the research and study to learn about gun safety and laws don't. Even devoted firearms enthusiasts like Speedracer don't keep up with changes in the concealed carry laws. Sorry Speed, but you only renew every 5 years, not 4 (changed last year). For this reason alone, a 4 hour class every 5 years would be helpful. The fact that there are a number of CHP holders who are not gun people i.e. who do not shoot regularly, if at all, would mean that their only exposure to guns, gun safety, laws and etiquette is at a mandated class. I hate to promote the nanny state, but for the safety of the general public who may be exposed to nimrod fumbling with his pistol, forced minimal training of less than 1 hour per year does not seem unreasonable.

All of that being said, I want to reiterate that LSA has not taken an official position on this bill. We won't know our position until we see what amendments are offered. There may be significant changes to its text in the upcoming weeks.

Dan