Safety in Education

Texas Concealed Handgun License Training

2012-01-20T09:25:00.000-08:00

Texas requires, by law, that the Concealed Handgun License class be no less than 10 hours and no more than 15 hours. By default, instructors try to force the entire program into a one day class of only 10 hours. This allows the student to get the least amount of training available. Sure, they will tell you that they are getting it all covered, but they are really just saying, “Not my problem”.

Originally, Instructors would brag about getting everything done in one day: Class, Range, Fingerprints, photos, notary, application, exams, and everything else. However, in 2011, the ability to do fingerprinting was taken away from instructors by the Department of Public Safety. This, pretty much, shoots the "One Day does it all" sales point.

Many instructors now use a "Bait and Switch" approach; they tell the student that they can get everything they need in one day... only to tell them in class that there are a few more hurdles to jump. Now that they have paid for the class, there is no turning back.

While teaching the CHL program it became clear to me that many students have never fired a gun before. What makes them think they need to be carrying a pistol into public mystifies me. Still, it is an American Right. Let’s face it: having a gun on you is not as important as knowing how to use it correctly. Knowing when you can use it is good, but hitting the target is much better.

So, my mission is not to provide the "Cookie Cutter"+"Cattle Culling" class for rapid concealed carry license issue that many people are drawn to. As a former Army Combat Medic, a licensed nurse, an Emergency Medical Technician, and a Father of 4 (+2 Step Children), I see the need of providing a class that offers training with a different point of view.

Where most instructors strive to make a buck pushing "Your Rights" and "The End is Near" teaching approach, I try to push the understanding that "Freedom is not Free!" Owning a gun simply means that you had the money to buy one (or someone gave you one). Knowing how to use a gun safely and responsibly means you made the effort to be a part of that purpose of "Security of a Free State". Any “scum-sucking, low-life, maggot” can tell you their Rights… but having no clue what their responsibility to the Security of a Free State means they need to be locked in a box to keep others safe.

Guns won't protect you, but you can protect yourself with a gun. Leave an unloaded gun on the table for a year or two and (if not stolen) it will do nothing more than rust away. Take it out and practice with it once a month and it will be ready to defend you on a moments notice.

Because of this philosophy, I will no longer teach the CHL program in one day. Instead, I will focus on those students that “Have a Clue” and want to know more about their “Responsibilities” than their “Rights”. Classroom training will take about 8 hours to get everything about "Responsibilities" taught (4 hours in the morning and 4 hours in the evening). Then another 3 hours on the range should do it (maybe more). I have never had a student on the range tell me, “I have had enough. I don’t like this.” Most students would rather be on the range shooting and improving their marksmanship. For this reason, I like to spend more time on the range.

Sometimes I have students that know more about pistols than I do. This is “Few and Far between”. When these individuals want to shoot and get on with the day, the Range time can be as little as 15 minutes. However, as I have said before, it is rare that I have a student that is as comfortable with a pistol as I am. Therefore, most students really need to be on the range practicing marksmanship and safety for more than an hour. For those that have no clue what a pistol is… make that 3 hours+.

If you want the "Cookie Cutter"+"Cattle Culling" training (because you already know it all), then look somewhere else. I give a more comprehensive training program that will last you a lifetime.

They can take your guns, but they cannot take what you have learned.

Oklahoma is OK!

2012-01-05T07:27:00.000-08:00

BLANCHARD, Okla. (AP) -- Authorities don't plan to file charges against an Oklahoma woman who fatally shot a New Year's Eve intruder at her house while she had a 911 dispatcher on the phone, but the intruder's alleged accomplice has been charged in the death.

A 911 tape released to Oklahoma City media outlets Wednesday reveals that 18-year-old Sarah McKinley asked a Grady County dispatcher for permission to shoot the intruder. McKinley's 3-month-old son was with her when she shot Justin Shane Martin, 24, at her Blanchard mobile home.

"I've got two guns in my hand. Is it OK to shoot him if he comes in this door?" McKinley asked the dispatcher.

"Well, you have to do whatever you can do to protect yourself," the dispatcher is heard telling McKinley. "I can't tell you that you can do that, but you have to do what you have to do to protect your baby."

Oklahoma law allows the use of deadly force against intruders, and prosecutors said McKinley clearly acted in self-defense. According to court documents, Martin was holding a knife when he died.

"Our initial review of the case doesn't indicate she violated the law in any way," Assistant District Attorney James Walters told The Oklahoman newspaper.

However, prosecutors have charged his alleged accomplice, 29-year-old Dustin Louis Stewart, with first-degree murder. According to authorities, Stewart was with Martin but ran away from McKinley's home after hearing the gunshots.

"When you're engaged in a crime such as first-degree burglary and a death results from the events of that crime, you're subject to prosecution for it," Walters said.

Stewart was arraigned Wednesday and was being held in the Grady County jail. A bond hearing was set for Thursday. His attorney, Stephen Buzin, did not immediately respond to a message left at his office Wednesday night.

According to court documents, Martin and Stewart might have been looking for prescription drugs. McKinley said it took the men about 20 minutes to get through her door, which she had barricaded with a couch.

She said her husband had died about a week earlier - on Christmas Day - after being hospitalized with complications from lung cancer earlier that month.

Who should you vote for?

2011-12-29T09:02:00.000-08:00

As a general rule, I always ask that you do not vote for an attorney to preside in any legislative position. There should be a clear difference between the people that serve in the Legislature and those that serve in the Judicial System. These two systems were specifically designed for the sole purpose of having a respectable system of “Checks and Balances”. When the two become entwined, there can only be bad things to come of it. The reason should be clear… but sometimes it is necessary to explain to those that cannot follow the basics.

First, in order to become an attorney, one must prove to their professors that they have NO MORAL COMPASS. This is defined as having ethical issues that would cloud the attorney’s ability to represent either side to the fullest. An attorney must be able to sing the Battle Hymn of the Republic and whistle Dixie … both with equal enthusiasm. Therefore, an attorney must first prove that, in their eyes, there is no right or wrong; no good or bad; no boundaries to prevent any aspect of their argument.

Second, attorneys become Judges [or at least hope to; someday]. When behind the bench, they make a solemn oath to never allow the truth to get in the way. It is not about “Right or Wrong”, it is all about who gives the best argument to the case. That argument is usually based on how much money each side can continue to bring into the system. I once heard a Judge in Austin Texas proudly state that she would intentionally give custody of a child to the parent with the least possible resources simply because it would encourage the other parent to continue the litigation. In other words, the longer the case can be kept in the court system the more money to be made by the courts [and its jesters]. It’s not about right or wrong, it is about how much money the litigants can bring to the court.

Third: attorneys, whom become Judges, like to get even for losses while being attorneys. This, often times, comes in the form of “Legislation from the Bench”; A technique that allows for the judge to write (or re-write) laws that are not appropriate but require large sums of money from the general public to correct (Money that the attorneys and judges share gratuitously). In today’s courts, it is not about innocence or guilt; it is about how much money the litigants can bring to the court. I once had an attorney explain this by saying that it is cheaper to plea guilty, or take “Nolo contendere”, than to plea innocent because the cost of a plea of innocence would require long court battles with extensive witnesses and would, “most assuredly”, be “Cost Prohibitive”. In other words; some people cannot afford to be innocent.

Fourth, attorneys that become Legislators can then write laws that are ambiguous and confusing so as to be left to the interpretation of the Judges and Attorneys that feel so comfortable in distorting and “bastardizing” the laws that are written. For example: The average length of time spent in jail for a convicted felon that commits a crime with a firearm in Washington DC is about 14 days. This is because the politicians in that town were lawyers that wrote a local law that would over-rule the Federal penalty of 20 years (20x360 days) to a local penalty of “Up to 40 Years”. Although it was presented as “being tough on crime”, the law actually allows judges to invoke penalties as little as “0” days. This is because the strict definition of “Up to 40” is defined as anything from 0 to 14400 days… the standard being about 14 days. In an opposing example: Trial Lawyers from the State of Texas despise the adoption of the “Castle Doctrine”. The Castle Doctrine establishes that you do not have to retreat when threatened and you may stay and fight for what is Right… even if you have to use deadly force to protect yourself or your property. The Castle Doctrine also states that, “if you are justified in using force, or deadly force, under Chapter 9 of the Penal Code, then you are exempt from any liability". Trial attorneys are furious with the castle doctrine because it, “does not allow for adequate interpretation or adequate discussion in open court”. In other words, it did not allow for enough ambiguousness for lengthy discussion (at your expense) in open court (at your expense) for attorneys to get their fair share of the loot (at your expense). The question should be: if you defend yourself (home, family, etc) from criminals, then what is there to discuss???

Fifth: The beauty of “repeat offenders” is that they keep coming back. Please note that repeat offenders rarely have the money to defend themselves, so the general public is obligated to provide these funds. Also note that the general public [taxpayer] is then left with the bill for both the prosecution and the defense of repeat offenders. And, as I said before, the beauty of a repeat offender is that they are a sure bet for “Job Security” if you are a judge or an attorney. Therefore, laws that appear harsh, but end up soft, help to keep the endless job opportunities open for a “Never-Ending” flood of repeat offenders that perpetuate the legal system. Laws that allow for the use of Deadly Force are contrary to this job security as death is a permanent issue. Dead Offenders have never continued their lifestyle…. “lifestyle”…lol. What adds insult to injury for attorneys and judges is the idea that there is no liability for a justified use of deadly force. This prevents judges and attorneys from getting their fair share of what the criminal was trying to obtain illegally.

Therefore, voting for someone that is a practicing attorney to represent you in the legislature is a vote for softer penalties, more repeat offenders, increase crime, ambiguous laws, and a perverse concept that innocence is directly proportional to your financial abilities. Instead, I recommend that you Vote for those that make laws that everyone must live with (even the ones that are writing the laws). Let the attorneys then interpret the laws that free men make and not the laws that these attorneys intentionally write to meet their own needs and desires.

Pistol Actions??

2011-12-08T09:15:00.000-08:00

There is a lot of issue concerning Pistol Actions. First, Texas State Law refers to Pistol actions as: 1. Semi Auto, 2. Single Action Revolver, and 3. Double Action Revolver. Even the NRA has it listed in its training manual this way.

There are actually 4 types of Pistol Actions:

Single Action Only [SAO]
Double Action/Single Action [DA/SA] Sometimes called Traditional Double-Action
Double Action Only [DAO]
Striker Action [Safe Action]

When all is said and done, there really are only two separate Action Types: Double Action, where the trigger pulls the hammer back and releases it, and Single Action, where the trigger simply releases that action.

The problem is that certain competitions groups have a problem placing the "Striker Action" pistol. I think the bottom line is that the Striker Action pistol (essentially a "pinball" action pistol") requires that the striker be moved from a resting position to a position of "Potential Energy" state before it is released to the "Kinetic Energy" state... essentially making it a double action "ACTION" based on the fact that the trigger first "Cocks" the firing pin and then releases the pin for firing (2 actions=Double action).

The issue is the fact that the Safe Action or Striker Action pistols does not use a Hammer to hit the firing pin. Instead it uses a pulling/spring-loaded action with the firing pin only (much like a pinball machine). Because it eliminates the Hammer, groups like the IDPA tend to have difficulty placing it in a category based on Stock, Enhanced, or other specialty.

I think the bottom line here is the fact that groups like the IDPA are filled with "Gun Bigots" that will find any excuse to eliminate, or reduce, the competition.

Americans won’t do immigrant work?

2011-11-12T17:57:00.001-08:00

Americans won’t do immigrant work? You are right!!!

An American won’t work his ass off for that little of pay because, unlike an immigrant, the American will have to give half of it back to the government to use in failed Liberal Progressive Programs.

An American won’t work his ass off for that of little pay when, unlike an immigrant, the American will still have to pay for his own Health Insurance.

An American won’t work his ass off for that little of pay when, unlike an immigrant, the American will still have to maintain his own License, Registration, and Insurance while the immigrant will be given a pass (with no questions).

An American won’t work his ass off for that little of pay when, unlike an immigrant, the American will still have to pay for his [and his children’s] education without any assurance of passing grades.

The truth of the matter is this: if you give an American tax free pay, free health care, exempt him from maintaining his license, registration, and insurance… and give him free educational benefits that he can share with his children… he will march through the gates of hell, into islomo-facist terrorism, and fight for your right to be an American.

Have a plan to kill

2011-11-04T16:27:00.001-07:00

Have a plan to kill everyone you meet. This might sound a bit radical, but let’s look at it from the standpoint of antisocial v.s. asocial behavior.

First, the rules of sanity do not apply to asocial violent attackers. The Geneva Convention is a failure because we have never gone to war with a country that gave a damn about the Geneva Convention. Just the same, Non-Violent Dispute Resolution is a valuable tool for learning and understanding, but you will never have to shoot someone that gives a damn about Non-Violent Dispute Resolution. You will never have to shoot someone that has the ability to think rationally or use cognitive reasoning. A sociopath will not understand (or care about) the rules of fair-play in the way that you were raised. Therefore, don’t plan on playing “Fair”. Have a plan to stop the violence. Have a plan to kill.

Second, when the violence starts is the wrong time to start thinking about how you are going to deal with it. Have a plan in place before you need it. Even then, the plan you have may be useless with the current attacker… but at least you had a plan. Have a backup plan too. Be ready to become aggressive enough soon enough. A sociopath does not have to escalate through a set of “Force Continuums”. A sociopath simply sees what they want and goes for it. There is little more thought process to it than that… other than they will sometimes consider modifying their attack to avoid being injured. A psychotic might not consider (or care about) the possibility of being injured.

Third, we do not use guns to “teach people a lesson”. We use guns to stop violent attackers. We use guns to stop the unthinkable. We use guns to kill sociopaths that have no redeeming qualities necessary to understand Non-Violent Dispute Resolution. We use guns to “KILL” asocial, violent attackers. We NEVER kill for anything less. Therefore, when it is time to draw and shoot: shoot to kill. Until then, your plan is just a “Plan”.

Fourth; have a plan for what you will do after the Kill. The problem with the Criminally Insane is that they don’t understand the consequences of what they are doing (or, they don’t care). If you are capable of understanding what comes after the kill, then you can adapt your plan to address future repercussions (and you're way ahead of the criminally insane). If you know/believe/think that going “there” will most likely put you in a position where you will have to “kill”, then you can rewrite your plan by “not going there”.

When reviewing your “plan to kill” over and over in your head, make sure that you include the part about addressing the deceased’s family and friends who want to punish you for killing that nice, lovable, child of theirs; or the officers responding to the scene that believe that only criminals (or cops) have guns; or the judge that believes in Legislation from the Bench; or the sheriff- (whose belligerent, arrogant, egocentric, bigot son you just killed). When you realize that the repercussions to follow could be more severe than the attack in the first place you may well consider avoiding the situation. When all else fails: Have a Plan to Kill!

Let's take our Government Back?

2010-05-23T16:54:00.000-07:00

Let’s take our government back? What does that mean?

Recently I heard a caller to the Mike Church Radio Show call in and ask what it really means to “Take our Government back”. Sadly, Mr. Church did a very poor attempt to reply to this question. One attempt was to say, “It is time to take our Government back!” This is like trying to define a word by using the word in the definition. Totally “Unacceptable”!

Here, let me try to explain the concept more clearly: First, let me remind you of the biblical text that tells us about, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”. While the original message, coming in response to a question of whether it was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations about whether it is desirable for the Christian to submit to earthly authority, one must remember that there are NO U.S. Coins that have ever been printed with Caesar’s face on them. In fact, every U.S. Coin that was printed before Progressives began taking over this country was printed with only that of an individual that was elected of, by, and for the people of this country.

Second point to make for this argument is based on something that I heard from a Preacher on the Book of Romans (Chapter 13). In Chapter 13, the bible tells us;

Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

The misinterpretation of this chapter is that we should submit to our government, but that our government is defined as the Legislature, Executive Branch, and the Judicial System. This flies in the face of reality as, anyone that is paying attention would note, each of our Legislators have three letters that precede their names –(REP). This does not stand for Republican, but for “Representative”. They are not the government, but merely representatives of our government.

So what is the actual government of this great land? Let me use the words of our forefathers: “We the People”. We the people are the rightful government of this great land… and “the government is from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people!”(Red Skelton-comedian).

To add to this, “We the People, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty to ourselves and our posterities: ordained and established the Constitution for the Many States of this Union. Therefore, the rightful government is the people, the ordained laws of the land is the Constitution, and the violators of the biblical command to “subject unto the higher powers” is that of the illegal and unlawful aristocracy that has unethically appointed itself as our government when they are nothing more than “Representatives” of our government. It is they that will “received to themselves the damnation”.

This is what we mean when we say, “Let’s take back our Government”

Intentionally, Knowingly, and Recklessly

2010-04-07T09:14:00.000-07:00

Intentionally, Knowingly, and Recklessly are not just attempts to reiterate the point. Each word has specific meaning in a court of law. Some of my students have made the inappropriate statement that they intend to get their Concealed Handgun License, but do not intend to carry a firearm unless they think they might need it. This is the definition of “Knowingly”. In a Court of Law, this is referred to as “Felony 2: Murder”.

When an individual, licensed to carry a concealed handgun, goes into a place where he/she "Knows" that there is the possibility that they will need to use a firearm for self defense and then uses that firearm for self defense, then they have committed the act of "Knowingly carrying a firearm illegally".

One student told me that there was a park that he likes to take his children; that he knows to be "Dangerous". This is why he wants the CHL. A Court of Law would find this unacceptable for a defense. If you know that the place is dangerous... don't go there... and don't take your children there! If you want the place cleaned up so that you can go there; go through the appropriate channels to get it cleaned up. Otherwise, to go there armed is a clear case for "2 to 20 years + $10,000 fine".

I encourage my students to do two things: 1. don't go anywhere where you believe it is not safe. and 2. Carry your handgun EVERYWHERE so that no attorney can accuse you of only carrying when you want to kill someone.

Always carry: ALWAYS CARRY!!! and always have a plan to kill everyone you meet. It is better to have a plan and not need it than it is to need a plan and not have it.

Rules for a Gun Fight:

2010-04-05T09:04:00.000-07:00

There really are no rules that the ordinary thinking citizen is capable of contemplating. The problem is that the enemy rarely is thinking of anything other than getting what they want. As a general rule; they see it, they want it! There really is no deeper level of thought process than that.

As for “Running Away”, that really is not a bad idea as I teach most of my students not to ever shoot at someone that is running away. This is because a person running away really is not much of a threat. The waste of a bullet at that point is not acceptable. Unfortunately, running away might not be the most logical thing to do if you are someone that cannot run. Remember that criminals rarely ever target someone that is “Capable”. More to the point, criminals target the week and slower targets. This is because the last thing on their mind is the idea of getting hurt. Their mission is to hurt you!

With that in mind, we must also address the fact that many gangs are now resorting to quieter and more covert types of weapons: edged weapons. A well trained MS13 or Philippine Kali trained thug can easily cover a distance of more than 20 ft in less than the time that it would take the average Professional Law Enforcement Officer to draw his or her handgun. For a CHL, the act of reacting to such an attack would be non-existent.

Still, the average “wanna-be thug” will use a handgun because it is cool and gives the feeling of power. Also, as said before, many of these individuals really are not well trained members of elite fighting groups. In many cases they are simply drug crazed dip-wads that think the gun will protect them from any harm. These individuals will, as a general rule, have poor marksmanship. However, even a fool hits his mark on occasion.

For most of my training I teach the CHL to avoid the problems in the fist place. If it gives you a bad feeling, just say “no”. There is nothing wrong with avoiding the problem in the first place. I, myself, have avoided many of dangerous situations by simply following my gut feeling and leaving before things got out of hand. To add to this, many of the really stupid issues that I have found myself involved have been due to the failure to act on my gut feeling. Now that I carry a gun, it is even more important that I act on these feelings and avoid possible problems.

Sadly, most CHL’s do not practice Marksmanship. In fact, many of them think that the CHL program is designed for just that type of training. It is not! If you want marksmanship, you need to attend my NRA training. Even then, marksmanship goes out the window when you find your heart rate at 120bpm and above. When I was on a military police team, I was known for my expert marksmanship…. That is, until I met an instructor that wanted me to experience real-life scenario shooting. With both the FATS (FireArms Training Simulator) and a 50 pound rock, followed by a couple of laps around the building carrying the rock, I found that marksmanship means very little when you are more concerned about trying to breath than you are shooting.

I, personally, don’t recommend running away in a crouched or “zig-zag” pattern. Instead, I recommend that you stay well away from the threat in the first place. This is done by “Pre-planning” your trips and movements. For example, if you can walk into a convenience store at night, buy a soda, and walk out without ever knowing how many cars are in the lot, people are in the store, and what color the eyes of the clerk were, then you probably don’t need to be carrying a gun. Being alert is the first key to keeping yourself out of danger and loosing your gun to a future cop killer.

The second thing you need to do is to plan to have company. Have friends and keep them close… they should be armed too. Scum-sucking maggot thugs rarely pick on groups of two or more. Remember, they want to hurt you, not get hurt. When traveling, travel in groups and stay together. When arriving at work, arrive when others arrive and leave with others as they leave. If not, call for professional assistance to escort you to and from your vehicle. If there is none available, this is when your alertness needs to kick into overdrive. Your pistol needs to be in hand, not just available. If you believe that it is too risky, don’t go there. Call for a friend, family, security, police to be there… if none are available… don’t go. Simply find some place you can be that is safer. It really is better to safe than sorry.

When all else fails, have a plan to kill everything that you meet… and hope you don’t have to use it! Dry fire activities and playing out scenarios in your head are very important. Remember, every handgun is loaded until you have proven it to be unloaded [I recommend well established NRA safety protocols for such practice]. Practice alone or with others that have come together for this type of training. Never point your firearm at another person.

If you do want to actually practice shooting someone, I recommend paintball courses for this type of training because everyone on the course is fully aware that they are going to be shot at some time or another… not to mention that everyone has to have proper safety attire before starting the course.

Voting means: Knowing who you vote for when you vote!

2010-03-25T08:15:00.000-07:00

Many "local" politicians will run on the ticket that brings them the most votes, not necessarily on the ticket that they belong to. Anti-gun, Union, and Thug organizations vote much more often than responsible citizens only because many Anti-gun, Union, and Thug members don't even know they are voting. Responsible Citizens rarely (if ever) think to "vote early and vote often"... because it is illegal. Anti-gun, Union, and Thug organizations rarely consider the idea that doing something illegal might be bad. Winning is everything!

Many of these Anti-Gun, Union, and Thug organizations (lets just call them AUT's) actually believe that they are doing the right thing by providing a "valuable service" to the "disenfranchised" (or disfranchised) by voting for those individuals that have been denied their vote due to criminal activities that were forced on the "Have Nots" by the "Haves". Never mind the fact that most "Haves" so have because they worked for it... but that is a discussion for a later time.

These AUT's are very instrumental in removing elected officials that use their power to "... establish justice, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty to [everyone]" and replace them with Marxist/Fascist dictators that will "rob from the rich and give to the poor [lol]". Remember, though, as I have said before, many of these individuals don't even know they are voting... only that they are members of organizations that promise "Change".

Therefore, when you vote, know whom you vote for. Vote your conscious. Vote for people based on what they have done, not for what they say they will do (this time).

CHL Associations

2010-02-19T10:34:00.000-08:00

I made it clear that I was not happy with the fact that the TCHA association that I had purchased my powerpoint shows from were so "Lackluster". After that, I received some interesting replies that would indicate that there were members that were also DPS that were not happy with me pointing out that it was so lackluster. After several months of attempting to contact TCHA, I was contacted by them with a "Well, why did you not call us first" email.

Then I started getting emails from revel associations that wanted me to join them and buy their products. So, I responded. TACCI's, Antonio Orozco let me know real quick that I was foolish to join the TCHA. The problem is that TACCI's Antonio Orozco made it clear that working on improving the Texas CHL program was not the mission of his organization. TACCI's mission was to make it politically difficult for opposition to thrive in the Texas arena. Then, he made the ultimate statement: "I am working on a plan to bring safety to our 'free carrying while in their vehicles totters."

That left me with a cold chill. What are "free carrying while in their vehicles" totters? Are these people that are not paying their fair share of the toll to carry their firearms in their vehicles? Is that how TACCI looks at not licensed people "Free Carriers".

Handgun Training

2010-02-19T09:58:00.000-08:00

I find that a lot of individuals that take the Concealed Handgun Training program in just about any state soon finds out that the class is really intended for those that have a greater understanding of the use of a handgun. Therefore, I offer training on a more basic, marksmanship, level. My class offer coaching and basic familiarization with a Handgun. As a member of the Texas Tactical Police Officer's Association, I also cover important issues that relate to the citizen soldier and the civilian policing of our communities. Look for me at www.scfh.net Thanks, Tom