TexasCHLforum.com

TVGuy wrote:

Papa_Tiger wrote:He wasn't testifying as a member of Texas Gun Sense. Just as a private citizen and the owner of Safety Matters. He might not have permission from the other organizations he is a member of to testify, or he just might not want to.

Just because I'm a member of a church doesn't mean that I represent them if I give legal testimony.

He isn't just a member, but on the board of a group that has a direct interest in the bill/matter about which he was testifying.

Charles is on the NRA board. There are many times he speaks where he is not representing them. He may not be authorized to speak on their behalf in those cases. But he can speak on his own behalf and any organization he is in control of.

I found some of his points amusing;

I surveyed 756 my customers — a clientele of largely Republican and politically independent handgun owners — and the results were overwhelming. Ninety-seven percent said training and education for handgun owners is beneficial, with the remaining 3 percent indicating it was somewhat beneficial.

I won't disagree with that statement. Education and training ARE beneficial

Ninety-two percent of respondents said they gained knowledge after taking a handgun safety course

I know I personally have gained knowledge from taking courses. This is not limited to gun safety courses though. Again, no argument from me.

while 92 percent think training should be required.

Now we have an issue where I disagree. Training is not mandatory to exercise any other right that is guaranteed in the Constitution.

Most telling, 97 percent believe that taking a safety education course could prevent gun injuries caused by carelessness and ignorance.

I will agree with this as well. The NRA has some excellent classes that anyone can take. But I do NOT believe they should be mandatory, anymore than classes should be mandatory in order to vote, go to church, or exercise any other Constitutionally guaranteed rights.