I understand the reasoning behind the bill. Someone unable or unwilling to follow the procedures in Texas turns to another state to obtain a CCL. One way around this is not recognizing non-resident permits from other states (as I believe Texas does with Utah now). I understand why Representative Burnham doesn't like people shortcutting the procedures to get a Texas CHL. I found the procedures in Texas not to be excessive. The trick is finding a balance between making it too difficult, which prevents law-abiding citizens from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights and letting anybody carry. I grew up in an open carry state (Wyoming, which I believe just passed a concealed carry law permitting any law-abiding citizen who can legally obtain a handgun to carry it concealed). If you could leagally own a firearm, you could carry it unconcealed. I personally liked the training Texas requires, found it very informative and appreciated that it focuses on use of deadly force issues and makes you think about what it means to use a firearm to kill or injure another human being. The idea behind this training is to make sure the people carrying understand firearm safety, know the law regarding use of deadly force, and know how to safely use, store and carry a firearm. I agree that the qualification standards are easy, (although two of the people in my class didn't qualify) but I believe the purpose behind the qualification isn't marksmanship as much as it is making sure those licensed to carry can safely use a firearm.