Here in Alabama there is no training requirement. I have mixed feelings about that.
I took the CCDW class Sat!!!!!!!
- Thread starter Medevack
- Start date
If you feel the law(s) don't apply to you, if you're irresponsible, and/or if you're a financial deadbeat you shouldn't have a gun.
Be safe.
"So now the city can deny a permit for a building code violation, a sanitation ticket for failing to sweep the sidewalk … an array of non-criminal acts,"
Councilmember Dan Halloran says those revisions are intended to give the police more power to deny licenses, which could counter a possible spike in gun ownership (related to SCOTUS ruling)
Can't find where the 2nd Amendment autorizes Government to limit gun ownership to a certain number of people. However, that was the law in Nazi Germany; only Nazi Party members were "responsible" enough to own guns.
Last edited:
38-44HD45
Absent Comrade
We should always be mindful that the original "gun control" laws were enacted to try to keep guns out of the hands of freed slaves. You know, those irresponsible financial deadbeats. Pretty much everywhere, it was white people who assumed that the laws didn't apply to them. As a practical matter, they were correct for generations. The Second Amendment has no clause limiting its rights to the elite. If we forget that, we play directly into the hands of the fascist, elitist antis.
medevack,
Congratulations!! Every citizen should have the right of self-defense.
The more CCDW permits the better.
TACC1
Congratulations!! Every citizen should have the right of self-defense.
The more CCDW permits the better.
TACC1
snub56
Member
I live in connecticut and the pistol permit class says 8 hrs. I was the only one in the class so we finished in 6. I'm taking a home defense class in november.
jtpur
Member
Im not a big fan of long courses. Texas was 11 hours and it could have been done in 3, with a 50 rnd qualification lasting 15 minutes. It was boring, it was pointless and well what else can I say. I took the Utah class at home and it was done in four hours and the class was excellent and did not require shooting...We are citizens not cops and we need not train to the same standards LEO's train too. I mean who in the heck trained Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, or John Adams? Guns are not rocket science. After one gets past the legal requirements, when one can and can not shoot (hell the law alone could take a lifetime of study) and the safety on gun handling, not much is left....Four hours on the range...good for cops and military, rather pointless for citizens who want to learn to defend themselves...
cshoff
Member
For a brief introduction to firearms safety, I agree that it wouldn't require 4 hours of range time. On the other hand, 4 hours would barely scratch the surface of the various defensive shooting techniques and skills that could be essential in saving your life some day. Simply shooting a gun in a safe manner is not rocket science. Along those same lines, actually using a gun effectively and efficiently for self defense isn't the same as target shooting either.
OP
Medevack
US Veteran
IMPO there are a lot of people who either try to imitate gunhoes on TV or have bad habits from previous handguns and they end up hurting themselves or others, I believe that if you want to get better and be safe about it! go and learn about the do's and don’ts, save your money, make time and take the class, is worth every penny..... I learned a lot.
OP
Medevack
US Veteran
I have to disagree with you on that. you say "We are citizens not cops and we need not train to the same standards LEO's train too"
ok then why would you carry a conceal handgun? the training is for defending your self ie shoot someone or something, last time i checked is the same thing as for LEO and for citizens, Also if you carry for safety? same thing, the shooting is the same anyway you put it, then why wouldn’t you have the training? IMO lets say someone panics and shoot an innocent by standard for lack of training, the 1st thing the DA will ask you in court is were you properly trained with that handgun and by who? Trust me i know, been there done that. Even when LEO are involved in a shooting they are question on the training they received. Who?, how often? and did the officer pass?.
The Law is for the crooks not for the law abiding citizen.
"Four Hours of range rather pointless for citizens who want to learn to defend themselves"
Again w/o training a handgun is useless anyone can point and shoot a gun, But a trained person can shoot a gun with accuracy and hit the intended target.
Its cool tho you are entitle to your own opinion and that’s ok
Last edited:
I haven't seen any arguments or posts that say firearms training isn't valuable. Whether that's guns safety, legal options, or defensive techniques.
The point is that the government should not be the one to decide or require specific tasks to complete before you can exercise a constitutional right. And 'bear' is also an operative verb in the 2nd amendment. There is no limiting clause the describes how or where 'bear' is applicable.
I think that everyone should train and practice with firearms as much as possible.
Although on a side issue, I might be in favor of an intelligence test before you were allowed to vote.
The point is that the government should not be the one to decide or require specific tasks to complete before you can exercise a constitutional right. And 'bear' is also an operative verb in the 2nd amendment. There is no limiting clause the describes how or where 'bear' is applicable.
I think that everyone should train and practice with firearms as much as possible.
Although on a side issue, I might be in favor of an intelligence test before you were allowed to vote.
jtpur
Member
I kinda thought that my comment may generate some oposition. That's fine. Cops make mistakes all the time and they are trained. Witness the guy in SFO who thought he was using his taser and instead shot someone to death. My own department was not without its own accidents. I think we were as well trained as any LEO agency. Sure there are tons of techniques that one could employ in defensive shooting. My point is that IM not sure that the average citizen needs or will ever remember all those techniques and if not practiced constantly they go to waste. The anti gun nuts use training as a reason the average citizen should not carry or even own guns. I dont want someone of that ilk telling you that You must spend 4 hrs per quarter shooting to 85% accuracy or they will take your gun. Our Department required 85% while the State mandated 70%, so I hope those of you who disagree at least understand my reasons...Again who trained the early settlers.....Their Dads on the back 40.....
OP
Medevack
US Veteran
Oh is not an argument!!!! i was just putting my 2 cents...lol ( 1st amendment) 
i agree is not about if you are a LEO or a citizen we are all human it doesn’t matter if you are trained or not mistakes will be made but if you train mistakes can be prevented and "for legal reason" is always good to have that training. as far as who trained the early settlers? WOW back then they didn’t have kids shooting people for the fun of it (gang related) they didn’t have to have a conceal permit or even a permit to buy a gun there wasn’t a wait time or background checks weapons were respected and were used for a purpose, everyone had a gun strapped to their side and was not questioned, Now! go to Wal mart and exercise your 2nd amendment and see if you don’t get stopped, get the police called on you, questioned or even asked to leave. Times have changed, and so has the Law. I think is a good conversation to see the different points from everyone’s perspective.
i agree is not about if you are a LEO or a citizen we are all human it doesn’t matter if you are trained or not mistakes will be made but if you train mistakes can be prevented and "for legal reason" is always good to have that training. as far as who trained the early settlers? WOW back then they didn’t have kids shooting people for the fun of it (gang related) they didn’t have to have a conceal permit or even a permit to buy a gun there wasn’t a wait time or background checks weapons were respected and were used for a purpose, everyone had a gun strapped to their side and was not questioned, Now! go to Wal mart and exercise your 2nd amendment and see if you don’t get stopped, get the police called on you, questioned or even asked to leave. Times have changed, and so has the Law. I think is a good conversation to see the different points from everyone’s perspective.snub56
Member
I think the big difference is between what the goverment mandates and what you set as your own personal standard. I know that I have the right to keep and bear arms. I also don't have a problem demonstrating that I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot or my neighbor in the backside before I purchase a handgun. The standard I've set for myself; basic techniques practiced regularly.
jtpur
Member
Oh is not an argument!!!! i was just putting my 2 cents...lol ( 1st amendment)
I certainly agree that times have changed. I see that you and I share a similar background in LE.....I do still have a problem about all this regulation, since the Constitution doesnt say a thing about training.. Unless you want to take the ...."a well regulated militia..." statement and say that statement allows all kinds of regulations....Dont get me wrong I think training is good. i still go to the range monthly or more. I also favor license for cc...I do not believe that one is necessary for open carry and surprisingly I really dont favor open carry on our streets. The woods is fine.....but if open carry became the law I would not panic...
Similar threads
- Locked
