carry permits

[walter o]

I live in Indiana and am a carry permit holder .In this state to qualify you must apply at your resident city or county police station ,fill out the paper work ,be finger printed pay a fee to the department .Then you send the paper work with a fee, to the In.State police to run a background check and within 3-8 weeks you can have a 4 year or a lifetime carry permit, depend on the fee,and what you applied for.
My question is what other requirements are training is needed in your
STATE to secure a license.It sometimes seems like it is to easy to get an Indiana permit, not that i don't think that it should not be complicated but some training might be in order or at least some law instruction.
What are your thoughts.

 

[The Big D]

I totally agree there should be training and instruction prior to anyone carrying a gun.

Suspect others who are known to disagree will soon be heard.

I am LEOSA qualified and that requires training and classroom instruction. That's despite my 30.5 years as a LEO. I have no objections to the mandates whatsoever.

Be safe.

 

[USAF385]

Here are the requirements in PA.....

Go down to your local sheriff's office, fill out the paper work, wait for them to call in the background check, pay $25.

After that, you walk out with your permit which is good for 5 years.

 

[11B Lifer]

Missouri has a class followed by shooting an autoloader and revolver. I took my class in a different county than my wife did. For both courses-the most unsafe practices I have seen occured during those classes. Both were done by law enforcement-if I hadn't had prior experience I would have learned some efficient ways to accidently shoot someone.

 

[Super Trucker]

In Michigan, you sit through a class about 6 to 8 hours then you spend a couple hours on the range (wink wink). If ya hit the target a couple times they pass ya.

Then you go get a passport size photo, take the $105.00 fee to the county clerk, after payment go to the cop shop and get printed.

You then wait a few days to 6 months depending on your county to get approved by the "gun board", Some counties require you to appear at the meeting of the "gun board".
When all is said and done, you get a 5 year permit.

You are only required to take the class/range time once, when you renew you have to "agree" that you have spent xx hours studying the laws and xx time at the range.

 

[OKFC05]

i don't think you should have to buy a government license to exercise a constitutional right.
If you do, then some training in laws is useful. Having taught both state classes that require firing and those that don't I prefer the ones that don't.
Why? Some people are going to think they are now "trained" to use their gun from a CHL course. They are not. I teach courses in use of the handgun for personal protection, and they take days to convey the basics.
I believe very person who carries should take courses in personal protection, but I want no part of state training and testing as part of mandated reqirements. Would you like to have to pass the entire police academy requirements, including physical fitness?

 

[flop-shank]

i don't think you should have to buy a government license to exercise a constitutional right.

I agree 100%. I also am emphatic that anyone who carries a gun should get training and continue to periodically take classes.

 

[GLV]

I live in Indiana and am a carry permit holder .In this state to qualify you must apply at your resident city or county police station ,fill out the paper work ,be finger printed pay a fee to the department .Then you send the paper work with a fee, to the In.State police to run a background check and within 3-8 weeks you can have a 4 year or a lifetime carry permit, depend on the fee,and what you applied for.
My question is what other requirements are training is needed in your
STATE to secure a license.It sometimes seems like it is to easy to get an Indiana permit, not that i don't think that it should not be complicated but some training might be in order or at least some law instruction.
What are your thoughts.

Indiana is a free state. I do not believe training should be required. It is as it should be--a matter of personal responsibility. I do believe that a responsible person who carries, should have some training. I just do not want the government involved.

The biggest problem in our country is lack of personal responsible.

I have had a an LTCH for Indiana since 1970, and for another state before that.

The local CLO must sign off on your application. If He recommends that license not be granted, with documentation and reason, you may be rejected. While the CLO is not the approving or disapproving authority, he does have input.

Our permit system has been in effect since 1934, and the problems with our LTCH holders is almost nil.

Arizona has a full day class with qualification, [I have had a Az CWP since 1998] and I do not believe Az is any safer then Indiana.

 

[M29since14]

I live in Indiana...
It sometimes seems like it is to easy to get an Indiana permit, not that i don't think that it should not be complicated but some training might be in order or at least some law instruction.
What are your thoughts.

My thought is that inviting the government into anything any deeper than it is already is the road to Hell. I thought that was apparent to everyone.

If you mean should one consider obtaining some private instruction, for his own benefit, that might be OK. (If the provider is actually competent.)

Indiana probably realizes lording over such a process would be pretty complicated and expensive for the taxpayer, and - ultimately - probably of comparatively little use. Easier and less expensive just to prosecute you if you screw up. (Police and prosecutors already on staff! )

Bottom line is that some people just shouldn't have gun permits - period! Unfortunately, trying to determine who should and who should not can be just as complicated as the training thing. And then there is the matter of elected officials and other "public servants" who may think no one should have a permit. Best to leave things as they are. JMHO.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

About like OKFC05, GLV and others have posted. Training is very important, and you should have it before you carry, or even handle, a gun. However, responsible adults know that you don't play with things like guns, chain saws, and dynamite before you learn what the heck you are doing. Your permit says you are a responsible adult. It's still up to you to act like one.

 

[hittman77]

Real easy here in Illinois. No training needed, no range qualifications, no fees, no tests.........'cause no permit available. Few 2A rights here.

 

[hobby-gunsmith]

In Florida, An application must be completed along with a set of fingerprint cards and completion training certificate from a certified NRA course or from a certified instructor indicating you passed the requirements set forth by the State. The kicker is the qualification is to fire at least one round from your intented gun of choice. In my opinion, if you are carrying a CWP, a minimum of 25-50 rounds should be used. My instruction utilizes the above method with a few malfunction applications. You should seek additional basic and advance courses from the NRA or any shooting academy for proficency.

 

[self protection]

I think training is a good thing, just not from the government.I took a 12 hour class for Colorado and a 3 hour class for Utah. There were people there that had never held or shot a gun before. I dont think people like this should be near a gun without training. I would think they would do more harm than good with a ccw license. I also found that the class taught me alot about when to use your gun and when NOT to. Just because you have a ccw doesnt mean you can go out and shoot someone because they called you a name or insulted your wife. You have to be in danger of your life, not your TV being ripped off. I think all states should require some sort of training. just my 2 cents

 

[JWiley]

Documented benefit?

If anyone can provide me with any documented, independently verifiable evidence that govenment mandated training has done anything other than prevent those who most need a firearm from obtaining or carrying one I'd very much like to hear about it. (PM me)

In all the time I have been carrying in Georgia and researching the issue I have NEVER heard of any benefit to mandatory training. Other than to the hoplophobes.

/minor vent/ I really don't understand the objection to protecting my property. I spent my valuable time and effort to obtain it. Why should I allow a crook to walk off with it? Yes, my property is worth more than a thief's life. /end vent/

 

[self protection]

Protecting your property is one thing , but killing someone over a TV is just wrong. Maybe holding them at gun point till the police can come would be more in line. In Colorado you would go to jail for that, but your from Georgia so I guess its OK there.

If anyone can provide me with any documented, independently verifiable evidence that govenment mandated training has done anything other than prevent those who most need a firearm from obtaining or carrying one I'd very much like to hear about it. (PM me)

In all the time I have been carrying in Georgia and researching the issue I have NEVER heard of any benefit to mandatory training. Other than to the hoplophobes.

/minor vent/ I really don't understand the objection to protecting my property. I spent my valuable time and effort to obtain it. Why should I allow a crook to walk off with it? Yes, my property is worth more than a thief's life. /end vent/

 

[Evil One]

One a person steps over the line and decides to willfully infringe on your property or person...
Do they really ddeserve much compassion?
What use is drawing a gun to hold them at gunpoint... if you are unwilling to pull the trigger.
If you are going to draw your gun and point it at them, you should be ready and willing to follow thru with your initial actions.
Someone breaks into my house, I will be making the assumption that they are there to inflict harm.
Easier to live with taking out the trash... than having my inaction allow my family to be harmed.


Jim

 

[mrwildroot]

I'm with John.
My TV, my hard earned stuff....Who says I can't defend my property...
Mollycoddling these scumbags is why there is so much murder and mayhem in America today.
Kill some of these lawbreakers, as they break the law, and maybe the scum will get the message that we aren't gonna take this cr*p any more.
They shoot us for our stuff?
We shoot'em for our stuff!!!
It is only fair.

MW

 

[PDL]

A couple of things. For the Guy in FL. A lot of friends of mine got FL CCWs and the DD214 from their military service was all documentation relating to training that was required, and this was within the last year. No shooting etc.

For the guy that wants to pull a gun and hold someone for the police, I have the feeling you've been watching too much TV. There's nothing magic about a firearm. If you think you're going to be in control, just cause you pulled one out of your holster, it don't work that way. If you pull a gun, you have to be prepared to fire it.

 

[mrwildroot]

"Protecting your property is one thing , but killing someone over a TV is just wrong. Maybe holding them at gun point till the police can come would be more in line. In Colorado you would go to jail for that, but your from Georgia so I guess its OK there."

Recently, a homeowner did just that, and was holding the BG at gunpoint, in his own bedroom, with the wife on the phone with 911.The supervising officer did not tell the officers that little fact, and when the two officers entered, they shot the homeowner several times, killing him dead as hell, and then dragged his body out in front of the wife and children like a sack of garbage, to the front yard.

I don't think that worked out too well for him....

If you have to shoot, shoot till the threat is completely eliminated. That way, unlike Zombies, they can't come back to get'cha!

MW

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

Protecting your property is one thing , but killing someone over a TV is just wrong. Maybe holding them at gun point till the police can come would be more in line. In Colorado you would go to jail for that, but your from Georgia so I guess its OK there.

You're not doing a very good job of selling Colorado, but Georgia is sounding better all the time. Is there a town in Georgia named Kennesaw or something like that?

 

[mrwildroot]

You're not doing a very good job of selling Colorado, but Georgia is sounding better all the time. Is there a town in Georgia named Kennesaw or something like that?

Kennesaw, GA.
Many years ago they passed a town ordinance that every home should have at least one firearm, and a box of ammo for said firearm. Crime rate for that town is still virtually non-existant.

MW

 

[JWiley]

In defense of the Gentleman from Colorado, everyone must make their own decision to shoot or not. He has made his. As have I.

Sorry for the inadvertent thread hi-jack. Perhaps we could continue the debate in the 2A forum?

 

[M29since14]

Someone breaks into my house, I will be making the assumption that they are there to inflict harm.

Exactly. If you're in the house, you have to assume that. Why would you even think about the TV, or anything else?

Unfortunately, this is what makes this no-knock search stuff such a danger to those of us who want nothing more than to quietly spend the evening at home, and to be left alone.

When I finally get to sit down in the evening, there is always a pistol within reach. The thought of the ninja arriving at the "wrong door," dressed in black from head to toe, faces covered like common bandits, with battering ram - and MP5s! - is unsettling. The USSC should not be encouraging this nonsense.

"Oh, we're sorry." (If you're left alive to hear it. )

Sorry for drifting off topic a bit.

 

[self protection]

I'm not saying I wouldnt shoot someone who I thought was a threat to me or my family, but If I caught someone leaving my house with something that could be replaced I woudnt shoot him. I just dont think its worth all the hassel it would bring if I did. Believe me if I thought that person was going to hurt me or my family they would be history.

In defense of the Gentleman from Colorado, everyone must make their own decision to shoot or not. He has made his. As have I.

Sorry for the inadvertent thread hi-jack. Perhaps we could continue the debate in the 2A forum?

 

[rchance]

In a crime free society you could go without having to get a license but we don't live that way. I believe everyone should have to have a license to carry, go through at least an eight our coarse as we do in Kentucky and go to the shooting range to show you know how to handle a gun. The reason I'm for having a license is they do a background check on you before they issue the license therefore if you do get pulled over the officer doesn't have to do one then to see if your allowed to have one. Can you imagine how long you would be in custody if the officer had to do a background check on you onsite rather than having a license and he/she just sending you on your way?

 

[flop-shank]

In a crime free society you could go without having to get a license but we don't live that way. I believe everyone should have to have a license to carry, go through at least an eight our coarse as we do in Kentucky and go to the shooting range to show you know how to handle a gun. The reason I'm for having a license is they do a background check on you before they issue the license therefore if you do get pulled over the officer doesn't have to do one then to see if your allowed to have one. Can you imagine how long you would be in custody if the officer had to do a background check on you onsite rather than having a license and he/she just sending you on your way?

Then ammend the Constitution. There is a process to do so.

Alaska, Vermont and I think Montana require no license to carry whatsoever. The only requirement being that the carrier is lawfully able to own firearms and isn't committing a crime. I haven't heard of those states having any problems of note.

 

[flagman1776]

I had to pass a series of psych tests before I was sworn & authorized for firearms. Regretfully my authorization was on my warrant which I gave up when I had to resign for medical reasons after 9+ years.

I just want to relate an incident that happened to me about a year in. Myself & my partner were supervising a beach front bar at closing. We stayed outside until most had left. There was a big guy who was not leaving, holding a bottle (potential weapon). I knew I was going to have to confront him & indicated for my partner to watch my back, in case he had friends.
I approached him & at about 2 paces, I told him he had to leave. He had the bottle in a weapon hold by the neck. He was a little bigger & probably stronger & I had to keep my right forearm over my M19 loaded with full house 357s. We locked eyes for a few seconds... it seemed longer. In those few seconds... I cleared my mind that if we went to the floor, I would shoot & in all probability kill him. A flash of recognition crossed his face. He tossed the bottle in the trash & left. He hadn't actually done anything chargeable... yet.
The imprint of the target stocks was deeply impressed in my arm & the occasion in my mind.
I had not recognized the subject since he had completely changed his appearance since our first meeting... the subject was a wife beater & sometime druggie, kicked out of the Army during the height of Vietnam for the good of the service, had done hard time for attempted murder... subsequentally went on the run for several years for another serious assault charge... long enough for the critical witness to die in an auto wreck. I saw him several more times in official capacity but I never had another problem with this man...

It is all well & good that you should, in fact must, think about this ahead of time. But it is different when you face the dragon for the first time. Despite my preparation, there was a few seconds when I was not mentally prepared. Once I resolved it in my mind, the opportunty was lost... and he knew it.

 

[Tom Beavert]

Rights

If we are going to require training, and background checks, we should set a few priorities. Let's start with child bearing, I feel you should be required to be trained in this area, and approved by LE after the background check is done.
Voting : same process, but much more training and testing.
Ect-
Ect.
I see no difference in these rights, and we all have seen the results from untrained people being allowed their rights.
Tom B

 

[OKFC05]

In a crime free society you could go without having to get a license but we don't live that way. I believe everyone should have to have a license to carry, go through at least an eight our coarse as we do in Kentucky and go to the shooting range to show you know how to handle a gun. The reason I'm for having a license is they do a background check on you before they issue the license therefore if you do get pulled over the officer doesn't have to do one then to see if your allowed to have one. Can you imagine how long you would be in custody if the officer had to do a background check on you onsite rather than having a license and he/she just sending you on your way?

Hang on a minute. I grew up in Kentucky and carried a gun long before Kentucky passed concealed carry laws. As per the KY Constitution, I carried openly and the only hassle I ever had was from northern tourists who did not know open carry is legal in KY.
I also carried a loaded gun in the glovebox of my car, which is legal in KY without a license. The only comment from a trooper at a roadblock was "just leave the gun in the box when you get your registration out."

 

[38-44HD45]

I've been a Texas Qualified CHL Instructor since 1995. I've certified quite a few people, and have made a few bucks off the program. Guess what? OKFC is right, on two very improtant counts: One should not need government approval to exercise a Constitutional right, and the state-mandated training doesn't do much to prepare anyone for self-defense with a handgun. The Texas course is tougher and longer than many (10-15 hours, including range time) but I've never had a student fail to qualify, even several who had never fired a pistol before attending my class. Think they are ready for the ex-con on meth coming out of the alley? Additionally, having passed the official state course might just make some think they know enough, because after all, Big Brother thinks so, right?

Anyone who carries should have the PERSONAL dedication to learn more than just the law and the basics of marksmanship. Personal opinion, with no statistics to back it: I bet a higher percentage of Vermont carriers have trained to a significant degree than have those of Texas. Just give it some thought.