Do you support MANDATORY firearms safety classes for concealed carry licensee's?
Last edited:
-
Forum Update: We've upgraded the software to improve security, performance, and the overall experience.
👉 Read why we made the change | Support the Forum
MANDATORY classes for ccw?
- Thread starter ladder13
- Start date
- Status
Register to hide this ad
skeetshooter
Member
YES,YES AND YES
MSgt G
US Veteran
I think taking a speech class before public speaking is a good idea as is a firearms safety class, but don't think either should be mandatory.
So if you open carry, or don't carry but you own firearms you don't need any safety training? Why would you only require it for concealed carry? Why would you not require for anyone who has a firearm? Why don't they require new mothers to attend baby safety training? How else will they find out not to put peas up the kids nose, or not to put a plastic bag over the kids head?
What ever happened to being responsible for yourself and for the safety of others?
No! Not Mandatory training, but everyone should be trained in my opinion, just not mandatory.
Pete
What ever happened to being responsible for yourself and for the safety of others?
No! Not Mandatory training, but everyone should be trained in my opinion, just not mandatory.
Pete
Last edited:
dougb1946
Member
I think gun safety should be a required school subject, with rubber or real guns. Like cars, if you keep it in the garage, no permit required. You take it out in public, training and permit required.
gdnagle
US Veteran
hard question I wouldn't want someone that has no idea how to handle a firearm or know safety aspects to carry until they were knowlegabe about their weapon. But then again MANDATORY could be a way to control who gets a lisense by making it to expensive to obtain by the dems.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
I think some miminal time maybe a hour each in legalites, safety and then range time at bare cost. You cant drive, fly, or even hunt without the same. I dont like dynastys built out of these things and thats the danger. People get a goverment job testing and teaching these things and it doesnt stop there. Either due to ego, power trip, proveing their value or all three they keep adding to it and make more and more rules. Still, we are no longer the unpopulated frontier either. EVERY time you give a new pencil neck a little authority this happens. (I used to work with some myself. (Didnt effect me though). Yesterday my next door neighbor told me what he had just went through day before yesterday.
He has lived here all his life and boated forever. I seen him leave with the family and asked him how it went. First at pencil necked youth state park ranger at a reservoir wanted him to scrub the boat down. He showed him some PW he had just got with the boats regestration showing he had just done that stuff. Then the ranger wouldnt let him put the boat in because the trailer wasnt tagged. In this state that size trailer and weight doesnt need a license. He even called the DMV and got that confirmed. Before he lost it he said screw it I will go over 30 miles to this other reservoir he told his grandkids. Off to the other reservoir and the pencil neck there told him his boat only had three license numbers on it and he thought it should have four! Buddy said look I had this boat for 15 years! I think its suppose to have four, says the pencil neck. Neighbor got out a roll of electrical tape and put on 0 in front of the other three numbers! Went back and pencil neck wasnt sure because it wasnt the same color! My neighbor was pretty upset telling me about it yesterday.
He has lived here all his life and boated forever. I seen him leave with the family and asked him how it went. First at pencil necked youth state park ranger at a reservoir wanted him to scrub the boat down. He showed him some PW he had just got with the boats regestration showing he had just done that stuff. Then the ranger wouldnt let him put the boat in because the trailer wasnt tagged. In this state that size trailer and weight doesnt need a license. He even called the DMV and got that confirmed. Before he lost it he said screw it I will go over 30 miles to this other reservoir he told his grandkids. Off to the other reservoir and the pencil neck there told him his boat only had three license numbers on it and he thought it should have four! Buddy said look I had this boat for 15 years! I think its suppose to have four, says the pencil neck. Neighbor got out a roll of electrical tape and put on 0 in front of the other three numbers! Went back and pencil neck wasnt sure because it wasnt the same color! My neighbor was pretty upset telling me about it yesterday.
jlrhiner
US Veteran
I think that mandatory training would be used to limit access. If there has to be mandatory training, it should start in grade school.
I would not want to require mandatory training as I'm sure politicians would seize on it as a means to limit access to firearms.
The only way I would be agreeable to any kind of mandatory training would be if an NRA approved course of training were incorporated into a countrywide program that would guarantee an individual reciprocal carry rights in all 50 states and US territories.
Don
The only way I would be agreeable to any kind of mandatory training would be if an NRA approved course of training were incorporated into a countrywide program that would guarantee an individual reciprocal carry rights in all 50 states and US territories.
Don
Last edited:
Well, you do have to take a class to get your CCW (here in Fl) Now some classes are more intense than others. Some they actually teach you "stuff" others, well it's a joke.
When I took my class it was 1 hr. 45 minutes on how to fill out all the forms and actually get a CCW the other 15 was for everyone in the class (20-30) to line up and shoot on round from a revolver to see if panic or freak out or something.
So rather than use the evil "mandatory" word, I would like to see, demonstrate proficiency in handling a firearm or something added to the class.
As in boating and driving, I would like to see some knowledge passed on and learned. Lots of idiots down here, buy a big arse boat with a lot of HP and have no clue how to operate it, they are a real danger.
I think there should be a mandatory test to become an elected official.
When I took my class it was 1 hr. 45 minutes on how to fill out all the forms and actually get a CCW the other 15 was for everyone in the class (20-30) to line up and shoot on round from a revolver to see if panic or freak out or something.
So rather than use the evil "mandatory" word, I would like to see, demonstrate proficiency in handling a firearm or something added to the class.
As in boating and driving, I would like to see some knowledge passed on and learned. Lots of idiots down here, buy a big arse boat with a lot of HP and have no clue how to operate it, they are a real danger.
I think there should be a mandatory test to become an elected official.
sipowicz
Member
Cops are pretty well trained in firearms yet they miss quite often when the SHTF...so I would assume a totally untrained person would could be a bigger liability on the street with a loaded weapon...so I vote for some proficiency with a gun...especially if they are carrying around me.
I do support mandatory classes, with both classroom and hands on shooting with a minimum qualification to hit the target. There are several states that will issue with no hands on, and there are some out there with a ccw that may not be able to safely handle a firearm. Now, for those who are already qualified, and could furnish verification such as a NRA or IPSC Instructors certificate or a classification card showing a classification above the beginners class, there may be wiggle room on the hands on. There should be a minimum of time spent in training, such as Missouri is now cracking down on where some permits were certified with only a couple hours in the classroom. There are quite a number of MO CCW holders having their permits suspended until they retake a "approved" class.
kraigwy
US Veteran
Who sets the training standards? Uncle Joe or some other government anti gunner??
Who pays the cost, are we going to make it where only rich people can get a permit?
Which other of the Amendments to the Constitution requires you to train and be tested before you can exercise the rights the Constitution guarantees?
Mandatory training would just be another means for limiting gun ownership and self protection.
It would eliminate low income people the same rights we enjoy.
A while back some ladies in town were looking for some training. The best they could do was $250 for a four hour shooting class, nothing about Self Defense.
So I started a weekly Ladies Firearms Safety and Self Defense Class. Two hours every Wednesday night.
I don't charge a thing. Even provide most of the ammo.
I have single mothers who couldn't afford to attend, they could barely afford to feed and house their children. Not to mention, its on going, no limit on how often they can show up.
I've gotten excellent reviews on my classes. Only problem is I might have to go to two nights a week to be able to keep my class size down.
The government, Fed, State and Local have spent a lot of money making me a firearms instructor. I figured I might as well give something to the tax payers who paid for my training.
I'm all for training, I'm against government mandatory training. Lets not make shooting sports and self defense a rich man's game.
A lot of women, more so then men, are afraid of guns, we can change that. A bunch of good old boys out shooting doesn't do much, getting women involved does. But if it comes to learning to shoot vs. feeding their kids, they choose the latter, and rightfully so, but they also are prevented from the ability to protect those same children.
If you believe people need training, then step up and provide the training. We want to grow our sport, and increase involvement in shooting, then we need to STEP UP.
Who pays the cost, are we going to make it where only rich people can get a permit?
Which other of the Amendments to the Constitution requires you to train and be tested before you can exercise the rights the Constitution guarantees?
Mandatory training would just be another means for limiting gun ownership and self protection.
It would eliminate low income people the same rights we enjoy.
A while back some ladies in town were looking for some training. The best they could do was $250 for a four hour shooting class, nothing about Self Defense.
So I started a weekly Ladies Firearms Safety and Self Defense Class. Two hours every Wednesday night.
I don't charge a thing. Even provide most of the ammo.
I have single mothers who couldn't afford to attend, they could barely afford to feed and house their children. Not to mention, its on going, no limit on how often they can show up.
I've gotten excellent reviews on my classes. Only problem is I might have to go to two nights a week to be able to keep my class size down.
The government, Fed, State and Local have spent a lot of money making me a firearms instructor. I figured I might as well give something to the tax payers who paid for my training.
I'm all for training, I'm against government mandatory training. Lets not make shooting sports and self defense a rich man's game.
A lot of women, more so then men, are afraid of guns, we can change that. A bunch of good old boys out shooting doesn't do much, getting women involved does. But if it comes to learning to shoot vs. feeding their kids, they choose the latter, and rightfully so, but they also are prevented from the ability to protect those same children.
If you believe people need training, then step up and provide the training. We want to grow our sport, and increase involvement in shooting, then we need to STEP UP.
deadin
US Veteran
Ability to demonstrate basic safety, handling and being able to get shots downrange in a reasonable manner..YES.
Mandatory training..?? NO!
Last time I was required to take "Mandatory Training" was in AZ and it was a joke. The "instructor" read the State regulations and then had a "practice" test and gave out the answers. Amazingly it was the same test as the real one we took later. (He was proud of the fact that no one had ever failed the written test after taking his class. He should have just sold the answers for the cost of the class and saved us a day of sitting listening to him.)
The only worthwhile part was the firing test. If I remember correctly it required that you put 3 or 4 out of 7 in a 2 foot square at 15 feet.
Mandatory training..?? NO!
Last time I was required to take "Mandatory Training" was in AZ and it was a joke. The "instructor" read the State regulations and then had a "practice" test and gave out the answers. Amazingly it was the same test as the real one we took later. (He was proud of the fact that no one had ever failed the written test after taking his class. He should have just sold the answers for the cost of the class and saved us a day of sitting listening to him.)
The only worthwhile part was the firing test. If I remember correctly it required that you put 3 or 4 out of 7 in a 2 foot square at 15 feet.
I, too, hate to use the word "mandatory". But I don't really see an efficient way around it either. My CCW class was eight hours with classroom time(including basic legal aspects)& range time. The instructors were thorough, & the class was enjoyable. I think people need to know the consequences of deciding to carry, as it is not something to be taken lightly. They need to know that they're not becoming LEO auxiliaries, & the dreaded mall ninjas need to be weeded out. Its not something done to be cool, its to provide real world protection for someone that actually needs it.
OP
I support training but nothing mandatory, especially if administered by a gov't agency.
Most people who own a gun have had some sort of training, whether it be a father, friend, or safety course. It might not be government mandanted training, but it's training. I am not sure this mythical person exists who goes out, buys a gun, and starts carrying it. Most people who are unfamiliar with guns are afraid of them.
shouldazagged
Absent Comrade
Exactly. I don't want some ninja wannabe or untrained person who's going to sweep me with a muzzle applying deadly force in my vicinity.
We have a training requirement--not at all arduous or extremely expensive--in Kentucky, a shall-issue state. It's required, therefore it's mandatory if you want to carry concealed legally. Same with a driver's license: you have to pass a test, written and practical. Required, as it should be. To practice law or medicine you have to demonstrate knowledge and proficiency. Required. Mandatory, so you don't have somebody who can't find his derriere with GPS carving out your gall bladder.
Sounds to me as if "mandatory" just sounds worse to people who already have some legitimately required activities to which they don't want to apply that "ugly" word.
- Status
