MANDATORY classes for ccw?
- Thread starter ladder13
- Start date
- Status
It sounds like not only do you want to check up on proficiency, but also to make sure an applicant has the right attitude.
Are you going to be the "attitude and reason checker"?
(To "allot" means to dole out, or to distribute, or to assign a share. "A lot" is two words, and means a great many, or a large number. 'Scuse me for pointing that out, but that is a pet peeve of mine. Maybe you want to "allot" carry licenses?
)I was among the first "batch" of Arizona-certified CCW instructors, when AZ first began issuing CCW permits about twenty years ago, to people who passed a background check, and completed a class consisting of, if I recall correctly, 16 hours of training, comprised mostly of training in the judicious use of deadly force, rudimentary firearms safety, and no mandatory proficiency test, although many instructors included some range time in their own curriculum. This mandatory instruction was imposed by our typically brain-dead legislature, and accepted as a compromise, by CCW proponents, to get the legislation passed. But, many of us opposed this mandatory training requirement (long since trimmed down, and eventually eliminated) because it gave people the false impression that if they had taken the minimum required training, that they had been adequately and sufficiently trained, and so, sought no further training, in most cases (personal observation...).
There's no data to support an argument for the apparent necessity of mandatory, or more, required training, because of misuse or injudicious use of force by AZ CCW permit holders, or, more recently, by concealed carriers without permits, which are now no longer required in AZ.
My personal opinion is that you are an idiot if you carry a gun, concealed or not, without a thorough grounding in firearms safety, the legal use of force and justification for same, and etc. But, last I checked, it's not illegal to be an idiot, a crime hopefully put to rest once and for all by the defeat of the Nazis, and the salvation of many American voters...
There's no data to support an argument for the apparent necessity of mandatory, or more, required training, because of misuse or injudicious use of force by AZ CCW permit holders, or, more recently, by concealed carriers without permits, which are now no longer required in AZ.
My personal opinion is that you are an idiot if you carry a gun, concealed or not, without a thorough grounding in firearms safety, the legal use of force and justification for same, and etc. But, last I checked, it's not illegal to be an idiot, a crime hopefully put to rest once and for all by the defeat of the Nazis, and the salvation of many American voters...
Last edited:
carpriver
US Veteran
Michigan requires a training class before getting a CPL. It is mandatory, I guess so. I was trained by my father, grandfathers and uncles. In the Air Force I was given more training. When I was assigned as a Air Policeman I was given more training. But I still needed to prove to the state I knew the basic of gun safety.
RaceBannon
Member
I've heard that 1 in 13 Washingtonians has a carry permit. We have no training requirements at all. Maybe someday we'll all start popping rounds off every which way or shooting the poor guy standing next to the guy we were aiming for, but so far, it hasn't been a problem.
I'm not a big fan of regulations aimed at solving a problem that doesn't exist. How often are permit holders responsible for accidental shootings? How about accidental shootings outside the home?
I'm not a big fan of regulations aimed at solving a problem that doesn't exist. How often are permit holders responsible for accidental shootings? How about accidental shootings outside the home?
I too am in favor of training but not mandatory. I wish there was some way to have mandatory training without government intrusion. Many people need it.
I too having worked at a LGS saw many people buy guns that didn't know what they were doing. Normally a young man full of himself. And when we tried to educate them all we got was attitude. But forcing mandatory training on them won't work.
After all we tell them "don't drink and drive". They do anyway. We tell them "don't drive too fast". They do anyway.
It's hard to teach someone that already knows it all. They must learn on their own and sometimes the decisions they make ruin the rest of their lives. And this would happen with or without government intervention.
I too having worked at a LGS saw many people buy guns that didn't know what they were doing. Normally a young man full of himself. And when we tried to educate them all we got was attitude. But forcing mandatory training on them won't work.
After all we tell them "don't drink and drive". They do anyway. We tell them "don't drive too fast". They do anyway.
It's hard to teach someone that already knows it all. They must learn on their own and sometimes the decisions they make ruin the rest of their lives. And this would happen with or without government intervention.
Vulcan Bob
Member
Like many things it sounds like a reasonable thing but can be turned into a weapon by a gun unfriendly administration . Well guess what people, we have no funds to administer the mandatory training! No training no permit. In a perfect world I would support mandatory gun training but sadly we do not. As in all things do not let your emotions cloud your reason.
7shooter
Member
I help run the range for the annual qualification for retired law enforcement officers qualifying under HR 218. There is a classroom session where a volunteer prosecuting attorney reviews any changes in the law involving use of force and a police officer reviews the other requirements of HR 218. The students seem to enjoy getting together with their colleagues .
It is fun to watch how accurate the officers are even the individuals who are at an advanced age. The revolver shooters are particularly impressive.
It doesn't make sense to me that these experienced and responsible officers should have to qualify every year when citizens in our state only need a class every five years in order to renew their permits.
FREE mandatory training?
Sure!
Sure!
Yep!
A full day class is required here with range time. Based on some of the people I've seen is some of the classes I've taken, it absolutely is necessary.
Scary!
^^^This^^^
I am glad I live in a country where conversations like this take place. I am gladder still that I live in state that requires no "test" to issue a carry license. It can get scary thinking overmuch of the nature and ability of my fellow citizens to to conduct their lives as I see fit in even a general way. I do not think I should have control over their method of defense. They may be old, poor, weak, outnumbered, unpopular, stupid, ugly, or have differing beliefs that I don't approve of. They are on their own, just like me.
USAF385
US Veteran
The poll result isn't surprising so far, considering how many here support universal background checks. I'm guessing a large percentage of those in favor of one are also in favor of the other.
OP
Not surprised either, looks like decades of gov't conditioning has taken it's toll. Sorry, but I don't see blood running down the streets in those states requiring no training at all.
deadin
US Veteran
How about this......??
Take the test (both written and performance) without spending $$$ ($150 in some cases). If you don't pass, then remedial training.
To have the "powers that be" decide that I don't know squat about the law and firearm handling and then make me pay to listen to someone "teach" me everything I already know just seems to be another ploy to limit my access to firearms......(and make money).
Take the test (both written and performance) without spending $$$ ($150 in some cases). If you don't pass, then remedial training.
To have the "powers that be" decide that I don't know squat about the law and firearm handling and then make me pay to listen to someone "teach" me everything I already know just seems to be another ploy to limit my access to firearms......(and make money).
While I am not in favor of mandatory training to obtain a CCW, in Ohio it is mandatory already. 12 hours of training in fact, including 3 hours of range time.
The essence of the poll came from another thread mainly concerned with firearm ownership and government oversight.
A question better suited to the original conversation would be:
Do you support mandatory government-regulated safety and proficiency training in order to own a firearm?
The essence of the poll came from another thread mainly concerned with firearm ownership and government oversight.
A question better suited to the original conversation would be:
Do you support mandatory government-regulated safety and proficiency training in order to own a firearm?
JFootin
Member
If they want to ensure public safety with training classes, not just for CC but also for OC, it should be FREE, available to all and not mandatory. Nor should there be any license required, which is antithetical to it being a God-given right. Should everyone be held strictly and individually accountable for what they do with any weapon? Yes. Should there still be laws enforced concerning brandishing, terroristic threats, assaults, kidnapping, false imprisonment and every kind of stupidity with a weapon? Yes. But should law abiding citizens be demonized, denied, made to wait, made to pay lots of money and jump through hoops to exercize their rights? No. Any way you want to look at it, any and all of this stuff is serious infringement!
To ensure public safety anyone who wants to write an article critical of the government should take a First Amendment Class-Just a short written test-if you pass then you can publish-if not then no article. Just a common sense exercise----controlled by the "party" of course.
Keep in mind the poll asks if you believe in mandating training, not if you had to show proof of training to carry a gun. 
I believe in what my forefathers wrote..... "Shall NOT be infringed"
Anything less is a slippery slope of corruption. They were there, they saw how it happens, and they gave us the tools to be a great nation.
Let's not waste this fabulous opportunity to BE a great nation by complacently giving away our rights to a few whining anti-gun people.
.
I believe in what my forefathers wrote..... "Shall NOT be infringed"
Anything less is a slippery slope of corruption. They were there, they saw how it happens, and they gave us the tools to be a great nation.
Let's not waste this fabulous opportunity to BE a great nation by complacently giving away our rights to a few whining anti-gun people.
.
Bill Bates
Member
Recently ( and currently ongoing) we fought a fight to stop mandatory background checks. One of the main reasons we, as firearm owners, were and are concerned was that those background checks could lead to registration and confiscation. We are concerned with government knowing we own firearms because we know that information may be used at some point in time to confiscate our firearms.
With that think I'm amazed at the number of firearm owners that see no problem with, and agree with government requiring training and license to exercise our right to carry a firearm. We go through a class, get a background check and the state issues a permit and keeps that information...anyone want venture a guess where the government who they will look at first, if and when, they decide to confiscate firearms?
We should never allow the government to require permission for us to exercise our inalienable rights.
Of course as with all right there are accompanying responsibilities. As firearm owners we have a responsibility to train, know the laws of use and to properly secure our firearms.
With that think I'm amazed at the number of firearm owners that see no problem with, and agree with government requiring training and license to exercise our right to carry a firearm. We go through a class, get a background check and the state issues a permit and keeps that information...anyone want venture a guess where the government who they will look at first, if and when, they decide to confiscate firearms?
We should never allow the government to require permission for us to exercise our inalienable rights.
Of course as with all right there are accompanying responsibilities. As firearm owners we have a responsibility to train, know the laws of use and to properly secure our firearms.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
