MANDATORY classes for ccw?

[timn8er]

Here...let me fix this so you guys voting "yes" don't have anything to worry about.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms , shall not be infringed" so long as you complete the mandatory training class to do so.


Geeze......on a gun forum????????????

I'm ambivalent on this issue:I can understand what you are saying & that it is a 2nd amendment right. Still, do you think it is a good idea for anyone to just walk into an LGS & pick out a gun & some ammo, load it up, shove it into his/her waistband & walk out the door? I don't feel it should be mandatory, but I also feel that if it isn't, the people that really need some instruction wouldn't bother with it. And that's scary!

 

[baldeagle8888]

I've copied and pasted my original post!!



I've been following this thread since the beginning and thought I would add my 2 cents.

As I read the Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment, why is there any other interpretation other then "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" not understood.
Would I "LIKE" for everyone seeking a CCL to be fully informed and to fully understand all about the legal and safety aspects and show proficiency, of course. What I find totally unacceptable is making it MANDATORY. As soon as it becomes mandatory, we NO LONGER have a "RIGHT", but a
"PRIVILEGE", which by definition then would be subject to any restrictions the politicians desire to put into a law. This would lead to a complete ban over time.
I don't have a solution, but we CAN'T allow this "RIGHT" to be
watered down if we want FREEDOM

HOW CAN YOU DO A MANDATORY LAW, assuming it wouldn't get struck down by the SUPREME COURT and still be able to have the "RIGHT" mean anything. It them by logic become nothing but a privilege and at the mercy and whim of the politicians.

It would seem to me, most all the YES posters think that they would be able to maintain their CCL rights and thus, anyone else that would lose their "RIGHT" would be of no concern.
I feel that having "RIGHTS" is not a zero sum game and they do have a cost associated with them, but not nearly as much as "NOT" having those "RIGHTS".

I would hope there would be enought of a desire of the "YES" members to suggest a workable solution that maintains "Shall Not Be Infringed" for everyone.

baldeagle8888

 

[arjay]

In theory I believe we all should be able to carry where and when we please.
And then I walk into Walmart...

 

[pace40]

I'm ambivalent on this issue:I can understand what you are saying & that it is a 2nd amendment right. Still, do you think it is a good idea for anyone to just walk into an LGS & pick out a gun & some ammo, load it up, shove it into his/her waistband & walk out the door? I don't feel it should be mandatory, but I also feel that if it isn't, the people that really need some instruction wouldn't bother with it. And that's scary!

Ambivalence on this issue is a recent occurence. I bought my first gun at the local hardware store. It was right next to the chain saws. Both tools, both capable of significant damage. Can't imagine a mandatory class for either. You just learned not to cut or shoot somebody's leg off. Guess I'm just old school and stuck in my ways. That, as they say, is my opinion and it, plus $2.75, will still get you on a NYC subway.

 

[USAF385]

A question for those who voted yes

I have a question for those who voted "yes".

Would you feel your rights were being infringed on if you failed the test?

What if there was a point system and, either by one missed shot or an incorrect answer on an exam, you failed by just one point?

You're now unable to carry. You have to pay for the course and exam again, which isn't held until next month.

So, would you be OK with just hanging up your firearm until then? Or would you drive home mumbling about the government taking away your rights over one stupid point?

 

[Alnamvet68]

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.

If you can afford a gun, you should be able to afford training that will make you safe. If you have to choose between feeding your kids and buying a gun, then the choice is quite clear.

 

[Alnamvet68]

In view of some of the idiots I see at public shooting ranges and how they handle firearms YES! YES! and YES! Lucky more of them don't shoot themselves.

This. .............

 

[Alnamvet68]

My opinion? If it weren't for the safety and legal courses that I took first, I would be in the hospital ward of the county jail having shot myself in the foot or someone else by now. If there was one thing I learned from the military, it was that extensive preparation for a mission ensured its success. All you have to do is read stories of some of the absolutely stupid things people have done with weapons and you understand why training is necessary.

....and THIS!!

 

[ladder13]

As I read the Bill of Rights and the 2nd Amendment, why is there any other interpretation other then "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" not understood.

Seems to be some feeling that since our rights have already been infringed, what's wrong with a little more infringement.

 

[ladder13]

What this thread has taught me is there are apparently a lot of incompetent, untrained gun owners out there just hoping and praying the government will step in and mandate they receive some training. Likely assuming others are incapable of receiving training on their own and that the only way they will is for Uncle Sam to force it upon them.

Probably a majority of them are also happy the government will mandate they buy health insurance since they aren't capable of doing it for themselves.

The naivety of some of these responses in favor of more gun restrictions and regulations is mind boggling.

With friends like these, who needs gun grabbing enemies?

You have a point.

 

[jlrhiner]

WOW!!! Just WOW!!!

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

I think it should be a must!! Otherwise, it would be the same as putting a person behind the wheel of a vehicle,without prior training,which might cause serious injury,or death,to themselves,or others.I see no harm with training people properly, with any tool that they need or have to use.I also think that people that use cell phones in their vehicles on public roads, should go through a training program,hoping that they will come to their senses,and see what the consequences of texting while driving could be. I don't have a problem or an issue with police officers having computers in their cars , it is a great idea, but when I see one driving down the road, that has his or her nose stuck to the screen of their computer, that pisses me off . So proper training and knowledge of how to use any of these tools,and others,would be a great plus to our ignorant society.

I have to tell you that I disagree with two points in your argument. First off, I am not PUTTING anyone behind the wheel of a vehicle, and to the best of my knowledge, neither is anyone else. Each person CHOOSES TO SITUATE HIMSELF behind the wheel of a vehicle, and only mental defectives (usually teenage males) do it without sufficient training. Same goes for guns.

Also, the actual results of the use of cell phones while driving reflects not only the mental and moral quality of the individual using the phone, but, to some extent, his age. When cell phones first came out, they were large and expensive. They were used mostly by well-off middle-aged males. By my observation, these people tended to drive in the right or middle lane, and were very stable. Of course, they were not texting. Nowadays, kids (fifty years younger than I) text with less distraction than I experience just making a call. I consider making a cell-phone call a marginal activity for me while driving, and usually don't do it, but I have no need to badmouth those who can do it safely. Surely there are kids (and adults) who can't, but there are also those who can. Let's lock 'em up if they can't handle it, but not penalize everyone because we're too old to know what the much-younger generation is capable of.

 

[Poodle Soup]

I will say yes. But that training must be affordable, easily accessible, and preferably no public record on who has taken it.


personally I think it should just be taught in schools. We live in an armed society.... pretending guns don't exist are the reason we have so many troubles with them.

We just don't live in a time anymore where common sense is taught.... or even encouraged. Theres no foundation or bed rock for the current generation.

 

[nachogrande]

mandatory classes

I'm sure people will do as they please as they always have. I doubt I'm not the only one who cc'd for decades before anyone heard of cc permits, even though it was my constitutional right to do so, I know I was breaking the law depending on where I was. now it's all the rage. I just don't really care for or trust any wildfire like fads/rages. too many too quick with no understanding or skill of many. I'm not saying that it's OK for me and not you, I just got a bad feeling about so many so fast.

 

[GaryS]

If you can afford a gun, you should be able to afford training that will make you safe. If you have to choose between feeding your kids and buying a gun, then the choice is quite clear.

Maybe we should require a credit check before we allow people to buy guns? Or maybe you feel that poor people who live in high crime areas don't deserve the right to buy a cheap gun for self protection?

I guess for some people only the wealthy deserve the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Or at least one of them.

 

[GaryS]

My opinion? If it weren't for the safety and legal courses that I took first, I would be in the hospital ward of the county jail having shot myself in the foot or someone else by now. If there was one thing I learned from the military, it was that extensive preparation for a mission ensured its success. All you have to do is read stories of some of the absolutely stupid things people have done with weapons and you understand why training is necessary.

I never took a formal safety course until my daughter and some friends did in 2010. That was well after I'd had my License to Carry for years. Somehow having carried since the mid 1970s, I've managed not to shoot myself or anyone else. My training was mostly informal, so I don't know if it counts as training.

Maybe my superintelligence enabled me to understand that it's bad to point a gun at someone unless you intend to shoot them, keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot, never assume a gun is unloaded, and be aware of your backstop.

I even played with toy guns as a kid, playing "Army" and managed not to turn into a homicidal maniac.

 

[Lost Lake]

I'm ambivalent on this issue:I can understand what you are saying & that it is a 2nd amendment right. Still, do you think it is a good idea for anyone to just walk into an LGS & pick out a gun & some ammo, load it up, shove it into his/her waistband & walk out the door? I don't feel it should be mandatory, but I also feel that if it isn't, the people that really need some instruction wouldn't bother with it. And that's scary!

Et tu timn8er?

Do you really think a great number of people will buy a gun, load it and stuff it in their pants if they don't feel comfortable or knowledgeable about how it works and how to use it?

I like the chainsaw reference. Very deadly, yet no mandated safety class.

The truth is where no mandated firearm training is required we see no increase in accidents.

I still can't get over this thread's poll numbers showing the majority of people here think the government needs to protect and regulate them.

Unbelievable.

.

 

[Alnamvet68]

Maybe we should require a credit check before we allow people to buy guns? Or maybe you feel that poor people who live in high crime areas don't deserve the right to buy a cheap gun for self protection?

I guess for some people only the wealthy deserve the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights. Or at least one of them.

Please....spare me with the self-righteous indignation act. We're not talking about your FICA scores, the topic is making choices when it comes to feeding your kids or buying a gun; and yes, if you can afford a gun, you have no excuse to take a firearms safety course, and the safe use of the handgun you possess; I don't care if it's CCW, open carry, or Mexican carry...you want to own a gun, then prove to me and every American who values their safety as well as the safety of their family that you have the legal and practical knowledge that should be "mandatory" when possessing a firearm.

 

[ladder13]

10-4 Joe Biden

 

[Poodle Soup]

Et tu timn8er?

Do you really think a great number of people will buy a gun, load it and stuff it in their pants if they don't feel comfortable or knowledgeable about how it works and how to use it?

I like the chainsaw reference. Very deadly, yet no mandated safety class.

The truth is where no mandated firearm training is required we see no increase in accidents.

I still can't get over this thread's poll numbers showing the majority of people here think the government needs to protect and regulate them.

Unbelievable.

.

A great number of people are already just going out buying a gun and ammo barely knowing where the bullets go in and where they go out. Government is already involved.... why not make it make sense? Im for/against. I don't think anyone (this day and age) should be able to walk into a store, walk out with a gun and carry it around without thinking of some of the scenarios or laws that are brought up in a CCW class.

Im not saying I want the federal government becoming more involved in the process... I think a private company could facilitate the training, where you would get a certificate or some such that you would then take to get your permit with. And then for renewals sit through a class to brush up on the laws.

And none of this would be necessary if they taught it in schools.