[Doc Intrepid]

people's opinions often express their own perspectives...and most of the participants on this forum are reasonably well-informed firearms owners.

It isn't surprising that many respondents on this forum feel that State-required training is either an onerous burden or an intrusion on personal freedoms.

The difficulty is that the greater U.S. population includes people who are literally clueless when it comes to firearms. We're talking ignorant, not merely uneducated.

As a firearms instructor, I've had students who could not figure out how to load their handgun. It was a revolver. One memorable young man got his finger stuck fast in the barrel of a handgun. Don't ask how.

These people want CCW permits.

Peetzkilla argues that since we have not historically seen reports of widespread bozonity among the civilian populace, this suggests there is no particular need for a training requirement for would-be CCW applicants.

I suspect that the truth is more that few reports of widespread bozonity among clueless firearms owners make it to the Associated Press; and that the lack of press coverage does not mean that the bozonity is not out there.

I'll certainly admit that the vast majority of those on this forum likely don't need basic firearms familiarization; and that its an intrusion on many well-informed applicants.

But my opinion is that for that small percentage of CCW applicants who would otherwise have a permit and still lack even basic familiarization with the rules of safe gun handling, having a basic training requirement makes sense and possibly prevents tragedy. I've had people walk into my class who owned and carried a gun in their purse or vehicle, that was either given to them or that they purchased and had someone else load for them, that they had never once fired nor knew anything at all about. Having met those people, I realize who the laws are aimed at.

YMMV.