Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OldMarksman
Not familiar with that--help me
|
Here is an
old Brady Campaign hit piece on CCW. Note that they refer to "Lax training requirements" and then the footnote cites Utah having 16 hours of training and no range requirement.
Both of those are objective requirements; but it starts getting real easy to list enough objective requirements to deny somebody a permit. How about just lengthening training to 24 hours? Now we've eliminated everybody who can't afford to take a day off work for the class (or pay the instructor extra for his time).
How about asking people to pass the Air Marshal qualification course before they carry a firearm in public? It is an objective requirement - you either meet it or you don't; but it sure leaves a lot of people who won't be able to avail themselves of a firearm for self-defense.
Quote:
|
Make any sense? No. Does that matter? NO!
|
Yes, it does matter. If we are just going to surrender the idea that legislation should make sense or have some relation to its stated purpose; then we might as well give them all of the guns now; because that is what they ultimately want and once we accept the notion that it is more important how people feel than whether those feelings make any practical sense, we are all hosed.
Mandatory CCW training requirements are only one step above totally useless. Statistically, you cannot prove that they do anything to reduce accidental firearms deaths - the only question is whether that is because there just aren't enough accidental firearms deaths involving CCW holders to make a statistically valid sample or whether it is because the programs themselves flat do not help.