View Single Post
Old December 2, 2011, 11:28 PM   #126
Senior Member
Join Date: March 21, 2009
Posts: 244
I have thought the same thing as long as we have had concealed handgun licenses in Ohio.
I have no idea what kind of course you went through, mine, we fired 50 rounds in differing distances, and magazine loads. Even had a couple where we had to change magazines during the exercise. With our own handguns, and they had to be a minimum of 9mm.

Out of around 30 people in my class, there were a total of 4 brand new shooters, and we had 3 instructors on the range to supervise the firing, with groups of 5 shooting at a time.

And of the 50 rounds fired per session, you had to have 40 within a regular paper plate sized area to qualify. Do I believe that minimal training equipped every student to be qualified as a concealed carry holder? Maybe not, but at the range I belong to, I have seen every student from my class there on a regular basis practicing, and have seen nearly all of them in advanced classes for concealed carry and tactics I've taken.

I'd say you find other concealed carry holders look at you with perhaps a little anger because (at least in my experience) the best part of CCW holders (again, that I know personally) have been involved in shooting sports for years, and most have served in the military. In job classifications that involve shooting on a regular basis.

I'll not claim to be a sniper, but I put a load of lead downrange during my time in the military, as well as survived a year in Uncle Sam's Summer Camp in SE Asia, as an infantryman. And though the eyes have went away a bit over the years, I can still shoot a pretty decent hole out of near the center of a bullseye target.

And, many concealed carry holders I know feel that the 2nd amendment should be the only "permit" required of a law abiding person to own, carry, and use a firearm as a form of self defense. We're all grown-ups, we all (well certainly should by now anyway) know that using a firearm for self defense is the LAST resort in a dicey situation, not the first thought that should come to your mind.

As such, I see required training as a way for the government to keep people from being "permitted" to have their 2nd amendment rights. Take the case of people who live in cities where they require a gun owner to have training to even be allowed to get a permit to own a gun, but the city refuses to allow training ranges to be situated in the city. Many people who live in urban areas depend on mass transit, which does not run outside of the city to places where they could take training. Many urban dwellers could barely afford to buy a firearm for home defense, and they sure don't have the extra cash to pay for training.
stickhauler is offline  
Page generated in 0.08598 seconds with 7 queries