Mandatory Training for CCW

[ATW525]

I teach the class here and I know for a fact that at least 85 to 90 percent of the people that take the class will never shoot their weapon again after they quailfy.

I'm willing to bet that 85 to 90 percent of the people probably won't be fulltime gun carriers, either. Those that do carry daily will likely be the ones who continue to go to the range and who might even seek out further training from professional instructors. It's a self-correcting problem that doesn't need to be regulated.

[DonR101395]

I understand your point of view. It would not matter what training was mandated, you would argue against it. So even if it was top notch free training and not "feel good" training, you would still be opposed to it because it was mandated. Based on your posts above, little of the training anyone is getting in law enforcement and the military is good enough anyway.

You're absolutely correct. As long as the government mandates training, permits and charges fees for the privilege of carrying those are infringements on our right to bear arms. I've just reached a point where I will no long "compromise" on gun rights. Feel free to give your rights away, but please stay away from mine.

[DonR101395]

I tried to stay out of this one but oh well. I teach the class here and I know for a fact that at least 85 to 90 percent of the people that take the class will never shoot their weapon again after they quailfy. Thats ten rounds folks! If you where to ask them they will tell you that they are now quailified to carry their gun and defend their lives or that of their loved ones. Thats horse pucky and you all know it.
If the SHTF happens to one of these folks I hope me and mine are as far away from it as possible. Cause it ani't gona be pretty. Most here have said they don't want any training made manditory well if this happens and it's your rear end that happens to be in the crowd and they just happen to hit and kill you or someone you love your next thing I'll sue their the hell out of them but will that bring back you or your? But what do I know I see and hear it all the time.

One more example of why mandatory training is utter BS.

[Manedwolf]

So you are perfectly happy with untrained folks willy nilly CCWing.?

Yup! It's never been an issue in NH.

You see, the state trusts its citizens, and figures they might just be responsible enough to go take a class without a boot hovering above their head.

Possibly an alien concept, I know.

[Wildalaska]

Possibly an alien concept, I know.

Sure is to me, the training classes here arent filled up

WildfolksdontevenunderstandmuzzledisciplineAlaska TM

[The Tourist]

There are two very real issues here, and each one has a great impact on the other.

First, we have rights as enumerated by The Second. Your neighbor might be a bozo incarnate, who last saw a handgun during 1971 in the movie "Dirty Harry." He still has rights.

Second, if this same bozo shoots a banger, three innocent pedestrians and a streetlight, you can bet the farm that Hillary will again saddle us with draconian rules and five-shot magazines.

To protect The Second, the bozos and idiots have to toe the line. You might be very knowledgible with a firearm, but most of my guests--most of my guests--have never seen a loading press. Almost all of them marvel at the fact I own a flat-top AR. They think "military guns" are illegal.

Do you really want these idiots in your world without training? Heck, do you want these idiots in your world without motorcycle training?

[Manedwolf]

Do you really want these idiots in your world without training? Heck, do you want these idiots in your world without motorcycle training?

Do you really want a government-mandated jackboot hanging over your head and over your rights, telling you you need to spend money and take time for a class before you're allowed to exercise a right, even if you grew up with a parent teaching you to shoot?

I don't. Plus it's a slippery slope. Training can become training renewals every few years, then registration to make sure you're trained with that specific gun, fees for certification, fees for renewal, fees for processing the fee...

And it's never been an issue in NH. The people who misuse guns and screw up with guns are invariably people who had it illegally anyway and intended to misuse it. There's lots and lots of CCWs, and almost zero accidents that I can recall.

but most of my guests--most of my guests--have never seen a loading press.

Um. I've never seen a loading press. I know they exist, but I have neither the interest, time, or inclination to make my own ammunition. As I work and can afford factory ammo, I purchase it from a store. What does reloading have to do with firearms safety? Reloading is a niche thing for specific people who want to do the repetitive work and who have the time and space to do it.

[Creature]

Ultimately, this whole issue IS a legal issue. Mandating is a legal process. Denying access is denying my right as an individual.

The idea that I should be required to train with a weapon in order to be able to have it at my disposal to protect my right to life means that someone else is responsible for my life.

Morally, that is not so. I alone am responsible for my life and no one and nothing should be allowed to stand in my way of protecting my life. Just as I am ultimately responsible for what happens when I employ that weapon to protect my life.

Mandate away if your so insecure about the masses and their carrying CCW. Doesn't mean I wont use a gun to shot someone who is trying to kill me because I never proved that I knew how to "safely" control my muzzle to you or anyone else.

[DonR101395]

First, we have rights as enumerated by The Second. Your neighbor might be a bozo incarnate, who last saw a handgun during 1971 in the movie "Dirty Harry." He still has rights.

Irrelevant
More damage is done to individuals with free press than firearms.

Second, if this same bozo shoots a banger, three innocent pedestrians and a streetlight, you can bet the farm that Hillary will again saddle us with draconian rules and five-shot magazines.

So let's give them the means to make it more difficult to exercise your rights by allowing them to regulate them with a training program they control. Makes sense to me

To protect The Second, the bozos and idiots have to toe the line. You might be very knowledgible with a firearm, but most of my guests--most of my guests--have never seen a loading press. Almost all of them marvel at the fact I own a flat-top AR. They think "military guns" are illegal.

Do they own guns? Doesn't sound like it. So once again their knowledge or perception is irrelevant.

Do you really want these idiots in your world without training? Heck, do you want these idiots in your world without motorcycle training?

Those idiots are already here and have been since the beginning of time. Last time I looked motorcycle riding was neither a right nor required any special training to engage in it.

[WhiteFeather93]

I really don't know what to say about all this. Am I really apart of a forum who's members are elitist and bent on fixing something that is not broken?

Mandating training for good lawful citizens does nothing but delay a process that is already corrupt and unnecessary. I am totaly against having to get a permit in the first place. There should be no man or group of men who decide if I may carry protection or not. Mandating training would further put undo stress and restriction on carrying and owning protection.

Ask yourself how many people would turn there backs and forget about ever carrying a gun knowing they had to jump through hoops just to carry so you feel safe. :barf: There are many many states that do not require any form of training before obtaining a permit and there is no problem.

And not everyone has the money to drop $35 on permit, $300+ on a firearm anonther $100 on ammo and a holster. And you want to add to that by mandating unnecessary training? News flash we are not all lawers and accountants and executives. Some of us give up things we need in order to seek protection.

So by all means go lobby your precious NRA to mandate training. But then you better personally tell Miss Anyone who's abusive ex boy friend is threatening her and her newborn that she can't just go buy a gun and protect herself. She needs to make you feel safe by having training that cost whatever the states comes up with. :barf:

[Silentarmy]

It seems that the non supporters of a standard of training are the untrained. I received some of my training as part of my job. I did not so much have to pay for it unless you count 13 yrs of my life, a marriage, and $125,000 in lost business during my active duty tours. I am not so much in favor of a Government control or required training as I am in favor of the carriers being responsible enough to be trained if they choose to carry. As unfortunate as it is real, the actions of the untrained people out ther carrying guns can, will, and does affect the rights of EVERY one of us! As was said before, if someone takes out a banger, innocents, and property as a result of their irresponsibility then those actions will be used against the freedoms of the rest of gun owners and if you think it can't affect your "god given right"? Have a good hard look at the Sheeple of California, New jersey, Illinois, and other states who have given up their 2nd amendment rights.

[DonR101395]

It seems that the non supporters of a standard of training are the untrained.

It seems you don't know what you speak of.
I attend two 6 day training courses a year at Blackwater. Two days pistol, two days carbine, 1 day driving and 1 day IADS. In between those two courses I attend 1-2 other formal training courses from various trainers this year Suarez Int and Defensive Edge. That doesn't include the monthly team training I attend and act as an assistant instructor for other teams. I have approximately 150 hours of formal instruction from recognized training schools in the last 12 months. How much training have you done this year?
I still won't support a mandated government training for CCW.

I received some of my training as part of my job. I did not so much have to pay for it unless you count 13 yrs of my life, a marriage, and $125,000 in lost business during my active duty tours. I am not so much in favor of a Government control or required training as I am in favor of the carriers being responsible enough to be trained if they choose to carry. As unfortunate as it is real, the actions of the untrained people out ther carrying guns can, will, and does affect the rights of EVERY one of us! As was said before, if someone takes out a banger, innocents, and property as a result of their irresponsibility then those actions will be used against the freedoms of the rest of gun owners and if you think it can't affect your "god given right"?

The untrained have no affect on your lively hood. And the rest has no bearing on the subject at hand.

Have a good hard look at the Sheeple of California, New jersey, Illinois, and other states who have given up their 2nd amendment rights.

Exactly, they continued to give a little until they have nothing left to give. I'd rather not go down that road by letting them dictate what training I receive in my personal life.

[Avenger11]

The Constitution is only a framework for our Democracy. It assumed the average American to be rational, reasonably intelligent, and free of mental deficiency. So to deal with the exceptions of stupidity, retardation, or tactical obsessions, laws are necessary to cover the anomolies.
So, I am in favor of mandatory training. We don't need more gun ownership, but more responsible, trained and intelligent ownership.

[Creature]

It seems that the non supporters of a standard of training are the untrained.

I am a non-supporter of mandatory training and I am active duty military with plenty of training.

Mandating weapons training in order to be allowed to CCW is elitist and more dangerous on a whole different level than simply for safety's sake.

This whole argument of this thread centers on the idea of CCW being mandated into a privilege vs CCW being a right.

[Creature]

The Constitution is only a framework for our Democracy. It assumed the average American to be rational, reasonably intelligent, and free of mental deficiency. So to deal with the exceptions of stupidity, retardation, or tactical obsessions, laws are necessary to cover the anomolies.
So, I am in favor of mandatory training. We don't need more gun ownership, but more responsible, trained and intelligent ownership.

So Avenger11, by your argument in favor of mandatory training we are all guilty of "stupidity, retardation, or tactical obsessions" until proven "rational, reasonably intelligent, and free of mental deficiency"?

That borders on insulting!

[hogdogs]

OOPS... SORRY!!!
i did not know i had joined a forum of CC permit holding executive types!!!
My family of 4 BARELY got by on way under $27,000 per year! I would pay for "pro" training through out the year if it did not mean my kids went without supper! Heck I would go get Blackwater classes just to go on a roadtrip! Not all of us can afford the cash outlay for the permit let alone advanced "pro" training! As it stands I have 20-30 close friends carrying under a permit that informed me of EVERY question on the Florida exam! I will not pull a gun without it NEEDING to be pulled! Right now I do not CC! I live in a crimeless enuff area (thankfully) that I can seek out proper avenues for legal CC... Here where I live a "hunting gun" on the seat is not admonished even on school grounds. just tuck it under a shirt or something so the "city slicker" school board folks don't see it! heck the school kids hunt RIGHT AFTER school for deer sincve the daylight savings would make it dark before they could setup in the stand. Now with the tax return this january I will be spending a chunk on a CCP and CCW to be legal...
Brent

[Avenger11]

Creature,
It is what it is!! If you are insulted, then consider that you may be in one of the groups outlined.

[DonR101395]

OOPS... SORRY!!!
i did not know i had joined a forum of CC permit holding executive types!!!
My family of 4 BARELY got by on way under $27,000 per year! I would pay for "pro" training through out the year if it did not mean my kids went without supper! Heck I would go get Blackwater classes just to go on a roadtrip! Not all of us can afford the cash outlay for the permit let alone advanced "pro" training! As it stands I have 20-30 close friends carrying under a permit that informed me of EVERY question on the Florida exam! I will not pull a gun without it NEEDING to be pulled! Right now I do not CC! I live in a crimeless enuff area (thankfully) that I can seek out proper avenues for legal CC... Here where I live a "hunting gun" on the seat is not admonished even on school grounds. just tuck it under a shirt or something so the "city slicker" school board folks don't see it! heck the school kids hunt RIGHT AFTER school for deer sincve the daylight savings would make it dark before they could setup in the stand. Now with the tax return this january I will be spending a chunk on a CCP and CCW to be legal...
Brent

Brent,
You are the exact reason I could/wouldn't/won't ever be in favor of govt mandated training. I freely admit I'm fortunate to receive the training I do, but wouldn't expect everyone or anyone to pay for it out of their pocket. I only pay for about 25% of my training out of my pocket and there is no way I could afford two weeks a year at BW. My unit funds the larger training courses I attend and occasionally the smaller ones if we have the funds. I do pay for the majority of the smaller two/three day classes myself. They are reasonable but not cheap with planning about $350 for training, $80-$120 for hotel(I stay in cheap hotels) $250 for a case of cheap ammo and gas to drive. I spend $700-$900 for a weekend of training and plan it into my budget a year out.


BTW I'm not an executive of anything. Including my own house

[Wildalaska]

He is the exact reason I would.

WildanimjustafatguyAlaska TM

So I guess we need to summarize the objections here...I'll try once Iam finished cookin up my Haimool Jung Gol (with fresh AK scallops) with a side of Samoan Ahi Poki

[DonR101395]

Ok WA

Here are my objections to govt mandated CCW training.
1. It infers privilege rather than right.
2. The govt has an extensive history of totally screwing up perfectly good ideas and intentions with their approach to application.
3. The cost could/would revert CCW to an elite status symbol due to the cost involved. It's already there in some states with the cost involved and selective (good ole' boy) system of issuing permits. There is no such thing as a free program. I'd rather not have the govt running a CCW program the way they run the welfare program.

I've limited it to three.
Your turn WA.

[The Tourist]

Originally Posted by DonR101395

Do they own guns? Doesn't sound like it. So once again their knowledge or perception is irrelevant.

The perception of the common man on "assault rifles" is what got us into the jam the last time.

This is one of those issues where "with great power comes great responsibility."

Do you know what killed muscle cars? Idiots and crashes.

Do you know what implements helmet laws? Idiots and crashes.

Do you know what causes decibel laws? Idiots and loud pipes.

You might think this is funny. However, I've heard just about every one of you complain about boom-boxes and cell-phones.

When high-cap mags were "banned," just about every legitimate gun owner remarked that as a "responsible citizen" he should be allowed to buy whatever he wants. However, every leftist countered that the "average citizen" didn't need the weapons of soldiers and police officers.

It was bunk then, and now. However, the perception made sense to voters.

Grin and bear it, fellas. I never lhear oud pipes on the interstate. And truth be told, neither do you. In fact, I doubt you hear a Peterbilt over your stereo and A/C. However, Harley is already addressing the issue of quieter pipes in the Enthusiast magazine. Legislation is coming.

And frankly, we have enough mall ninjas out there that cannot control the guns and knives they already have. How many times have you seen a newb wave a pistol around with his finger still inside the trigger guard?

[DonR101395]

The perception of the common man on "assault rifles" is what got us into the jam the last time.

Actually it was the screeching of Sarah Brady and people like yourself who were willing to compromise your rights away.
From what I've seen the average American could care less about the size of your magazine.

This is one of those issues where "with great power comes great responsibility."

This is one of those issues where it's either a right or a privilege.

Do you know what killed muscle cars? Idiots and crashes.

Try gas prices and OPEC.

Do you know what implements helmet laws? Idiots and crashes.

Do you know what causes decibel laws? Idiots and loud pipes.

Neither of which have anything to do with a guaranteed right.

You might think this is funny. However, I've heard just about every one of you complain about boom-boxes and cell-phones.

See above

When high-cap mags were "banned," just about every legitimate gun owner remarked that as a "responsible citizen" he should be allowed to buy whatever he wants. However, every leftist countered that the "average citizen" didn't need the weapons of soldiers and police officers.

First they were never banned, they were restricted for a period of time, but most of us had them.
Once again the screeching of a few coupled with capitulating gun owners were the cause.

It was bunk then, and now. However, the perception made sense to voters.

We never voted on a gun ban. Legislators voted on it. Do you think it would have passed were it given a general population vote?

Grin and bear it, fellas. I never lhear oud pipes on the interstate. And truth be told, neither do you. In fact, I doubt you hear a Peterbilt over your stereo and A/C. However, Harley is already addressing the issue of quieter pipes in the Enthusiast magazine. Legislation is coming.

You keep bring up things that aren't guaranteed rights and can be regulated as if they are the same as a Right guaranteed by law.

And frankly, we have enough mall ninjas out there that cannot control the guns and knives they already have. How many times have you seen a newb wave a pistol around with his finger still inside the trigger guard?

We also have enough old half drunk skeet shooters sweeping everybody in the club house trying to show their buddies how they shot a perfect round; would you like to regulate skeet shooting with a license and training program also?

[Creature]

Creature,
It is what it is!! If you are insulted, then consider that you may be in one of the groups outlined.

"It is what it is!!"?...what is that exactly? You lost me there.

Anyway, back to my point which you have not addressed: tell me why I should have to prove to you that I am reasonable when the consitution stipulates that I am reasonable until proven otherwise?

Why should I allow you to remove my rights in order that I must then prove to you that I am a reasonable and upright citizen before I am allowed the right to protect myself?

Why has the "burden of proof" in this argument shifted to the CCW'er? Where has the notion of innocent until proven guilty gone in all of this?

[Wildalaska]

Again, leave the issue of "rights" out of it..

Or are you saying that your only objection is the legal one?

WilddamnImagreatcookAlaska TM

[DonR101395]

Again, leave the issue of "rights" out of it..

Ok scratch #1. The others have nothing to do with legal.

Or are you saying that your only objection is the legal one?

66.66% of my reason were not of the dreaded "legal" reasoning.
I really hate it when legality gets in the way of a good argument