concealed carry permits

[Alerion]

thank god i live in indiana!! mail in my $25 the state does a background check and my CCW comes in the mail good for 4 years!! they are actually talking about a lifetime carry permit that would run $125.

Actually the lifetime permit became law earlier this year. I'm thinking it was on July First. BTW if you already have a valid (4 year) permit when you apply for your lifetime permit the lifetime permit is cheaper, I think it's $100 total.

I'm not a fan of requiring permits in the first place but if I have to live somewhere that requires them I'm glad that it's the first state in the country to offer a lifetime permit!

Tom

[Trip20]

My opinion is based on the number of people out there that will get a ccw and have NO experience with firearms... ...They're a threat to themselves and other innocents.

Ok. Now, provide proof of this being an issue whereby these untrained gun-toting masses are a danger to innocents.

I mean, there's gotta be proof of this happening, right? And don't just toss me one article from 1988 -- I mean it’s definitely happening at a frequency that should alarm us all, right? Otherwise this would be much ado about nothing; kind of an irrational fear about a non-existent peril and based on the same you'd like to see us further regulated. Nice.

I repeatedly ask for proof of this happening and no one is able to produce. Not that one article would change a damn thing, but I at least want to see the effort.

The rest (i.e., anecdotal malarkey about buddies who buy guns every month but never shoot them) is irrelevant.

[gvf]

One about "bear arms": there are various opinions about the historical use in the 2nd - because there are a lot of instances where it had a military meaning; but others where the current meaning (a civilian owning and using weapons) was also meant.

Two - I can't help but think if there were that many CCWs who had no training or minimal knowledge of guns, we would see that played out in real situations, innocents shot, guns taken away by BG and shooting the CCW etc. I never do.

[dave421]

Ok. Now, provide proof of this being an issue whereby these untrained gun-toting masses are a danger to innocents.

I mean, there's gotta be proof of this happening, right? And don't just toss me one article from 1988 -- I mean it’s definitely happening at a frequency that should alarm us all, right? Otherwise this would be much ado about nothing; kind of an irrational fear about a non-existent peril and based on the same you'd like to see us further regulated. Nice.

I repeatedly ask for proof of this happening and no one is able to produce. Not that one article would change a damn thing, but I at least want to see the effort.

The rest (i.e., anecdotal malarkey about buddies who buy guns every month but never shoot them) is irrelevant.

Are you serious? You HONESTLY think that there aren't single mothers, college students, elderly, and even normal people out there that have a ccw & a gun because of where they live, past experiences, or just so that they'll feel safer? I don't recall saying anywhere that there were masses or majority or any specific number. The fact is that you KNOW it happens. If you want news articles about this, then you find them. I don't need to. My own experiences show me that it happens. As for being a danger to innocents, why does everyone on this forum and pretty much anyone that is a responsible gun owner talk about gun safety? Danger to yourself and others. If I've had no training, then how am I going to know the 4 rules of gun safety? I've definitly never had anyone tell me whenever I bought a gun. I've seen them on gun forums and in ranges yet can't recall a single gun store that had them posted prominently.

People need to understand that "danger" is a situation, not an event. An inexperienced driver with no training is dangerous. Joe Shmoe that saw someone juggling fire in Hawaii and decides to try it without any experience or training is dangerous. A gunowner that has no experience or training, is dangerous. Do you honestly feel that someone doesn't need to train with a gun, test a gun, or be familiar with it in anyway in order to be safe? If I leave my gun out in the open and my 22 year old female roommate who has no gun experience (by her choice, not mine) is going to know how to handle it properly, fire it properly, and be safe with it? If so, I'd like some of whatever you're smoking.

As for your proof of people being harmed with their own guns, read a paper occasionally. It's not unknown for a homeowner to be shot or held hostage with their own gun(s) either because they were easily accessible or didn't know proper handling.

[Trip20]

The fact is that you KNOW it happens.

Is that really all you've got?

Checkmate.

[dave421]

Checkmate what? Are you that ignorant that you think all gun owners are responsible? Maybe I should move to your world.

Tell you what though, you guys are all right though and I'm wrong. All gun owners are responsible. Everyone is born with the knowledge of firearm safety. Guns should be given to every child when they leave the hospital after birth. The 2nd amendment says we all have the right to arms so I'm going to make sure that everyone has them. I think I'll start at the prison down the road. I'll give one to everyone being set free at gift (after all, it does say the right won't be infringed, right?). The guy I work with that has brain damage will get one too. Then I'll work on children next, a gun for every infant. I'll be glad to know that they all know how to use a gun and I won't need to remind them to practice because of course they would all do that anyway. Oops, can't forget the people on welfare, they need a gun too. I guess the ranges give them free ammo and range time, right?

[Trip20]

dave421 - I've not purported "all gun owners are responsible," nor have I disagreed with the point that we have fellow citizens carrying who have little training beyond what's currently mandated if any training is mandated at all.

So lets set that all aside. We agree on those items, which is why I've not discussed them up until this point.

What you've put forth is the following among other similar statements. Statements that makes a claim of those folks who fall in the above category. I'll bold the claim below:

My opinion is based on the number of people out there that will get a ccw and have NO experience with firearms... ...They're a threat to themselves and other innocents.

I've asked for proof of these untrained folks being a threat to themselves and other innocents (i.e., permit holders shooting innocent people) to a degree or frequency that should alarm us all. I’m not looking for one obscure case. I’m looking for definitive proof that there is truly a problem akin to what you fear.

Instead of producing any evidence, you have both told me that I "KNOW" it happens (mmmkay), and you've also stated you “don’t need to” find evidence. That’s where you’re wrong.

The real issue is this: I want proof because what you want to do is further restrict a Right based what amounts to nothing so far (other than what it appears you feel is happening). Before you or any lawmaker should be allowed to restrict any Right of ours, there better be a damned heaping pile of evidence to support your position. Scratch that. There’d better be an irrefutable heaping pile of evidence. Capice?

[Capt. Charlie]

There's good subject matter here. Let's not ruin it by making it too personal, OK?

[dave421]

The proof is in the statements that can be found throughout this forum. Why does everyone here talk about the safety rules? Is it to keep people from throwing their gun in a river and expecting it to be perfectly normal? I would assume, it's for safety. If someone has no firearms knowledge or training, how do they know safe firearms handling? If they don't know safe firearms handling, how can they be a safe firearm owner? If they aren't a safe firearm owner, how can they not present a dangerous situation to themselves and others around them? Capice?

Further, as I explained above, there would be no additional restrictions on firearms owners. There would really not be any additional restrictions on ccw holders. The costs would pretty much be the same. The only difference, as I stated earlier, is that they would make one payment rather than 3+ for their license and the license training would be more uniform throughout the state. I've made no claims about other states whatsoever. I *HAVE* made claims about where I live. As to other states, would you prefer that everyone KNOWS safe firearm handling, the laws pertaining to ccw and self defense, and how their firearm handles or would you prefer that the people out there without those things continue in an ignorant state of being? What I'm talking about would change that. I'm not for a $1000 fee throughout the U.S. (or even a $30 fee). However, if training is mandatory and uniform then it's one more thing that will reinforce the image of gunowners as responsible people (something that is severely lacking in the U.S.) and inspire more confidence in the sheeple out there (you know, the ones that freak out when I walk in a store carrying openly) that gunowners are responsible and knowledgeable rather than "gun freaks" and "dangerous".

And no, I don't "need" to find evidence. I'm not your congressman. I'm not a member of a committee looking at gun rights. I'm a fellow citizen that is stating his opinion based upon his experiences and facts that are well known. You may take a different view on those facts and that's completely acceptable. But DON'T tell me that I'm not entitled to my opinions without proving something to you. I don't know ANYONE on this forum. Therefore, I don't care whether people here agree with me or not. Last time I checked, I lived in the U.S. and am entitled to my beliefs regardless of what they are.

It seems to me that you're one of the people that fit into the extremes. I see the "sheeple" out there that think all guns are evil and they should all be banned and anyone that carries a gun or disagrees with them is an extremist, criminal, or needs to be committed. And then I see the gun owners that tout the 2nd, interpret it however they want, and think they should be allowed to own anything they want to since it's every American's right to own a rocket launcher for "protection" and anyone that says anything contrary is trying to take away their rights. This isn't an insult, it's simply an observation and as I stated earlier, everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. Personally, I'm in the middle. I feel I deserve the right to own guns for my protection, hunting, or enjoyment but I don't think people need a selectable fire MP5 for "protection" and they should be able to go to a bar and throw a few back with their 1911 on their hip.

If you disagree with me, that's fine. However, it doesn't seem like you do. You're willing to accept the very basis of my argument, just not my conclusion. So I'll make you a deal. You provide me with "definitive proof" that ignorant gunowners are perfectly safe and I'll be happy to show you some news stories of victims harmed with their own firearms or harming an innocent.


*edit* actually here's a situation where everything went right except

She then ran to the living room and found a masked Carson fighting with Jenkins on the floor. She fired several times, apparently grazing her boyfriend in the back and hitting Carson once in the back.

This girl did everything right but the question remains whether additional training would have resulted in several shots in the perp and no grazing of the boyfriend. And no, I didn't search for the story (it's on XDTalk for a while now) and I am NOT questioning her actions. Article can be found here: http://dispatch.com/news-story.php?s...214-A1-02.html

[Daves-got-guns]

im sorry again, but i was using the term gun nut loosely, as i am not always talking in a serious manner, and i want to keep things friendly. I have nothing against anybody carrying concealed carry, really i would like to see more of it! more armed populas, less crime is the typical rule of thumb. But their are people who go with the bare minimum of what they need to do to get a hold of a gun, and i think that is wrong. I think everybody who has a gun for concealed carry should be able to be able to do basic stuff with it, like hit paper at certain ranges, prove they're competence in safety and maybe more requirements. I know alot of people stop attacks, or incidents without firing a single shot, but when the time comes its nice to know its not some guy who barely knows witch end to point, and they just pull the trigger. Im not trying to be on the liberal side of well what if people get into shootouts, and what if this or that. Im not concerned with the general amount of people who carry, and are serious about it but some idiots DO get by with little to no training, and its just stupid. I can cop as much of a attitude as i want, cause John, i must have said something that irratated you and i dont care, you are very high strung about this and i try to keep it loose. If you want to cut up every little word i say then go for it, its not going to change my opinions. If you want to, idk lower the age of people who can carry then go for that too, or if you think that we should be able to carry in a school zone then more power to you. The only real reason i can see the government not wanting guns in there is they try to make it some sort of "utopia" and you dont need iron, knife or your fists. Truth was in my school, witch i havent been to in oh idk 3-4 years that it was awhole hell ofa lot more dangerous in there then it was almost anywhere i would usually travel, and our "security guards" that i wouldn't trust my dogs life with didn't even pack pepper spray and they were NEVER around when things got bad, so after awhile they had a sheriff there part time.

[Daves-got-guns]

oh and the case i spoke of concerning the man with the .357 was not a nd, but he was in a self defense, fired and missed went thru walls. My fault on that one because i forgot to throw it in there.

Sorry for not breaking things up when i talk, i just have ALOT on my mind, not just about this but life in general and when i start speaking/typing i just goto town with whats on my mind.

Also its cool that people can debate, or pick about what ever i say but please don't be rude, i'd love to hear everybodys side, but im tired of everybody being hostile towards me, its b/s. Were here to learn, discuss and post our thoughts, and opinions! sorry to tell anybody this or that, but its how i feel things should be, and there is sooo much b/s against our gun rights in most of the states as it is, but thats how things turn out sometimes.

I know not all liberals are anti-gun owning flower picking "ijetts" but the majority of them are. John kerry is the biggest one i can think of who acts like hes here for guns in front of the camera, but when its conveinent to him hell support the same general idea as almost all dems and that is to get rid of guns. I know my states pretty good on gun laws, and we're a dem state, but i guess its a exception to the rule.

[stiffnecked]

http://www.dps.state.ak.us/PermitsLi...achp/index.asp

Not one single incident of an untrained concealed carry person gunning down innocent bystanders. Maybe Alaskans are just more sane than the rest of you guys.

[sanson]

I had a conceal permit when down in south fl, now at the top of the state where people are nicer I let the permit expire. may be sorry someday when permits are unavailable

[dave421]

Not one single incident of an untrained concealed carry person gunning down innocent bystanders. Maybe Alaskans are just more sane than the rest of you guys.

And? I guess I missed where I said that "untrained concealed carry person gunning down innocent bystanders" was an issue. And I would be somewhat surprised if any state's webpage for ccw mentioned such a thing.

[Danzig]

You are asking the wrong question. The question should not be "Should training be mandatory before receiving a ccw?" Rather the question should be "Do we give in to the idea that the state has any right to "permit" or not our carrying of concealed firearms?" I say no and therefore I will never go on my knees before the government begging their "permission" to carry my weapons concealed. I either will do so, or I won't. A permit is not needed in a free country.

[stiffnecked]

All I can add to this is that is some States in this country, freedom lives.

[Shamus]

First I'll apologize for not reading more than the first two pages in this thread so If I'm missing something already said then chalk me up as impatient.

In Ohio I was happy to see the law change so I could complete the training (mandatory) and receive a permit a couple years ago.
Training focused on firearm safety and legal consequences should you produce and discharge your firearm. Damn scary stuff for sure.

The first rule as taught was to run away if possible. Second is to be a good witness for the prosecution and third is to hit what you are aiming at. In other words, as a last resort, shoot, and then only to protect your loved ones and/or yourself.

We are not Police nor should we feel it is our responsibility to act like them. We may be better shots and have the element of surprise as an average citizen with a concealed firearm, possibly, but we all need to understand what will happen after the fact. That's the scary part.

I believe most of those that read gun Forms have read scenario about some situation, real or imagined, where shooting someone is the end result. Few have taken the time to understand what will happen when one round leaves your barrel. If you choose to shoot the bad guy you may well be a hero, you will most likely be sued even if the Grand Jury does not indict you. Lastly, if you wing an innocent bystander I hope you have a stash of cash someplace cause your gonna need it.

Concealed carry is a huge responsibility and can be a life altering experience if you do the wrong thing. Anyone that believes otherwise isn’t seeing the whole picture.

Just my ol 2¢

[dave421]

I say no and therefore I will never go on my knees before the government begging their "permission" to carry my weapons concealed. I either will do so, or I won't. A permit is not needed in a free country.

I'm sorry that that is your attitude. Unfortunately (imho), that type of attitude is a more of a problem than a solution. Every person that carries concealed without a permit (i.e. ILLEGALLY) is just one more person to be used as an example of the antis. If such a person were to get caught, they would be kissing their "right" to buy any firearms in the future goodbye. That's not something the gun owners of this country can afford to lose (another gun owner). I truly hope that is taken into consideration by anyone that decides to carry illegally. There's already enough people out there that believe gunowner = criminal / bad person and we don't need to help them out by giving them another example.

[Danzig]

Unfortunately Dave, attitudes like yours only serve to legitimize "their" laws, rules, and regulations. As for me....I choose freedom.

[Capt. Charlie]

I say no and therefore I will never go on my knees before the government begging their "permission" to carry my weapons concealed. I either will do so, or I won't. A permit is not needed in a free country.

I can relate to your feelings, Danzig, and I thank you for your efforts to keep this Country free, but simply ignoring laws you disagree with is not the way to do so. Don't like the laws? Work to get them changed. It takes time and effort, but it does work.

Taking your route leads only to anarchy, chaos, and the eventual downfall of a great Country and the loss of all you've fought for.

As for us here at TFL, we don't advocate illegal activity, and we'll continue working toward preserving the Bill of Rights the right way..... through legal channels.

Closed.