Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states

This is a discussion on Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by glockman10mm Has anyone here ever been around anyone, that makes them feel uncomfortable when that person handles firearms? With your children or ...

Page 2 of 36 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 532
Like Tree138Likes

Thread: Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states

  1. #16
    Senior Member Array Luis50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Has anyone here ever been around anyone, that makes them feel uncomfortable when that person handles firearms? With your children or spouse around?In my opinion, mandatory training should be required to carry among the public. I have seen too many clueless idiots carrying guns because it's " the thing" right now.

    We have all read about them right here on this forum, and occasionally, we talk to them on this forum.

    Do you really want your kids or wife in the same store, let alone the same isle as some of these morons? I don't.
    Yes I have. I happen to agree with your opinion but I have no stats to support it.
    Luis

    "Everybody's got a plan, 'til they get hit".

    Mike Tyson

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,514
    I believe it's RKBA, not RKBA/WT (With Training)...the permit to carry a firearm should be very easy/quick to get.
    That said, I have ALWAYS told people seeking a permit that getting one was just the beginning, and they needed to seek out a 1-2 day SD pistol course.
    Someone discovering a serious stalker, or fearing a rash of home break-in's shouldn't have to master a series of tests to get the 'tools' for SD/HD.OMOYMV
    Aceoky likes this.
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  4. #18
    Member Array WarMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    OH
    Posts
    364
    Carrying/owning a gun(s) is a HUGE responsibility so with that in mind the individual should take it upon him/herself to properly train to use that gun(s).

    Think of it this way if I was in a store/restaurant, etc that allowed CC and there was a person carrying that just recently bought a gun but never really learned how to operate that gun safely and he went to adjust the gun to sit down, bend down, etc and he accidentally pulled the trigger and shot himself or the floor. What would people say/think? I know I would be upset at him because it seems he doesn't know how to safely operate his gun.

    Us as responsible gun owners should take it upon ourselves whether required or not to properly learn how to safely operate/shoot/carry our guns that way we aren't at risk of hurting ourselves or anyone around us.

  5. #19
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,811
    Quote Originally Posted by glockman10mm View Post
    Has anyone here ever been around anyone, that makes them feel uncomfortable when that person handles firearms? With your children or spouse around?

    In my opinion, mandatory training should be required to carry among the public. I have seen too many clueless idiots carrying guns because it's " the thing" right now.

    We have all read about them right here on this forum, and occasionally, we talk to them on this forum.

    Do you really want your kids or wife in the same store, let alone the same isle as some of these morons? I don't.
    Yes, but how many of those folks have been cc'ing while they screwed up AND have hda training? Since most states have mandatory training the evidence you show is that training did not prevent these indicents. I can't think of too many stories from NH, VT, Alaska, and other places that do not require training.

    Also, a lot of the stories here have been at the range or in their house where no CCP is requuired..therefore they would not have had to undergo the mandatory training.

    Your post just highlites what I am trying to get at: there is no evidence that mandatory training states have less incidents of human error and human judgement by a CC'er while out in the public.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  6. #20
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Luis50 View Post
    Yes I have. I happen to agree with your opinion but I have no stats to support it.
    Well, if you advocate a law then would you not agree you need to prove it is necessary?
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  7. #21
    Senior Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,133
    Given the way statistics are calculated, I'm not sure that this is quantifiable enough to form a correlation. You're going to have to find out all of this information on a state by state breakdown, then find out all crimes committed by legal firearm owners/ccp holders where a gun was involved. Then you will have to quantify the population percentage in regards to the crime for each state.

    You will need to know all of these statistics PLUS the number of permit holders who committed the offense.
    1) murder
    2) assault
    3) reported AD/ND (discharges)
    4) criminal trespass with a firearm
    5) Robbery with firearm
    6) Home invasion with firearm
    7) Domestic disputes with firearm
    8) Kidnapping with firearm
    etc
    etc
    etc

    Then, you will have to find a way to correlate the data to legal permit holders. Because the number of permit holders who commit offenses is so low, it is possible... It's just way too much data to rummage through and calculate. Plus, I don't know if it is recorded accurately enough to truly make a connection.

    Link to FBI crime statistics. Good luck.
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...aw-enforcement

  8. #22
    VIP Member Array glockman10mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8,668
    Suntzu, I don't think the question as is is a fair one either way. All that can be learned are opinions based not on any facts from either side, but he said- she said approach.

    As far as a concer for needing a firearm for emergency purposes such as EPO/DVO situations, this could easily be factored in with provision that required training could be waived with a copy of the order for x amount of time while applying for the permit. And of course, use in the home is private and should of course, be exempt from any requirements for purchase.

    I wish, the 2nd Amendment was recognized as a national carry right for all, and was safe from the infringement or attack of liberal wacko's.
    But it's not. And for every person that is totally negligent, thru ignorance or carelessness, it gives them more ammo against us.
    This is just the nature of our reality. We should be asking ourselves how we can tighten up our ranks, and strengthen our credibility as gun owners and enthusiasts.
    It's sad that I or we have to justify anything. But that's where we are at, and some of our clueless and non proficient brethren blowing holes in the ceilings of Walmart, or having accidental discharges in public places are destroying us.
    DocT65 and Doghandler like this.
    Ignorance is a long way from stupid, but left unchecked, can get there real fast.

  9. #23
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Lotus222 View Post
    Given the way statistics are calculated, I'm not sure that this is quantifiable enough to form a correlation. You're going to have to find out all of this information on a state by state breakdown, then find out all crimes committed by legal firearm owners/ccp holders where a gun was involved. Then you will have to quantify the population percentage in regards to the crime for each state.

    You will need to know all of these statistics PLUS the number of permit holders who committed the offense.
    1) murder
    2) assault
    3) reported AD/ND (discharges)
    4) criminal trespass with a firearm
    5) Robbery with firearm
    6) Home invasion with firearm
    7) Domestic disputes with firearm
    8) Kidnapping with firearm
    etc
    etc
    etc

    Then, you will have to find a way to correlate the data to legal permit holders. Because the number of permit holders who commit offenses is so low, it is possible... It's just way too much data to rummage through and calculate. Plus, I don't know if it is recorded accurately enough to truly make a connection.

    Link to FBI crime statistics. Good luck.
    FBI ? Offenses Known to Law Enforcement
    Go back to the OP and don't try to complicate this OK. I was very specific about what data I was asking for from folks that say mandatory training will protect the CHL holder and the public.

    The only crimes I were talking about were for illegal use of a firearm which training suppose to prevent (brandishing, trespassing, shooting a dude in the back as he was running away from the guys house...bad shoots.)
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  10. #24
    Senior Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,133
    Looking back on some of these posts, I have to say that I definitely agree with glockman. I wouldn't be against any required firearms safety courses. I would want it to happen at a young age, though. I also wouldn't want it to have any bearing on an individuals right to arms. Just like they have done with drivers licenses requirements of a student to be enrolled in education - the same could be done with firearms safety. Only, the kids should be required to take and pass the course to proceed to X grade level. For the safety of ALL of the students in public education.

    Because that is what really matters. Basic firearm safety. We can't trust the schools to teach it. It should be done in a similar way that the hunting education courses are taught. I'd be fine with something like this.
    DocT65 likes this.

  11. #25
    Senior Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,133
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Go back to the OP and don't try to complicate this OK. I was very specific about what data I was asking for from folks that say mandatory training will protect the CHL holder and the public.

    The only crimes I were talking about were for illegal use of a firearm which training suppose to prevent (brandishing, trespassing, shooting a dude in the back as he was running away from the guys house...bad shoots.)
    No offense, but I didn't think I was over complicating anything. You are asking a complex question. I read your OP a couple times over before I replied. I still don't think it is quantifiable - even if you are only talking about brandishing, trespass, shooting someone in the back, etc. It is still going to be darn near impossible to gather that info and accurately form a correlation based on the way the FBI has gathered it's information.

  12. #26
    Senior Member Array Luis50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    Well, if you advocate a law then would you not agree you need to prove it is necessary?
    Yes, I would agree with that but, as Lotus222 has posted, the data would be almost impossible to collect. My guess would be that even if the data were available it would show that the numbers don't support a need for mandatory training laws. It still doesn't change my opinion.
    suntzu likes this.
    Luis

    "Everybody's got a plan, 'til they get hit".

    Mike Tyson

  13. #27
    Member Array Dougb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Minn
    Posts
    161
    You get evidence for the need for training every deer season. Look at the damage a bullet does. I don't care if you have no training and keep your weapon at home. The only casualties there are you and yours, but when you go out in public with no idea of what is proper or legal, then it becomes my problem. I believe in personal responsibility, but that doesn't help if you start shooting at the wrong time, wrong target, or just plain miss your intended target and hit me or mine.
    Ogre likes this.

  14. #28
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Lotus222 View Post
    No offense, but I didn't think I was over complicating anything. You are asking a complex question. I read your OP a couple times over before I replied. I still don't think it is quantifiable - even if you are only talking about brandishing, trespass, shooting someone in the back, etc. It is still going to be darn near impossible to gather that info and accurately form a correlation based on the way the FBI has gathered it's information.
    Then there is no data and folks are just "guessing" that mandatory training is benficial for public safety and personal safety of the individual. Folks have no idea or clue if that is true or not. I lived in NH growing up and when I retired. NH and adjeacent VT had very few if any incidents that any mandatory training would have prevented. I am just asking a straight forward question to a premise that others have postulated.

    Guess so far there is no proof or evidence that states like TX are better than NH, VT, Alaska, and all the other states that have no mandatory training.

    No evidence,no proof...then no law should be made to make it mandatory. By making it mandatory it incurs costs on the individual wanting to exercise a right. And they are beiing prohiited against it by laws that make mandatory trainig (which has no foundation in any stats people can come up with) required to carry.

    If folks think it is OK to pass laws without any proof it works or not and costs folks money then that is up to you (people in general). But until there is data on the subject it is an opinoon...not a fact that mandatory training is nescessary
    OD* likes this.
    Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”
    And I said, “Here am I. Send me!”

    Isaiah 6:8

  15. #29
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    982
    As a teacher, I can tell you how fast someone can forget what's covered in a class right after they take the test.

    I'll go out on a limb here. I would guess that anyone who gets their permit and does in fact carry with regularity will pay attention to the class material, and will seek out some additional training, or at least keep reading forums like this, to improve their understanding of the responsibility they've taken on. The many who get their permit with no real intent to carry, or who soon decide it's too much hassle, won't maintain or improve their knowledge. JMO.
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

  16. #30
    Senior Member Array sdprof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Near the Black Hills of SD
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    <snip>

    Guess so far there is no proof or evidence that states like TX are better than NH, VT, Alaska, and all the other states that have no mandatory training.

    No evidence,no proof...then no law should be made to make it mandatory. By making it mandatory it incurs costs on the individual wanting to exercise a right. And they are being prohibited against it by laws that make mandatory training (which has no foundation in any stats people can come up with) required to carry.

    <snip>
    There you have the crux of it. In some cases, the requirements for training, along with exorbitant fees for background checks and processing, the long period the permit may be held up before issuance, are ways by which the state is effectively discouraging people from being able to exercise their natural right.
    ~~~~~
    The only common sense gun legislation was written about 224 years ago.

    I carry always not because I go places trouble is likely, but because trouble has a habit of not staying in its assigned zone.

Page 2 of 36 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

powered by mybb advanced weapons

,
powered by mybb all movies
,
powered by mybb area of
,

powered by mybb best exercise

,
powered by mybb code search
,

powered by mybb criminal law

,

powered by mybb free full movies online

,

powered by mybb free online training course

,

powered by mybb law and order

,

powered by mybb legal

,

powered by mybb paintball stuff

,
powered by mybb reference
Click on a term to search for related topics.