Defensive Carry banner

Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states

35K views 531 replies 59 participants last post by  Aceoky 
#1 · (Edited)
OK,

I see a lot of folks saying that mandatory training and mandatory qualification is needed and should be required for a CHL. They state that it is for the protection of the public at large and for the protection of the person carrying the gun.

Please, somebody show me stats, hard evidence, that mandatory training states are better than non mandatory training states as far as
1. The wrongful use of a firearm by CHL/CCP holder
2. Inicidents of arrests for trespassing by CHL/CCP holders
3. Errant shots fired by CHL/CCP holders
4. Illegel use of a fireamr by CHL/CCP holders EDIT:such as brandishing, bad shoots, ects....NOT crimes committed malichievously)

Feel free to throw in other data.

I understand that it may be the opinion of folks that training should be mandatory or not. But...if that is your opinion and you think it should be law then I would hope that you guys have the data to prove it. I for oone do not like laws neing made with anecdotal evidence or one or two spectacular events. That is like pushing through the AWB because of very isolted cases of misues of madman using those weapons.

Laws should be made to protect the public and their should be data to back it up.

OK...ball is in your court.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Facts? We don't need no steenkin' facts!

Oh, wait, it's the antis that don't need facts.

I think your request will be very hard to fill, as there are few sources of any such data. Texas puts out a report on crimes and does indicated what portion are committed by CHL holders - as you would expect, they are at a lower rate than the general populace.

Add to that the fact that permit holders don't all carry, or carry all the time, and the proportion of active carry may vary widely by locale.

All we might really have to go on are anecdotal reports and the few news reports of bad behavior. Which, by the way, are few and far between.

I know of no incidents in South Dakota, a no training required state.
 
#8 ·
Facts? We don't need no steenkin' facts!

Oh, wait, it's the antis that don't need facts.

I think your request will be very hard to fill, as there are few sources of any such data. Texas puts out a report on crimes and does indicated what portion are committed by CHL holders - as you would expect, they are at a lower rate than the general populace.

Add to that the fact that permit holders don't all carry, or carry all the time, and the proportion of active carry may vary widely by locale.

All we might really have to go on are anecdotal reports and the few news reports of bad behavior. Which, by the way, are few and far between.

I know of no incidents in South Dakota, a no training required state.
This thread is not about anti's..it is about the attitude and opinions of folks on this forum that have professed that mandatory training should be a requirement. I just want them to put facts on the table since they advocate it should be law. You don't make law based on "I feel this is the right thing to do". You make law based on facts and how it will afffect public safety and blah blah blah.
It is perfectly OK to say IMO....but when you advocate it should be a requirement then they need to pur the proof up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RickyD
#5 ·
I personally think one should get training, but I don't think that it should be a requirement. I don't have any stats either way. Right now, I am scheduled to take my CPL class, but I would like to carry my gun until that class occurs. However, because of the laws here in Michigan, and the now open carry law in my City, my guns sit in a locked safe.
 
#7 ·
I personally think one should get training, but I don't think that it should be a requirement.

I agree with this, I think that not getting at least basic safe gun handling training is stupid, but I don't think that it should be required
 
  • Like
Reactions: RichB70 and gregnsc
#6 ·
I live in a state that does not require trianing to carry. When I see someone post a comment that trianing should be required I automatically make the assumption that they had zero experience with firearms before they started carrying. If a person has many years experience and good trianing by their parents and uncles and grandfathers and friends parents then why should they be required to attend trianing. The last class I attended (it was this month), was totally worthless, a waste of time and money. If a person does not know how to handle a firearm and they intend to handle a firearm they should act responsible and get so trianing. The trianing should not have to be conducted in a formal class setting in order to be valid trianing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jackster
#9 ·
Training is not required in GA, but like many others I personally think it is a good idea. I am actually taking a class this weekend and plan to take additional classes in the future. With this said, I am training because I think it is wise. I do not think it should be up to anyone else (insert government) to tell me it is necessary. I agree with Suntzu that there should be hard evidence and legitimate research before passing a law.
 
#10 ·
I haven't seen any statistics dealing with illegal or negligent activity by those allowed to carry a firearm, concealed or open. I wouldn't have any ideas where to even find them.

I believe that the 2nd Amendment should be the only permission that a person needs but if training is required it should be classes on the state's laws on concealed carry & firearms in general as well as safely handling a firearm. In those classes actual hands-on training should be strongly urged & offered at low cost. Proficiency in shooting safely & being able to hit your target should be stressed but not mandated by law.
 
#63 ·
Let me get this right. You think people should be allowed to carry a firearm on their person, with the sole purpose of possibly shooting and killing someone in self defense, yet they should not have to demonstrate their ability to safely handle a firearm, hit targets with reasonable accuracy, or demonstrate an understanding of laws and concerns surrounding self defense?

The Second Amendment does grant the right to keep and bear arms, but there are reasonable concerns that need to be addressed to balance personal safety and the safety of others. Free speech and assembly are guaranteed by the Constitution too, but there are still reasonable restrictions on those rights; you aren't free to verbally threaten people, you aren't free to write slanderous comments about people, and you have to get permits to conduct demonstrations. The same can, does, and should apply to the Second Amendment to prevent an uneducated and unskilled firearm owner from carrying in public. Rights have responsibilities attached to them and, unfortunately, Americans, as a whole, are extremely irresponsible and we have demonstrated that time and time again throughout history.
 
#11 ·
Nice to have--firearm proficiency training, but not mandatory.
Should have--training and familiarity with CC and lethal force laws. You really need to know what the reprecussions of your actions are.

I don't feel like doing a lot of research that you can do, but, althought the outcome has not been finalized, there is the Zimmerman case as well as the guy who shot into the car with the loud music, both "questionable" incidents of SD shootings. There are others, but in agreeing with you, for every one incident, there are millions of daily "non-"incidents. You'll never seen a prime-time media report on the million plus Florida CWFL holders who obeyed the law and had no significant incidents.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diver1102
#12 ·
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.
 
#16 ·
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.
 
#15 ·
I believe in personal responsibility. WA is a shall issue state (as I think all should be). I would encourage individuals to get training. The administration is trying to inject mental issues into the general public, let alone firearms owners. The pshchiatry bs has been driven by CIA money. The truth is they want everybody on ssri inhibitors.
 
#17 ·
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aceoky
#18 ·
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.
 
#42 ·
What does this have to do with mandatory training? Do you think they actually give adequate basic gun safety training for CHLs? This brings to mind the viral video of the joe pro cop gun trainer who shot himself in the foot while giving a lecture on gun safety. No amount of training is going to fix stupid. The point in the OP is what impact is the training having? What evidence is there to demonstrate that this training is necessary and that it is solving the problem nanny state is trying to fix?
 
#21 ·
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/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement
 
#23 ·
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.)
 
#22 ·
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.
 
#24 ·
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DocT65
#27 ·
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ogre
#37 ·
Well that's certainly the way I feel about a large number of drivers on the road...training is required but the responsibility level is often lacking. As is good judgement. There's nothing to 'save' me from that and I'm in much more danger every single day.

And yes...another 'car' analogy. Sorry but it does add relevant perspective.

And I dont see or hear people trying to limit cars or drivers or discussing alot of fear when venturing out on the roads. Despite the accidents & deaths we see and hear about every day.
 
#29 ·
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.
 
#32 ·
You're not going to get any evidence because the underlying premise behind the nanny state mandate is that people are irresponsible, stupid, immoral, incompetent morons. You take a group of several hundred thousand people, who by definition have not committed a crime for years or even so much as had an outstanding student loan. Now, you let them put a gun in their pocket and go about their lives. The premise behind the mandate is that now, all of the sudden, because of the gun, you're going to have a big crime problem that nanny state needs to fix. It's just not true. Never was true. Even if there are a few idiot morons, nanny state isn't going to fix them with this silly mandated training.
 
#34 ·
I for one, disagree with the entire notion of there being a difference between concealed carry and open carry. I can not find anywhere in the Constitution where there is language to support any type of restriction, training or registration on either.
 
#38 ·
I try to stay away from the driving analogies but since it was brought up:how many states require you to do a drivers test or any other test when you have to renew your liscense? How many states now or in the future want you to "re-qualify" when you have to renew your CHL/CCP...
 
#75 ·
I try to stay away from the driving analogies but since it was brought up:how many states require you to do a drivers test or any other test when you have to renew your license? How many states now or in the future want you to "re-qualify" when you have to renew your CHL/CCP...
I don't know about nowadays, but there was a time I was moving every year, and every state wanted at least
a written test and some wanted a driver's test. It got to be a big nuisance. I even had to re-take a written
test in one state I'd had a license in, moved from, then moved back to 2 years later.
 
#39 ·
Yeah, I agree that since there is no statistical evidence to back up the reasoning behind a required course to carry a gun, it shouldn't be law. Then again, I think it's up to the state to decide whether they want their citizens formally educated in weaponry. ...So long as it doesn't infringe on the 2A. ...And now we're back to full circle on what constitutes infringing on the second amendment.

IMO, I'd like to see nation-wide constitutional carry. If the state wants to educate, they should educate everyone.
 
#40 ·
I am sitting here picturing Hopyard feverishly googling away looking for stats to support mandatory training:danceban:
j/k Hop......join the fun:wave:
 
  • Like
Reactions: ksholder
#46 ·
I am wondering if you are able to find any evidence that states that don't require training fair as well as states that do. Or are you guessing they do?

If the "facts" aren't readily available, and I am sure they are not. Everyone is simply guessing on both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ogre
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top