Mandatory traing states for CHL vs non training states

[Hopyard]

In SCUBA training, they teach you about complicated health hazards associated with diving. They teach you complicated physical skills you need to manage the risks and dive safely. I can teach anyone gun safety with four simple rules. I can teach anyone to safely shoot a firearm in just a few minutes, and that's certainly more hands on training than you'll get at any CHL training class.

Why is it that people on Internet forums are so bad at making good analogies?

Yes, you can teach anyone to safely handle a gun quickly, but what about the teaching the laws of self defense; the gun laws of your state; the need to deescalate a confrontation and some techniques to do so. What about
all the stuff folks need to know at least think about before traveling interstate, or attempting to
board an air-line.

There is plenty to be taught. Now, I'm not suggesting stretching anything into a two week course,
but seriously, 10-15 hours is not unreasonable before allowing someone to go armed outside
the home.

If everyone who got a license without training would come here and spend hours a day
reading scenarios and discussions, then yes--- no training needed. But we see it all the time, the guy
with a license who hasn't a clue what the law on use of deadly force is within his own state.
That is can be fixed with minimum training requirements.

I like the old style- Hunter Safety courses too. I recall taking one when I was about 14, which was a very
long long time ago. Got it done at Boy Scout camp. I don't hunt, but there are a few things
I learned that still are valuable pieces of knowledge.

I don't much care what system we use, and if one state wants a private system and another a DPS
administered system, and third one self-training with a supervised written test, that's fine with me.
If the gun industry wants to develop some sort of "C-card" program that would be fine with me too.

But I do continue to feel strongly that the training is very much for ones own protection, just as with
the C-card; you don't want to be the one that drowns. With gun training, it is also for your protection.
You don't want to be the one in legal hot water for something you could have been warned about.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[dldeuce]

See deuce now you are sounding like the "no regulations" crowd. Felons should have guns. Etc. What I proposed had no limitation other than 30 or so minutes of time. Time doing what you said you could do on about that.

I am sounding like someone who believes in freedom and our Constitution that limits the government to a republic, not a mob rule tyranny. You are sounding like the leftist communists that want to destroy our republic and strip us of all our rights one common sense regulation at a time.

I never said felons should have guns. That's a strawman argument. You guys are increasingly collapsing to one fallacy after another. Felons are a tiny portion of the whole population, and there is long standing precedence to limit their rights based upon strong and compelling societal interests. What you have proposed is to wholesale strip every citizen of their rights with no compelling interest, no thought to tailoring your ban to the least restrictive means possible, and no evidence at all that your wholesale ban on everyone's 2nd Amendment right is necessary at all.

I never said you fail you don't get a gun.

Whether you're willing to admit it or not, you are necessarily advocating the elimination of the 2nd Amendment that guarantees the protection of our right. No card, no gun. It's as simple as that. We haven't gotten too deep into the card part yet either, because just like in Maryland, mandatory licensing for every gun owner goes right along with mandatory training. You're on a slippery slope, and the only thing that keeps you from sliding all the way to the bottom is the whim of the majority.

[Ogre]

Deuce, I never said "no card no gun" I said buy a gun get a 30 or so minute training on its safe use. NOWHERE did I prohibit buying a gun. Do you know how to operate and clean (safely on both counts) EVERY gun made? I know several gun owners that could benefit from some common KNOWLEDGE of their firearm that won't get any because "I'm a grown man, I don't need any training" same mentality that won't read instructions.

To get a CONCEALED carry permit perhaps one SHOULD get training in the laws etc. for the protection of the populace but nothing should prevent anyone from being able to pass such tests. Do you honestly want untrained individuals to have a gun? I do know people who I don't want to be around when they are armed, yet they CAN be and some are.


Posted from the outer reaches of the universe via my Star Fleet communicator! Live long & prosper.

[9MMare]

Since I guess "I" may fall into the bold category, allow me again to try to be more clear. A judge has set the sentence, most times a jury was involved, IF one has served their time and are released "to be in public" then they SHOULD be safe enough to not have ANY RIGHTS taken from them "forever" . IF not then they should never be released anyway.

Agreed, certainly the same with voting.

And it seems a little hypocritical when I hear people here say, " laws dont stop criminals, criminals wont obey the laws and they'll just get guns anyway,' and then not recognize that if the released felon has not 'changed their ways,' they will still just go out and get a gun.

[dldeuce]

Deuce, I never said "no card no gun" I said buy a gun get a 30 or so minute training on its safe use. NOWHERE did I prohibit buying a gun.

You said:

Not so much mandatory training for CCW, but a free class (required) before purchase of a firearm(from a store) on SAFETY.

I don't want your free class. Do I get to buy a gun without taking your free class?

[dldeuce]

Yes, you can teach anyone to safely handle a gun quickly, but what about the teaching the laws of self defense; the gun laws of your state; the need to deescalate a confrontation and some techniques to do so. What about
all the stuff folks need to know at least think about before traveling interstate, or attempting to
board an air-line.

Now's your chance once again, Hopyard. Stop evading my rebuttal over and over and over, and I'll give it to you one more time. Here it is. I expect a response this time.

Everything you just said applies to every gun owner. Why just CHL? Why not mandate training for every gun owner in America?

When you finally admit that your argument applies to every gun owner in the country we can continue with our conversation.

[Jemsaal]

I don't want your free class. Do I get to buy a gun without taking your free class?

How is this a violation of the 2nd amendment? There have ALWAYS been qualifications as such. The first being, you must be a citizen. The second being, you must be of a certain age.

Or do you think a Citizen of the US that's five years old should be able to walk into a gun store and by a handgun? If not, then you believe in restrictions on the 2A. All the rest, is simply what restrictions we think are or are not reasonable.

[Aceoky]

THE COTUS does not grant full rights to Minor children- It is the LAW of the USA so yes it applies to legal citizens....No it does not apply to Iranians

[dldeuce]

How is this a violation of the 2nd amendment?

Because what no one wants to admit is that before you can mandate training, you have to ban every citizen in the country from having firearms. Whether it's keep or bear it doesn't matter. No card, no gun.

There have ALWAYS been qualifications as such.

Show me any other fundamental right specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights where there is a law that equivalently says no card, no gun.

[dldeuce]

THE COTUS does not grant full rights to Minor children

SCOTUS nor the government grant rights to anyone. They don't have any such power. They only have the power to protect our rights.

That's what is fundamentally wrong with the mandatory training scheme. First the government has to deny our fundamental right altogether. The government has to usurp that power when the Constitution specifically denies that to both the state and federal governments. Once they do that, we are then slaves to the government. As our master, the government would grant privileges and permissions.

Here's your card.

[3dfxMM]

How is this a violation of the 2nd amendment? There have ALWAYS been qualifications as such. The first being, you must be a citizen. The second being, you must be of a certain age.

Or do you think a Citizen of the US that's five years old should be able to walk into a gun store and by a handgun? If not, then you believe in restrictions on the 2A. All the rest, is simply what restrictions we think are or are not reasonable.

You do not have to be a citizen to buy a gun.

[OldVet]

What was the OP again?

[suntzu]

What was the OP again?

Just let them roll with it LOL

[OldVet]

SCOTUS nor the government grant rights to anyone. They don't have any such power. They only have the power to protect our rights.

I believe the Congress, "our government," has added to and changed the amendments to the Bill of Rights on several occasions--thus the title "amendments."

[DPro.40]

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

This. I say if your comfortable around firearms then leave us alone. If your not then its up to the individual to take the course. Just let me know in advance if your not comfortable so I can sit at the table with those that are.