Mandate Training Thread... Another go around...

[GoldenSaber]

Sorry for offending... wasn't intended. I'll take the dead horse elsewhere...

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[llongshot]

Get a grip on the training thing! I'm against mandatory training. I'm not against being able to show you can operate an automobile/motorcycle/airplane/weapon in a manner that is safe for the general public. If you're really interested in statistics look into how many accidents/assaults are committed on a yearly basis by NON permit holders.

[Majorlk]

Why was it necessary to start ANOTHER thread on the very same subject that is currently being posted on - and post the same information that you posted there????

Is there some compulsion to see one's self as the originator of a thread?

[varob]

I see the bitterness moved to this tread as well.

[TX-JB]

[Majorlk]

I see the bitterness moved to this tread as well.

It's not bitterness, it's wondering what the heck can be resolved with TWO identical threads going on at the same time - and both of them repeating all the same arguments (on both sides) of at least two other threads (on the very same subject) in the last month or so.

Common sense seems to disappear on Internet forums.

[retsupt99]

I'll hang around a while......I have extra if anyone wants some...

[Defensive Arms]

[archer51]

I'll hang around a while......I have extra if anyone wants some...

I'll take one with extra butter please.

[ccw9mm]

I agree this is a "get a grip" type issue.

I'm personally not in favor of mandatory anything when it comes to rights. As in, a mandatory journalism/psychology degree for anyone daring to purchase a typewriter, television or newspaper. Or, a mandatory 80hr Ayoob/LFI1 course for anyone daring to carry weapons amongst us. Or, whatever.

Seems to me that the potential of being strung by the toes in public and financially ruined for life provides plenty of incentive for people to seek training beyond the silly 8hr introductions to law and technique that most are exposed to. But, I believe that the relatively untrained nature of many (most?) concealed carriers combines with basic criminal statistics to show that even without a severe training regimen that carriers tend to be far, far more safe than the nay-sayers fear they might be.

In my case, every other year since 1993 I do some training seminar or two, I have been reading a dozen books each year in the subject area for the past 20yrs, I head to court every couple of years to monitor and evaluate a case or two (in the area of self-defense and lethal-force), and I participate in a couple of quality, on-line discussion forums such as this. Hard to say it'll be enough. Everyone's different. But by no means do I think this should be mandatory.

Popcorn's gone, by the way.

Sorry for offending... wasn't intended. I'll take the dead horse elsewhere...

GS, you did nothing wrong. The nay-sayers simply got snide. Suck it up and plow ahead, if it's something you feel strongly about. No crime in that, no matter what they say. Folks don't need to post, if all they can post is "snide."

[Bumper]

GS, you did nothing wrong. The nay-sayers simply got snide. Suck it up and plow ahead, if it's something you feel strongly about. No crime in that, no matter what they say. Folks don't need to post, if all they can post is "snide."

I agree and am pretty disappointed how some responded to this thread. The better way to have handled it was to either report it to us so it could have been closed or merged and the OP referred to the other thread for responses and comments.

This thread is closed pending removal....