More stringent Qualification for Permits - Page 2

More stringent Qualification for Permits

This is a discussion on More stringent Qualification for Permits within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; You really wanna know what's scary? Look how many people can get a driver's license! I've seen quite a lot of them on the same ...

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 130

Thread: More stringent Qualification for Permits

  1. #16
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    You really wanna know what's scary? Look how many people can get a driver's license! I've seen quite a lot of them on the same roads as me, and quite frankly, reckless drivers and vehicles kill more people than anything else I know other than diseases here in the US. Think about that for a few minutes. New drivers take a written or oral exam, then the eye exam. Unless you are changing to a different endorsement, you never have to take another test...even if you move to a different state so far as I know. I haven't taken a driver's test in some 29 years or more...just go every four years, pay them, do the eye exam, and I'm out of there with a new one good for another four years! I let my commercial license expire six years after I moved from Kansas to Arkansas simply because they raised the fees, and I didn't need it. I haven't taken a test for DL since I got my very first matter of fact!
    Like the responses above, I appreciate and share your concern, but the last thing that I ever want is more regulation.
    Just reserve a spot for me on this boat.


  2. #17
    Senior Member Array rmodel65's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    934
    training is a back door ban for the poor not to be able to exercise a right.....

    GA has no training.....and the permit is good in the OP's state
    S&W M&P40/M&P9c OC rigs
    S&W 640-1 or Sig P238 as a CC rig
    proud www.georgiacarry.org member
    Second Amendment Foundation Life member

  3. #18
    Member Array jackg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    97

    Proactive

    All of us should be in a pro-active safety mode anytime we're dealing with firearms.
    My opinion is no government is good government. This gentleman has an enormous amount of pride and self sustainability. The family should sit down and decide who has the best relationship him then design a plan that over a reasonable amount of time
    SEMPER FI
    Life member: DAV
    Life member: USMC
    Life member: MOPH
    Member: NRA
    Life member: VVA

  4. #19
    Ex Member Array maddyfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    nKy.
    Posts
    450
    A friend of mine disagrees and compares CCW licenses to drivers licenses. You have to take a test, drive a course and pay a fee for a drivers license.
    What he fails to see is that driving a car is not a right at all. Driving can and should be regulated (and IMO should be much, much more heavily regulated).

    Carrying a weapon/self defense is a human right and should not be regulated by something as insignifcant as a government.

  5. #20
    Senior Member Array unloved's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Southeastern Pennsylvania
    Posts
    568
    Quote Originally Posted by QKShooter View Post
    Pennsylvania is "Shall Issue" with no strings attached. AKA No written, oral, or range testing required.
    Our incident rate of accidental shooting or negligent discharge is the same or lower than every other State...with PA having one of the highest percentages of citizens with licenses to carry per the total state population in the U.S.
    Just quoting this so that, hopefully, more people will read it, and perhaps begin to understand that "CCW classes" do not increase safety.

    I mean, here in PA no one has to take any class, or test, yet we don't see lawfully armed citizens blasting away wildly at BGs, missing said BGs, and mowing down innocent bystanders. Hmmm...

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array dldeuce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    844
    I would bet my wife would do about as poorly on gun handling as anyone else who has little or no experience. Only she's not going to go through all the onerous and expensive hassle of getting a CHL, much less a process that's more stringent. No CHL, and she's not going to bother going with me to the range to practice. She's not going to carry. She's not going to be able to defend herself if necessary. People like this in society aren't going to teach their children about firearms either, which is how we got to where it's common place for grown men in our society to not know how to safely and accurately fire a gun. It's a change in our society that started in the civil war with gun control, and the situation isn't going to change with more gun control. I don't think this makes us safer and certainly doesn't do any thing for our long term freedom.

  7. #22
    Member Array ScubaDuba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Winston-Salem, NC
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by ECHOONE View Post
    I know for the most part the majority of us are properly qualified to carry,and most of us do our part,keeping up as best we can with professional classes as well as going to the ranges as much as possible etc.
    but there a small percentage that adds up that few of us think about,and they can be as lethal as the bad guy! There not some young drug crazed kid,it's people you and I would never expect and there getting permits everyday without any form of training.Our beloved Senior Citizens that had military service back when they were young!
    I hate to be the whistler blower on this one,but it's something that someone has to look at before a tragedy happens. My father in law now 80 was able to obtain a CCW without any formal or informal training,not even a safety course,because back when he was 18 he was a cook in the Service.I could understand somewhat if he was infantry and had alot of weapons training but he was a cook if he had a week of small arms training he had alot. after the service he never touched a gun,never hunted,nothing!He applied at age 79 did the paper work,backround check,Paid and with NO training at all got his permit.
    Now at his age senility is setting in for one,I have tried to teach him safety and the proper way to handle a gun,(nearly getting shot on several occasions) and have been temporarily thrown out of his house for as he say's disrespecting him for stating he doesn't know how to use his own gun!I have tried talking to family members only to have a family fued start and you know who the bad guy is! Go figure,but this is my fight for now! what concerns me is the thousands of elderly Vets out there just like him,I'm sure he's not the only one.
    How many nice older gents are out there,that think there doing the right thing,but God forbid they draw to help someone and with out the proper training,they shoot and kill the wrong person(s),They go to jail,and there going to be liable for something that some guide lines should have been in place to avoid!Something for us all to think about.The next time your out,be a little more on guard about the little old man over your right shoulder,he means well,but......................does he even have any training?
    I hope I didn't offend any one it wasn't my intention! Good luck and Stay Safe
    My first thought was, "Leave him alone and mind your own business if he doesn't want to listen to you." After that, I thought about all the old men who shoot at burglars fleeing the scene. People should be aware of shoot/no shoot laws before they start packing. But, fot the most part, the government and everybody else needs to mind their own darn business.
    Healthy children will not fear life, if their parents have integrity enough not to fear death.
    -TIME DEUM ET OPERARE IUSTITIAM--

  8. #23
    Member Array jonesy_26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    SE MI
    Posts
    325
    While I agree with the concerns raised, and they are very valid ones, I do not want any more rules or regulations put in place.

    With freedom comes responsibility. That said, for many years, individual responsibility has been slowly replaced with government controls. Because Sally is scared that Joe down the street might hurt someone with his gun, the government has placed limitations on what Joe can legally do with his gun. Sally feels better, but Joe has lost some of his freedom.

    While I would hope that everyone who goes for a license takes the time and effort to be competent, I know in reality that there are some that will fall through the cracks. That's the risk of having a high level of freedom and low levels of regulation; you have to trust that people will do the right thing.

    We need to promote and encourage everyone to act responsibly, and especially educate those who want more restrictions that indivual responsibility is the better alternative. Its a steep climb, but if enough folks DO the right thing (like get training if if they aren't required to), and keep doing it, there will be less calls for more restrictions.

  9. #24
    Senior Member Array rmodel65's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by maddyfish View Post
    A friend of mine disagrees and compares CCW licenses to drivers licenses. You have to take a test, drive a course and pay a fee for a drivers license.
    What he fails to see is that driving a car is not a right at all. Driving can and should be regulated (and IMO should be much, much more heavily regulated).

    Carrying a weapon/self defense is a human right and should not be regulated by something as insignifcant as a government.


    actually you have a right to travel freely....and by paying for a license its is being infringed upon.. this right is cited under the 14th amendment it is also a right we hold under the 9th because it existed before the constitution in the Magna Carta and also it was enumerated under the articles of confederation...


    YouTube - Michael Badnarik's Constitution Class 6 of 43


    actually you should watch all 43 very interesting....
    S&W M&P40/M&P9c OC rigs
    S&W 640-1 or Sig P238 as a CC rig
    proud www.georgiacarry.org member
    Second Amendment Foundation Life member

  10. #25
    VIP Member Array SIGguy229's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Kommie-fornia-stan
    Posts
    7,085
    Quote Originally Posted by BigStick View Post
    While I believe proper training and practce is a necessity to anyone who wants to be a responsible gun owner, I will aggressively oppose anyone who attempts to put yet another "infringement" on our rights.

    Yes, it would be more safe and preferable if all gun owners had proper instruction, and in fact, I would argue for mandatory weapons training in schools, but allowing another regulation and restriction is a step towards what the Brady Bunch and UN have been trying to do for years(take away all of our guns). If you give them an inch, they will take a mile; slippery slope; etc...

    Am I still paraniod if they really are after me?
    Agreed. Wholeheartedly support firearm safety being taught in schools...grades K-12.

    Other than that, training should be encouraged...NOT required.

    Training or not, accidents happen. Adding a training requirement will not prevent anyone from doing something stupid or reckless hours, days, weeks, months or years after the training is conducted.
    Magazine <> clip - know the difference

    martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter
    You have never lived until you have almost died. For those that have fought for it, life has a special flavor the protected will never know

  11. #26
    Member Array alexcantslee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Dallas, Tx
    Posts
    272
    I think we need to be less stringent personally. I agree people need to be practice and train but Im a supporter of the 2nd Amend which gives us the RIGHT to bear firearms, not "Permission to bear a firearm in a limited capacity after an arbitrary set of requirements made by a third party is completed".

    I think people who carry for a job need to prove some proficiency but by and large, most of us are not LEOs, we're just citizens, plain and simple. And we just want the rights that citizens of this country are privy to. More people in the government telling us what to do is a step backwards. I agree, it should be up to that mans family to make sure he's proficient if its an issue.

    I can hear the challenges now..."Well, what if he or she has no family?"

    Well, I say we can only hope for the best. If people are really worried about it get trained to teach and offer free classes for senior citizens. But that's the flip side of freedom. We live in a free country and a person has the freedom to shoot his own leg off. And if we're worried about being around such people we have the freedom to stay home. We cant be free and "idiot proof", we get one or the other.

    Alex!
    My other Kahr is a Kimber.

  12. #27
    Member Array golfer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    259
    IMO, these types of situations should be dealt with one case at a time, not as a group. My 86 year old father knows how to handle a gun and enjoys doing it. I'm on the older side of 50, where do we draw a line that says if you are this old, you aren't eledgible? Self protection is a 2nd ammendment right and should not be tampered with as such. As a group, older people are more inclined to be preyed upon than the younger.
    If your father in law is not capable or uncapable to safely having a CHL, the family has to step in. There is no other good way to do it. I understand the problem trying to get the rest of the family behind you. Perhaps a discussion with each one individually of your concerns for him and the family relative to the laws and problems that even an accidental discharge could do for you all liabially. An accidental shooting could bankrupt your father in law and may mean time in prison.
    On the other hand, does father in law plan to carry or just keep the gun at home.
    I think your only hope is one on one with each family member o see what their feelings are.
    Best wishes.

  13. #28
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    I would like to see guidelines for qualifying for CCP. I would also like to see a program where the government provides every American of age a rifle, a pistol and a shotgun along with a monthly allowance of practice ammo.
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  14. #29
    GM
    GM is offline
    VIP Member Array GM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    6,866
    Once again the same question. The system might not be perfect, but I should be much worse if the government could decide about this question. And in that case, why do we need a Constitution if the government could decide if we can use our constitutional rights or not? Like many other members said, you should consider all the reckless drivers and the accidents caused by them; it is totally right when bladenbullet writes “here in Florida we have elderly people piloting deadly weapons down our roads, sidewalks and ditches with great frequency”. They might not drive that fast, but driving 35 mil/h in a highway because they do not dare to drive faster is not what I consider very safe. Do you want to forbidden then driving too?
    "The Second Amendment: America's Original Homeland Security"

  15. #30
    Distinguished Member Array BigStick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gig Harbor, WA
    Posts
    1,455
    Quote Originally Posted by rmodel65 View Post
    actually you have a right to travel freely....and by paying for a license its is being infringed upon..
    The right to travel freely is not infringed by requiring a drivers license. You are still free to walk, take the bus, ride a bike, have a friend drive you, take a taxi, fly... Yes, I understand what you are saying, infringment on part and where do you draw the line, but "travel" is the right, not "driving." And "to keep and bear arms" is a right. That is a little more specific.
    Walk softly ...

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 123456 ... 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
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Qualification
    By evanely in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 20th, 2009, 12:47 AM
  2. LEOSA qualification for non-LEO?
    By press1280 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: January 10th, 2009, 01:23 PM
  3. CCW shooting Qualification?
    By Krmnnghia in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: May 1st, 2007, 07:21 PM
  4. CCW Qualification
    By Hekkenschutze in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: December 4th, 2006, 06:48 AM
  5. Qualification requirements
    By zx9rt1 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: September 25th, 2006, 12:28 PM

Search tags for this page

az post police shooting qualification
,
pa post firearms qualification
,
police shooting qualification requirements georgia
,
stringent qualifications for concealed carry
,

werner carry system

Click on a term to search for related topics.