Would you support multi-level CCW permits - Page 3

Would you support multi-level CCW permits

This is a discussion on Would you support multi-level CCW permits within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Mike1956 Being ex-military in no way ensures one is proficient at marksmanship. Some of the lousiest shots I have ever known were ...

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 86
Like Tree85Likes

Thread: Would you support multi-level CCW permits

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array suntzu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    TX/NH
    Posts
    5,999
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    Being ex-military in no way ensures one is proficient at marksmanship. Some of the lousiest shots I have ever known were in the reserve transportation unit I joined for a year after I ets'ed from an infantry unit.
    We get from here to there by electing officials who represent our interests instead of ones who question our right to bear arms.
    I agree. For some reason the population thinks because you were in the military you are some Rambo or weapons expert or an expert on weapons safety. And the ones that can shoot an M-4 at a range in now way makes them more qualified to "have a special permit" than others. In fact most of the military is not trained in hand guns and not in CQB scenarios or inside buildings.

    As far as permits:NO. And I think the OP's rational is wrong. If you start giving special permits to folks you will never see no gun zones taken off of states list. Why would they bother since you can make someone pay for more training and a special permit. It is a Big step backwards.


  2. #32
    Distinguished Member Array 4my sons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Out side of Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,637
    Quote Originally Posted by suntzu View Post
    As far as permits:NO. And I think the OP's rational is wrong. If you start giving special permits to folks you will never see no gun zones taken off of states list. Why would they bother since you can make someone pay for more training and a special permit. It is a Big step backwards.
    Fair enough, Seems to be the concusses , Thanks for everyones input. I do appreciate your time.
    "fundamental principle of American law that a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any individual citizen." [Warren v. District of Columbia,(D.C. Ct. of Ap., 1981)]
    If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand

  3. #33
    Distinguished Member Array BigStick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gig Harbor, WA
    Posts
    1,455
    While I don't think I want to go down that path, I can understand the reasoning he is using. Get people used to having guns in all of these places, nobody with the permit goes crazy and there is no blood running in the streets, etc... or they even stop some bad guys. Once they are comfotable with it, there will be less resistance to allowing everyone to carry there.

    At the same time, I can see the people making the rules saying "well, we already have a way for the 'qualified' individuals to carry there, so we don't need to expand anything"

    I agree that it depends on who is in power and making the laws. The problem I see is that the people who would think rationally are the people who would not require us to have a permit anyway, so trying to push the tiered permit through the other people will be a losing battle and more beuerocracy.
    Walk softly ...

  4. #34
    Distinguished Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,262
    Quote Originally Posted by lyz_grace View Post
    Are you of the mind that a permit shouldn't be required in the first place, though? If that's the case, isn't paying the government money to have the license we already have a sort of appeasement in itself? That might not be your stance, I'm just asking because I'm trying to figure out where I stand myself.
    In short, yes. I am very supportive of constitutional carry. I wish GA would pass a constitutional carry law. Think of it this way... If I get into any trouble with a firearm, the government is going to have a record of whether or not I am a felon. The piece of paper in my wallet isn't ever going to change that fact. Essentially, it is a useless piece of paper which will get me into a lot of trouble if I forget my wallet when I am carrying a gun. Criminals are still going to obtain guns illegally. Permitting does nothing to prevent it. I know my state representative, personally, and I know that he is has not only supported constitutional carry, but written laws to attempt to have it (and similar laws) passed.

    On a similar note, currently, the only convenience of my permit is the ability to purchase guns without a background check - since I'm obviously clean to have the permit. Alternatively, if GA had constitutional carry, they could make money by issuing a purchasers license (of some type) that incorporates the fingerprinting and background checking that must be done to currently get a permit. Some people would like the convenience instead of waiting 10 minutes for a background check - and there would be no hassle if you have a common name, ect.

    Professionally, I am a land planning consultant. I have to deal with local and state municipalities on a daily basis. It's sad to see peoples rights getting trampled day and night because municipalities (state and federal, too) want complete control through the permitting and approval process. Citizens are losing more and more rights every single day, simply because the government thinks it knows better than the people. Factor money into the equation, and holding onto freedom is an increasing uphill battle. As soon as a law is passed, it is a law that is set in stone. All common sense can be trumped because it wasn't thought out thoroughly enough, was created for the sole purpose of control, or was created in utter incompetence.

  5. #35
    sgb
    sgb is offline
    VIP Member Array sgb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    You don't need to know
    Posts
    2,414
    Bark'n hit it spot on.
    "There is a secret pride in every human heart that revolts at tyranny. You may order and drive an individual, but you cannot make him respect you." William Hazlitt (1778 - 1830)

    Best Choices for Self Defense Ammunition

  6. #36
    Ex Member Array barstoolguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    under a rock in area 51
    Posts
    2,548
    until they eliminate them all together yes I would do it
    4my sons likes this.

  7. #37
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    To the point of the thread. This is just a question for discussion to see what people think. Seems to be overwhelmingly against. wouldn't be the first time I was wrong. That's fine, I do believe its the whole point of being on this forum.
    The permits as they are now would be the normal permit. I would never consider taking away what we have all gained away from anyone. It would still be valid for everyone to carry in all the normal places. On the street, in the convince store, in Burger King Etc.

    But the places off limits. Which are very few here in Va. I'm using schools as an example, we can push and fight for another 10 years to get schools taken of the prohibited list. Meanwhile, our kids are unprotected. If we could push through a higher level permit, one closer to say a police academy training but focused on citizens and CCW to gain quicker access to the more restricted areas so our children would be protected now, not later if ever.

    Isn't this what they do to us. introduce something, then get it expanded, isn't' that what we have done to get where we are, get the narrow edge of the wedge in, then drive it in further. Some states started out with permits, then went to not needing a permit?
    I think you're missing a point here. Maybe it's easy for you to understand what the system has laid out for you, and less easy for you to comprehend the rather simple part you play here amongst the rest of us unworthy dolts with guns. When you say different levels, that means separation. Hey........I don't like to hear about John W Smith blowing his arm off with the 30-06 he put behind the seat loaded and muzzle facing driver's side door, then reaching in and grabbing it by the trigger to pull it out of the truck. I've wanted to unsubscribe from humanity for a long time because of stupid stuff done by individuals that causes us all to suffer....believe me. Despite all of the obvious drawbacks...........I still dream of us all being a team. A team always beats doing things alone...even if you can't trust your fellow man or you've never tested their DNA for stupid. Humanity....we're all a member. Some times this fact may become unacceptable.....thing is....I've been working on this for ten years or better...to get over and accept these facts.

  8. #38
    Senior Member Array Happypuppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Small Town USA
    Posts
    901
    No. In the motorcycle community to get a license in some states a course is required by the motorcycle safety foundation. It is very low cost and helps starting riders a lot I believe. I would like to see course subsidized by the manufacturers , NRA etc. about basic carry laws ,safety etc regarding conceled carry in all states. Right now it's a mess really some states no training is needed, others it is fairly extensive. I think it's time we police ourselves especially if we ever want to have national carry like driving is currently.


    Sent from my 300 baud modem

  9. #39
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    12,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Happypuppy View Post
    No. In the motorcycle community to get a license in some states a course is required by the motorcycle safety foundation. It is very low cost and helps starting riders a lot I believe. I would like to see course subsidized by the manufacturers , NRA etc. about basic carry laws ,safety etc regarding conceled carry in all states. Right now it's a mess really some states no training is needed, others it is fairly extensive. I think it's time we police ourselves especially if we ever want to have national carry like driving is currently.


    Sent from my 300 baud modem
    It works fairly well with C cards for SCUBA divers. The states mostly stay out of regulating that because the diving community and manufacturers developed a system of training.

    However, I don't think our legislatures will allow anything similar where guns are concerned.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  10. #40
    Member Array EeyoreCC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Mississippi & Afghanistan
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    I don't think the core issue (2A purism aside) would be training. It would need to be thoroughness of the criminal background checks, and perhaps some form of more thorough psychological evaluation, perhaps
    even including something like a hair test for drugs (90 day look back and much better than urine), and actual phone interview with your physician.
    Mississippi recently switched to a 2-tiered system. There is no training or competency requirement to get a permit there. With the specified training (though the exact training and who can do it are somewhat vague and arbitrary) you can get an "enhanced" permit which allows you to carry in several places that are off-limits to unenhanced permit holders, such as church, polling places, etc. If you accept the premise that concealed carry is a privilege not a right, I don't think this is unreasonable (unlike some of Mississippi's other gun laws). CC-specific training is prudent to ensure you are aware of and don't run afoul of local laws, but the basic permit is minimally invasive, so you have a choice. A decent balance, IMHO. Now if we could just get them to define "concealed" in a reasonable way....
    Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.

  11. #41
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,156
    I want to know how I can get a "00" permit like Mr. Bond. But seriously...

    Once a higher level tier permit is in place, what's to keep our public servants from believing that ALL permittees should be so papered? I mean, it would just be reckless to allow an under qualified citizen to CCW, right?

    The answer is Constitutional Carry anywhere the police can carry. When the citizens are entrusted by their governments, they will rise to the occasion.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  12. #42
    VIP Member Array Crowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    West Allis WI
    Posts
    2,761
    Here's a novel thought.... How about the right to keep and bare arms without government infringement... If America only had that......
    NH_Esau and bmcgilvray like this.
    "One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation."
    --Thomas B. Reed, American Attorney

    Second Amendment -- Established December 15, 1791 and slowly eroded ever since What happened to "..... shall not be infringed."

  13. #43
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,950
    I am on the fence about this one, but I am strongly leaning towards the side of I would go for it, conditional on a better understanding and definition of what the requirements of the process would be. Let me say up front, that I would oppose a psych evaluation or a blessing by a physician, which amount to another person's opinion regarding your suitability. While I completely support constitutional carry and believe that there should be no restrictions or gun free zones, I don't see it happening within the remainder of my lifetime. Gun free zones, including places like schools are stupid and will not stop anyone from doing the unthinkable and I think even the antis know this, but it may (emphasis on the may aspect, not will) prevent Joe Idiot from reaching behind his seat to grab his gun and discharge it in the school parking lot. I also look at it this way, my profession is Engineer. While every citizen has the constitutional right to become one (or a doctor, a lawyer, or whatever they choose), I had to go through many years of schooling in order to become one and to become what is called a "Professional Engineer" (which is mostly needed for civil and construction applications and involves state licensing), the requirements are even tougher. One of the reasons that there are requirements in these professions is because of the consequences of the choices made by said individual. From this perspective, I don't really have a problem with a system of standards that goes beyond a 250 year old document that says one needs to have a pulse, to be able to carry a lethal weapon. As far as what those standards should be, well that is a matter for another debate. Go into a gun store and you will see any number of idiots waving them around, pointing them at customers and clerks, pulling the triggers, etc. By the definition and according to the argument in this thread, these individuals should be allowed to buy said tool and walk out the door with it and if they were, they would likely do the same things in public. Note, I am thinking of the difference between being allowed to own and possess a weapon in your own home vs public. In most states in order to carry it in public, one is required to have obtained minimal training and a license. I don't see a problem with requiring a higher level of education and proficiency focusing on things such as safety, marksmanship, and proper handling of situations that are more likely to arise with weapons present in "sensitive" areas before being allowed to carry in those areas. Just like at work, before you are allowed to open the door on equipment and expose lethal energy potential you need to obtain training on how to do so safely. Requiring training certainly hasn't infringed anyone's right to work on said equipment, but it has certainly cut down on the number of deadly accidents that result.

    Edit: Post number 2 )and 1 also) here shows both sides of this argument very clearly: Tale of two Mothers (and others)

    On one hand, all the permits and training in the world aren't going to stop bad things from happening. On the other hand, not everybody is capable of the responsibility of carrying, let alone in "sensitive" places.
    4my sons likes this.

  14. #44
    Distinguished Member Array Lotus222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    US
    Posts
    1,262
    I think it would be much safer for everyone, if everyone was taught the basic safety standards of a firearm - rather than a handful of "qualified" people. Maybe you're looking at it completely backwards. Educate every person in the public school system what to do if they encounter a firearm. Educate on how it is a lethal instrument. Educate upon the age of 18 and 21 (and other ages depending on state), that it is a citizens right to bear arms. Teach them the consequences of their actions starting at a young age. Teach them the basic rules of a firearm so that they know how to safely handle it without killing themselves or someone else - and the only appropriate times to be handling the firearm (IE their parents supervision). How many accidental deaths would this prevent? We teach children about drugs and sex at a young age. Why? Because there is the chance that they are going to be introduced to them. God forbid we do the same for firearms... They are potentially just as likely to stumble across one in their own home... or a friends home... or neighbors home.

    Average people aren't inherently stupid or ignorant. The are just uneducated about certain things - like firearms. I don't see anywhere in the 2A that restricts when or how a person can bear arms.
    NH_Esau and 4my sons like this.

  15. #45
    VIP Member Array tkruf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Really SW, Virginia
    Posts
    4,733
    Carry permits are already an infringement on our rights under the 2nd Amendment as far as I am concerned. The add multiple levels is further infringement. Why don't they start doing something about criminals instead of placing more restrictions on law abiding citizens and infringing upon our rights. Why do you suppose that they don't make criminals get a permit to carry?
    NRA Member
    Glock 26 XD9sc
    Ruger SR9c Ruger LCP

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Sponsored 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

ccw permit levels

,

do i need a ccw if exmilitary in ga

,

multi level carry permits

,

multi level ccw

,

what level for ccw

Click on a term to search for related topics.