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 ...
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.
"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
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 ...
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.
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
until they eliminate them all together yes I would do it
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.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?
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
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.
Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.
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!
Here's a novel thought.... How about the right to keep and bare arms without government infringement... If America only had that......
"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."
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.
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.
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?
Glock 26 XD9sc
Ruger SR9c Ruger LCP