AZ: House OKs bill to eliminate gun refresher training


PDA






Desertdog
February 8, 2006, 01:59 PM
House OKs bill to eliminate gun refresher training
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=4472689


A year after cutting in half the refresher training required for renewing a permit to carry a concealed weapon, the Arizona Legislature may eliminate the requirement altogether.


The House on Tuesday voted to delete the rule making permit holders get two hours of refresher training on gun safety, updates on weapons laws and other topics.

The bill (HB2074) now goes to the Senate.

Arizona had 72,823 active permits as of November, and the state is among 44 that require a permit to carry a concealed firearm, according to a legislative staff memo.

A first-time applicant for a permit, which is good for five years, must complete a state-approved firearms safety training program, submit fingerprints for a criminal history check and pay a fee. Renewals also require criminal background checks but only the first renewal requires submission of a fresh set of fingerprints.

Supporters of the bill said eliminating the requirement for refresher training is in accord with the right to bear arms afforded by the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.

"It doesn't say you can bear arms if you've taken a class or understand the change in the laws. It says you have a right to bear arms," said Rep. Pamela Gorman, a Republican from Anthem, an unincorporated community north of Phoenix.

Critics said the refresher training is important for gun safety and that legislators should leave the requirement intact until any effects of last year's reduction from four hours can be measured.

"We're stepping ahead of ourselves," said Rep. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix.

If you enjoyed reading about "AZ: House OKs bill to eliminate gun refresher training" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
fourays2
February 8, 2006, 03:32 PM
House OKs bill to eliminate gun refresher training
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=4472689


A year after cutting in half the refresher training required for renewing a permit to carry a concealed weapon, the Arizona Legislature may eliminate the requirement altogether.


The House on Tuesday voted to delete the rule making permit holders get two hours of refresher training on gun safety, updates on weapons laws and other topics.

The bill (HB2074) now goes to the Senate.

Arizona had 72,823 active permits as of November, and the state is among 44 that require a permit to carry a concealed firearm, according to a legislative staff memo.

A first-time applicant for a permit, which is good for five years, must complete a state-approved firearms safety training program, submit fingerprints for a criminal history check and pay a fee. Renewals also require criminal background checks but only the first renewal requires submission of a fresh set of fingerprints.

Supporters of the bill said eliminating the requirement for refresher training is in accord with the right to bear arms afforded by the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment.

"It doesn't say you can bear arms if you've taken a class or understand the change in the laws. It says you have a right to bear arms," said Rep. Pamela Gorman, a Republican from Anthem, an unincorporated community north of Phoenix.

Critics said the refresher training is important for gun safety and that legislators should leave the requirement intact until any effects of last year's reduction from four hours can be measured.

"We're stepping ahead of ourselves," said Rep. Steve Gallardo, D-Phoenix.

I am so glad I voted for her, pro-gun and real easy on the eye too:D

britinaz
February 8, 2006, 06:49 PM
I wrote:

Way to go Pamela!!



How refreshing to hear support on the grounds of the 2nd amendment!!



It is considered reasonable to keep oneself updated on traffic laws and rule changes, the CCW laws are the gun owners responsibility too.



If you can scrap the CCW requirement altogether Iíll work on your presidential campaign.



Thanks Again

She wrote back:

Thank you for the kind words of encouragement. I do believe that is the direction we are heading. It is nuts to me that you can wear your weapon on the outside of your clothing with full rights, but if you change your fashion and your clothing falls over it, there is an avalanche of new restrictions. Why am I suddenly a more law-abiding citizen with a gun that shows? The answer is that I am actually equally law-abiding and therefore should not have to register myself as a person who owns a weapon or pass some meaningless accuracy test with a weapon that I may not even choose to carry (Arizona does not require you to qualify on the same weapon you carry, so the target shooting requirement is incredibly silly. You can qualify shooting a .22 revolver and then pack a .45 semi that you have never fired).

Personally, I just consider carrying concealed to be a more "polite" way to carry and it bugs me that I and other CCW folks are treated like a danger to society because we choose to keep our self-protection hidden unless needed.

Incidentally, I would love to see even a single example of someone carrying out a crime or for that matter even being involved in a shooting accident while their gun is still concealed. That would take a greater amount of dexterity than anyone I know has.

Have a wonderful day!

Her webpage and bio are very sincere. What a friend we have in our legislature!

Lennyjoe
February 8, 2006, 07:01 PM
Figures, after I spend $40 for a refresher class they will come out with this bill. After your 2nd renewal you don't have to take any other classes either.

Standing Wolf
February 8, 2006, 07:22 PM
Critics said the refresher training is important for gun safety and that legislators should leave the requirement intact until any effects of last year's reduction from four hours can be measured.

Those are the same "critics" who would have sided with the British in 1776, pending further "studies."

fiveoboy01
February 8, 2006, 08:06 PM
It is nuts to me that you can wear your weapon on the outside of your clothing with full rights, but if you change your fashion and your clothing falls over it, there is an avalanche of new restrictions. Why am I suddenly a more law-abiding citizen with a gun that shows? The answer is that I am actually equally law-abiding and therefore should not have to register myself as a person who owns a weapon or pass some meaningless accuracy test with a weapon that I may not even choose to carry (Arizona does not require you to qualify on the same weapon you carry, so the target shooting requirement is incredibly silly. You can qualify shooting a .22 revolver and then pack a .45 semi that you have never fired).

Wow, a woman with some common sense!! It's amazing how few legislators have that trait these days...

And yes, she sure is a beautiful woman, too:)

AZRickD
February 8, 2006, 10:04 PM
From her web page...
...Pamela is also a member of the Arizona Women's Shooting Association and has earned her CCW permit.

Ya mean she's a freedom-fighter and purdy, too?

Well, I guess so... :)


http://www.azleg.state.az.us/alisImages/MemberPhotos/47leg/House/GORMAN.gif

Sorry, boys, she's taken. And her hubby carries. :-)

State Rep Pamela Gorman pgorman@azleg.gov

Her web page... http://www.azleg.state.az.us/MembersPage.asp?Member_ID=20

AZLibertarian
February 8, 2006, 11:06 PM
If I could do it without forcing it, I'd like to find a way to encourage more CCWers to go out and practice. While I welcome this proposed change, I think there are far too many CCWers who simply don't practice.

And before we get too far ahead of ourselves, and since we're comparing "Hot Chicks in Government", let's remember that another there's another "Babe (http://www.governor.state.az.us/images/press.jpg)" in town who might not support this.

AZRickD
February 8, 2006, 11:54 PM
Argh, ahhghg, AHHHGGHHH !!!

http://www.governor.state.az.us/images/press.jpg

Arizona's "moderate" governor, Janet Napolitano.

Anita Hill's attorney.

Appointed US Attorney in Arizona by Bill Clinton.

Ran for Arizona Atty Gen against a weak GOPer and won.

Ran for Governor against a weak GOPer and won.

Has been trying to cast herself as a moderate (especially on guns) ever since, and has brought Democrats to her woodshed in an effort to impress upon them that she does not want a pro-gun bill on her desk that would force her to veto (her words, according to one lobbyist).

Rick

Lennyjoe
February 9, 2006, 12:59 AM
Hey, why did you put a picture of Mrs. Veto? :neener:

zzzarkt
February 9, 2006, 01:12 AM
"Jan the Man" is a bane on this state and our country. It will be a great day when she leaves office.

Back on topic though, I practice plenty without the state telling me when I need too. I agree more CCW holders should practice more, but it should be because they want to not because they have to.

britinaz
February 9, 2006, 02:49 AM
Those are the same "critics" who would have sided with the British in 1776, pending further "studies."

Not this British!!!:)

pittspilot
February 9, 2006, 10:20 PM
More then this, we need a bill that gets rid of our moronic limitations that don't allow you to go to decent restaurant (Read any liquor) while CCW'ing.

fourays2
February 9, 2006, 10:51 PM
the sooner janet goes back to coaching the Phoenix Mercury (WNBA) the better.

lostone1413
February 10, 2006, 06:28 PM
Just looked at my E-Mail. Had a letter from were I got my CCW wanting me to work against the bill. Guess when you make money teaching classes you look at the 2nd amendment different. For them to send out something like that makes them no better then Brady in my book. What do you think?

Desertdog
February 10, 2006, 08:44 PM
Had a letter from were I got my CCW wanting me to work against the bill. Guess when you make money teaching classes you look at the 2nd amendment different.
This is understandable. After all, if it passes they only have you as a student one time, not everytime it is up for renewal.
Big cut back on business.

What if AZ become #3 no permit state? They will really be against that.

denfoote
February 11, 2006, 12:31 AM
The bill (HB2074) now goes to the Senate.


Agreed.
This is DOA as soon as it hit's Gov Janet's desk.
I'm not so sure I would not support her on this one.
It seems silly to me to make you go through initial training without refresher.
I learned several new things about current case law concerning CCW at my last re-up.

If you are going to go this route, then make the law like Vermount's!!!

AZLibertarian
February 11, 2006, 01:15 AM
More then this, we need a bill that gets rid of our moronic limitations that don't allow you to go to decent restaurant (Read any liquor) while CCW'ing.As most here will remember, this has been vetoed once already by our dear governor.

fourays2
February 11, 2006, 09:14 AM
Agreed.
This is DOA as soon as it hit's Gov Janet's desk.
I'm not so sure I would not support her on this one.
It seems silly to me to make you go through initial training without refresher.
I learned several new things about current case law concerning CCW at my last re-up.

If you are going to go this route, then make the law like Vermount's!!!

maybe not, janet has to portray her(him?)self as being supportive of gun rights, we all know that the inevitable photo-op of her shooting Quail is just around the corner in time for the november re-election bid.

El Tejon
February 11, 2006, 09:21 AM
Keep fighting, Arizona. Best wishes.:)

armoredman
February 11, 2006, 11:42 AM
A few keep introducing the permitless carry every year, and every year it gets a little farther...we did slash CCW traiing, extend the permit time period, and allow firearms training in public schools, with mandatory range time to pass.
Now we should go Alaska carry, (permit available for states that have reciprocity, just not neccesary instate.), and require firearms training in public school! Hey, drivers ed is mandatory!

AZRickD
February 11, 2006, 02:36 PM
FourRayz has it correctly...
maybe not, janet has to portray her(him?)self as being supportive of gun rights,
Janet does not want to see this bill on her desk. She wants to keep the illusion that she is a moderate. This bill isn't making her feel all warm and fuzzy right now.

If I had to predict, I think she is going to gamble that a veto will hurt her less as she balances out the fallacy of her constituency.

Rick

AZRickD
February 12, 2006, 01:28 PM
This is all you have to know about Janet Napolireno, who wants to be your next Vice President...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,184531,00.html

During budget negotiations last summer, Gov. Napolitano agreed to provide $5 million in tax credits for corporations contributing to private-school scholarship funds for low-income students who now attend public schools.

The governor -- long opposed to school choice -- explained at a news conference that “the $5 million tax credit was not a bad price to pay” to reach a budget compromise.

But days later, Napolitano changed her mind and vetoed the measure. She told the Arizona Republic she did this because the tax credit wouldn’t automatically “sunset,” as she had requested in the negotiations.

Jim Weiers, then the Republican speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, couldn’t believe his ears. “There's only one way to put this,” he said. “The governor lied to me.”

Who to believe?

Consider this: On Jan. 11 of this year, the state legislature again passed tax credits for school choice. And this time, it included the sunset provision Gov. Napolitano had requested. A few days later, Gov. Napolitano vetoed the measure again. This time, she said she will consider a tax credit only during budget negotiations in the spring.

So, choice supporters will have to try again this summer to expand education opportunity for Arizona’s low-income students. Assuming the legislature can pass tax credits a third time, Gov. Napolitano will have to decide again whether to honor her promise or veto this popular program yet again.

It’s not an easy calculation. She must strike a balance between the demands of the 30,000-member Arizona Education Association, which opposes school choice, and Arizona families, who support school choice by nearly a 2:1 margin, according to a recent poll by the Goldwater Institute. Already, 100,000 children in Arizona attend charter schools or private schools, thanks to a 1997 scholarship tax-credit program.

pittspilot
February 15, 2006, 01:20 AM
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/bradylaw/permit_chart.htm

Your CCW will no longer suffice for the NICS check.

Not sure if that is determinative for me, but something to consider.

roscoe
February 15, 2006, 01:53 AM
Your CCW will no longer suffice for the NICS check.
That's enough for me - I can spare a couple of hours to re-up.

WayneConrad
February 15, 2006, 10:47 AM
Your CCW will no longer suffice for the NICS check.

How's that? I think the NICS-check excemption is dependant upon background checks, not training. Does the bill leave a background check as part of the renewal process?

pittspilot
February 15, 2006, 04:10 PM
How's that? I think the NICS-check excemption is dependant upon background checks, not training. Does the bill leave a background check as part of the renewal process?

My understanding is that a CCW may be used in place of a NICS check, if that CCW is renewed with a background check at least every five years.

My understanding is that when you renew in Arizona, they do a NICS check as part of the renewal.

But, if they stop doing the renewal, as part of this bill, then your CCW will only be able to suffice for five years in lieu of a NICS check.

As I said, I am not sure if this is a disqualifier from supporting the bill. On the one hand, I usually only wait a minute of two to get qualified in the NICS check. It is nice not to have to wait with the CCW, but I would have to buy a lot of guns for the wait on the NICS to equal the hours for the renewal class.

Just something to think about.

WayneConrad
February 15, 2006, 07:15 PM
The text of the bill is here (http://www.azleg.state.az.us/legtext/47leg/2r/bills/hb2074h.pdf). It strikes this sentence from 13-3112(M):

"A certificate of completion of a two-hour refresher firearms safety training program approved by the director of the department is required before a renewal permit may be issued and shall accompany an application for renewal."

Unless there's something I'm missing, permits still must be renewed every five years, and the state will still do a background check. If this bill were made law, your CCW would still exempt you from the NICS check

pittspilot
February 15, 2006, 09:17 PM
The text of the bill is here (http://www.azleg.state.az.us/legtext/47leg/2r/bills/hb2074h.pdf). It strikes this sentence from 13-3112(M):

"A certificate of completion of a two-hour refresher firearms safety training program approved by the director of the department is required before a renewal permit may be issued and shall accompany an application for renewal."

Unless there's something I'm missing, permits still must be renewed every five years, and the state will still do a background check. If this bill were made law, your CCW would still exempt you from the NICS check

Well, that's what I get for spouting off without checking. Typical lawyer, huh? ;)

Forget everything I said.

If you enjoyed reading about "AZ: House OKs bill to eliminate gun refresher training" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!