bigione
Member
How would the framers of the constitution feel about some government body deciding who is properly trained to carry? Should this be a state mandate or a personal responsibility?
CCW classes: Good or bad?
- Thread starter bigione
- Start date
- Status
Deanimator
Member
In places (like Ohio) where there are a host of relevant (and arbitrary) rules relating to CCW, it's probably a good thing. Using common sense about CCW is an excellent way to get arrested in Ohio.
bigione
Member
So the classes are needed because the law is screwed up?
Vern Humphrey
Member
As a guy with a lot of experience -- both military and industry -- in training, as well as a couple of graduate degees in education, I have to say most "training" is close to worthless. It's primary value is you have to attend to get your license.
No.
My observations: A fair number of people who have not taken the classes where I live seem to believe that if they have a gun, they can it to detain people ("hold them for the police"), to defend property, etc.; that they can shoot fleeing suspects; that they can shoot people for trespassing, or tell them to "get on the ground;" and that they can draw it and point it at people when they are not threatened with imminent danger of death or great bodily injury. Add the idea of warning shots, shooting to wound....
Why? You tell me. Have they seen too many Western movies and police shows? I don't know.
So--in my view some kind of education is a good idea, to protect the rest of us, to keep the citizen with a gun out of prison, and to help ensure a kind of "domestic tranquility" in which the right to carry will continue to be permitted.
I tell people that everyone should take the CCW class where I live, whether they intend to carry or not.
I also tell people who are skeptical about CCW that if they were to take the course, their misconceptions would be corrected and their concerns addressed, and that they would no longer make comments that reveal their ignorance.
How effective? Well, Vern does have a point....
How would the framers feel? I don't know, but I think it likely that the general level of knowledge of the common law among the populace might have been a tad higher then, and the fact that the maximum speed of travel was governed by the capability of the horse put some order into the society that we don't have today.
Vern Humphrey
Member
They tried that in Texas -- when CCW was orginally debated, the legislature tried to set the performance standard higher than that for the State Police.
There are states with no training requirements. How come these bad things don't happen in those states?
bigione
Member
In S Dak we cam obtain a list of requirements from the permit issuing agency (Sec of State). We ate required to know the rules, but no class is required. Again, personal responsibility!
jfh
Member.
there's a couple issues here, I think.
First, for most of us posters in a forum like this, we are experienced gunnies, and probably with handguns. The 'fundamentals' of shooting, from safety to manual of arms for our firearms are pretty well in place. For us, a carry class--i.e., to obtain a state / whatever-mandated permit--serves primarily as 1) an introduction to the legal issues involved in Self Defense, and 2) an opportunity to demonstrate the (minimal) skill required with a range test. It certainly does no more. Nor should it. The threshold for civilian carry is set as low as the political issues will allow.
Then there's the second type of class member--the newbie (male or female), who has taken the step to provide effective self-defense. Many of these people, not the posters here gain much more from these CCW classes than the rest of us can imagine, particularly if they are new to gun culture--or at least to the handgun culture. At the minimum, they gain new facts (what constitutes a deadly threat, legally), and they may even gain some better fundamental skills.
The intersection with 2nd Amendment history--i.e., with the Founding Father's commentary about arms in the Federalist Papers--suggests to me that they would have no problem with skills classes, nor with legal classes. Gunny mythology suggests they would see no desire for, nor need for, governmant-mandated civilian training--but I am not so sure about that.
Jim H.
First, for most of us posters in a forum like this, we are experienced gunnies, and probably with handguns. The 'fundamentals' of shooting, from safety to manual of arms for our firearms are pretty well in place. For us, a carry class--i.e., to obtain a state / whatever-mandated permit--serves primarily as 1) an introduction to the legal issues involved in Self Defense, and 2) an opportunity to demonstrate the (minimal) skill required with a range test. It certainly does no more. Nor should it. The threshold for civilian carry is set as low as the political issues will allow.
Then there's the second type of class member--the newbie (male or female), who has taken the step to provide effective self-defense. Many of these people, not the posters here gain much more from these CCW classes than the rest of us can imagine, particularly if they are new to gun culture--or at least to the handgun culture. At the minimum, they gain new facts (what constitutes a deadly threat, legally), and they may even gain some better fundamental skills.
The intersection with 2nd Amendment history--i.e., with the Founding Father's commentary about arms in the Federalist Papers--suggests to me that they would have no problem with skills classes, nor with legal classes. Gunny mythology suggests they would see no desire for, nor need for, governmant-mandated civilian training--but I am not so sure about that.
Jim H.
ezypikns
Member
I happen to agree with you.
The majority of people who take CCW classes have done absolutely NO research or preparation prior to taking their class. They bring their virgin handgun and ammo to class with them and their qualification is the first time they've ever fired it.
Someone here is sure to take exception with this part of your next statement though:
The majority of people who take CCW classes have done absolutely NO research or preparation prior to taking their class. They bring their virgin handgun and ammo to class with them and their qualification is the first time they've ever fired it.
Someone here is sure to take exception with this part of your next statement though:
SeekHer
Member
The law states (in most every local) that certified training is required to obtain a Concealed Carry permit and I have to applaud that decision...
You take lessons to learn to drive a car, pilot an aeroplane or boat/ship, to be a licensed tradesman and its there as much for you to learn how to do it as it’s there to show you what not to do and of course for the liability aspects….
Everybody, who has seen an iota of TV, knows how to hold and point a gun…What they don’t know is how to do it properly--aiming, shooting etc. but most importantly why they can and when they are allowed to use it, the legal and social ramifications and to a great degree, on the discretion of the trainer, whether they have the psychological profile needed for a CCW…I don’t want to be the trainer saying Joe Mentalcase, whose only goal in life is to save hostages, shoot terrorists and those pesky, loud, immoral teenagers attending that inner city school…Sorry, JoeMC, you didn’t pass better luck next time or the time after that or !
Like Kleanbore pointed out, the conception of being armed changes once you are armed!
You take lessons to learn to drive a car, pilot an aeroplane or boat/ship, to be a licensed tradesman and its there as much for you to learn how to do it as it’s there to show you what not to do and of course for the liability aspects….
Everybody, who has seen an iota of TV, knows how to hold and point a gun…What they don’t know is how to do it properly--aiming, shooting etc. but most importantly why they can and when they are allowed to use it, the legal and social ramifications and to a great degree, on the discretion of the trainer, whether they have the psychological profile needed for a CCW…I don’t want to be the trainer saying Joe Mentalcase, whose only goal in life is to save hostages, shoot terrorists and those pesky, loud, immoral teenagers attending that inner city school…Sorry, JoeMC, you didn’t pass better luck next time or the time after that or !
Like Kleanbore pointed out, the conception of being armed changes once you are armed!
bigione
Member
For the posters here who may not have needed a class, "Where did you learn?" Now I was born into a family that had and used guns. I've never had any formal training unless it was a kick in the butt form an older more experienced relative or family friend. I'n not opposed to classes. I jusst wonder if it souldn't be my choice and responsibility. If we continue on this nanny state mentality, it starts a slippery slope.
bigione
Member
I never had driving lessons and neither have my ten children or my ten siblings. None of us have had any serious accidents. Several of us have driven tractor trailers and many different straight trucks thru some horrible weather and road conditions. We must have received the training but no formal classes. Again, personal and family responsiblility.
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
It is interesting to read so many say "training requirements are good because..." and go on to list all the things they believe folks are learning from these classes.
But if you read other threads on this forum about folks' experiences with CCW classes you'll find that what is taught in classes in one state is completely different from what's taught in another state. Some seek to educate about safe gun-handling. Some seek only to instruct about the law in that state. For some, the class is extensive, with range time and class time and demonstrated proficiency criteria. For others, it's brief and superficial.
And then there's plenty of places like PA where there is no requirement for training at all.
I personally don't think there should be any requirements at all (including a license or permit) for a citizen to carry a weapon for protection. I also happen to believe that a new shooter who buys a gun, loads it, and proceeds to carry it without a good deal of practice (and to be most effective, that's GOOD practice under the eye of a trainer or experienced and safe friend) and a clear understanding of the law in his/her jurisdiction assumes an ENORMOUS amount of risk. Much more than they imagine, in fact.
But, I just don't hear more than a statistically negligible number of reports of folks winding up in danger/trouble beacuse of it. Certainly not in ways that a 1-day training class would have likely prevented. A few, of course, but the vast, VAST majority of CCW holders appear to go on about their lives with nary a problem.
So, yes, I think folks should be able to carry without a mandated training class, but no, I don't think folks should carry without availing themselves of some good training and study of the laws.
-Sam
But if you read other threads on this forum about folks' experiences with CCW classes you'll find that what is taught in classes in one state is completely different from what's taught in another state. Some seek to educate about safe gun-handling. Some seek only to instruct about the law in that state. For some, the class is extensive, with range time and class time and demonstrated proficiency criteria. For others, it's brief and superficial.
And then there's plenty of places like PA where there is no requirement for training at all.
I personally don't think there should be any requirements at all (including a license or permit) for a citizen to carry a weapon for protection. I also happen to believe that a new shooter who buys a gun, loads it, and proceeds to carry it without a good deal of practice (and to be most effective, that's GOOD practice under the eye of a trainer or experienced and safe friend) and a clear understanding of the law in his/her jurisdiction assumes an ENORMOUS amount of risk. Much more than they imagine, in fact.
But, I just don't hear more than a statistically negligible number of reports of folks winding up in danger/trouble beacuse of it. Certainly not in ways that a 1-day training class would have likely prevented. A few, of course, but the vast, VAST majority of CCW holders appear to go on about their lives with nary a problem.
So, yes, I think folks should be able to carry without a mandated training class, but no, I don't think folks should carry without availing themselves of some good training and study of the laws.
-Sam
Vern Humphrey
Member
And yet oddly enough, all the bad things that mandatory training is supposed to prevent don't happen in South Dakota.
Imagine that!!
victoryredchevy
Member
I feel the same way about this as I feel about voting. I am glad there is a procedure, such as there is, to earn your CCW. I feel that there should be a "similar" type of procedure to determine voters as well, which to many seems a bit awkward, I know. Think about...How much more dangerous is an uninformed, untested dum-dum with a gun than an uninformed, untested dum-dum with the right to vote. Not much more dangerous, if you ask me. Anyway, that's for another day. I honestly believe the Founders would NOT go for having to have a permit. They would possibly change their minds with the way present day society is(nutty!), but then again, I take them as the type of men that would rather the GOOD folks in society take care of criminals by their own means....tall trees and long ropes, guns and knives, things of that nature. Although the Founders had it right in what they did by declaring independance from Britain, in their day, they were viewed as extremely radical. They did, in fact, have a radical mindset and idealogical view of things for their time period. No one dare challenge the king and they did that and more. The Second Amendment states,"the right to keep and bear arms". That, my friends, is your permit for everything involving a firearm that is lawful. You foreit your right if you use the firearm for something unlawful or unjust. The problem is the law has been manipulated to go against the Amendment to keep up with "the times".
In current societey where knowledge of firearms and laws are based off rumors I find it it to be required. in my opinion I don't think the training requirement should be for CC but for general gun ownership. I think CC should be a given and no permit required. Then after guns are more accepted in societey and the knowledge and laws are simpler once again as they were earlier last century then the class requirement should be done away with.
I think anyone interested in using firearms for self defense should get some training in how to handle and use firearms effectively and especially get training in the legal aspects of deadly force.
But, I think that while training is a good idea, I do not think it should be mandated by the government. We should not have to take a government mandated class to exercise our right to self defense. It ultimately comes down to that to me.
Now, I am an instructor, and I do teach our state mandated NRA class for students to receive a Michigan Concealed Pistol License, so I obviously see the value of good training and try to provide the best training possible within the limits of the curriculum.
Still, mandatory training and permiting takes time and money and can act as a sort of "poll tax" to keep poorer people from exercising their rights, and I'm against it for that reason alone.
(You can tell I'm a bit conflicted on the issue, btw)
But, I think that while training is a good idea, I do not think it should be mandated by the government. We should not have to take a government mandated class to exercise our right to self defense. It ultimately comes down to that to me.
Now, I am an instructor, and I do teach our state mandated NRA class for students to receive a Michigan Concealed Pistol License, so I obviously see the value of good training and try to provide the best training possible within the limits of the curriculum.
Still, mandatory training and permiting takes time and money and can act as a sort of "poll tax" to keep poorer people from exercising their rights, and I'm against it for that reason alone.
(You can tell I'm a bit conflicted on the issue, btw)
Vern Humphrey
Member
If you are correct, we should be able to look at those states which either require no permit to carry, or which do not require training to get a permit. There should be a dramatic statistical difference between those states in terms of accidental and unlawful uses of firearms in "self defense."
But there isn't.
As I have said many times, training is a solution. Before advocating a solution, you should have a problem -- and be able to relate your proposed solution to the problem.
What is the problem this training is supposed to solve?
JImbothefiveth
Member
Whether or not it should be legally mandated, taking a class is a good idea. The laws can be very confusing.
Vern Humphrey
Member
Training and practice are good ideas -- but mandatory training is like the Assault Weapons Ban. Even it's staunchest proponents are forced to agree that it made no difference at all (and yet they still want to see it reenacted.)
We must remember that training is not exempt from the problem of quality -- you can have bad training as easily as good training. Just having training isn't enough -- you have to have clearly defined objectives (the problem we are trying to solve) and feedback (showing the problem was actually solved, or at least significantly ameliorated.)
We must remember that training is not exempt from the problem of quality -- you can have bad training as easily as good training. Just having training isn't enough -- you have to have clearly defined objectives (the problem we are trying to solve) and feedback (showing the problem was actually solved, or at least significantly ameliorated.)
NGIB
Member
We do not have a training requirement in GA - nor do I ever want to see one imposed.
This being said, I recommend every newbie get training - I just don't want the government to be involved...
This being said, I recommend every newbie get training - I just don't want the government to be involved...
ccw classes; good or bad?
Regardless of what you thing, It's the law.....So it's pointless to argue
And if you read the eligibility requirements for a CCW more carefully, a firearm training course is all that is needed.
There are a multitude of acceptable firearm training courses other than the bull**** CCW class they offer at Gun-Shows;
Is this really that upsetting to you that you are forced to show documentation that you are at the very least somewhat competent with a firearm..........?
Regardless of what you thing, It's the law.....So it's pointless to argue
And if you read the eligibility requirements for a CCW more carefully, a firearm training course is all that is needed.
There are a multitude of acceptable firearm training courses other than the bull**** CCW class they offer at Gun-Shows;
Is this really that upsetting to you that you are forced to show documentation that you are at the very least somewhat competent with a firearm..........?
Vern Humphrey
Member
No, it's not pointless to argue. We have a right -- in fact, an obligation -- to examine the law and work to change it. After all, it's our country -- it doesn't belong to the King or to the elected politicians.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
