Common Sense and CHL's?
- Thread starter joey93turbo
- Start date
- Status
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
One man's idea of common sense may well be another's idea of damned foolishness.
I don't need government permission to keep and bear arms. If I'm too dumb to keep and bear arms safely and responsibly, I'll end up being responsible for the consequences thereof in court.
The proposed "solution" of government involvement in the nation's civil rights is always and everywhere worse than the real or imaginary "problem."
I don't need government permission to keep and bear arms. If I'm too dumb to keep and bear arms safely and responsibly, I'll end up being responsible for the consequences thereof in court.
The proposed "solution" of government involvement in the nation's civil rights is always and everywhere worse than the real or imaginary "problem."
thumbody
Member
Joey,
Who gets to set the requirements for your so called proficiency test. One group may say if you can keep all your shots in a 8 in circle at 7 yds that is good enough for self defense . Then you get a bunch of antis in charge (Kennedy, Schumer, Boxer, etc) Now you have to keep all your shots in a 2 in circle at 20 yds to pass. Just another way to take away our rights.
Who gets to set the requirements for your so called proficiency test. One group may say if you can keep all your shots in a 8 in circle at 7 yds that is good enough for self defense . Then you get a bunch of antis in charge (Kennedy, Schumer, Boxer, etc) Now you have to keep all your shots in a 2 in circle at 20 yds to pass. Just another way to take away our rights.
svtruth
Member
Not Needed
The vanishingly small %age of CCW holders who have their CCW revoked tells me this is not a big problem.
And I agree it is the nose of the camel to restrict that right.
Wiley, you forgot a separate certification to buy ammo.
The vanishingly small %age of CCW holders who have their CCW revoked tells me this is not a big problem.
And I agree it is the nose of the camel to restrict that right.
Wiley, you forgot a separate certification to buy ammo.
Bobo
Member
I don't believe anybody should have to PASS A TEST, or even BE TESTED in order to carry concealed or openly.
I think it should be mandatory to be INFORMED, but not mandatory be TESTED.
In VA we can open-carry without a permit/license so our 2nd amendment rights are pretty much intact, but not totally (we can't carry everywhere -- yet!).
For concealed-carry we must obtain a CHL (Concealed Handgun License).
An application, my DD214 "Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge" form, a passed background check (basically, no felonies), and $50.00 is all that is needed for me to obtain a CHL. Without the DD214 you must attend an NRA or similar class. NO TEST!
This is a pretty good combination that covers both freedom and responsibility.
Although a class is not mandatory for me I will attend a class anyway. I believe the additional information from someone more informed and more experienced than I am, with the advantage of being able to ask questions and get useful answers, will make me much more comfortable about carrying and probably safer as well.
I think it should be mandatory to be INFORMED, but not mandatory be TESTED.
In VA we can open-carry without a permit/license so our 2nd amendment rights are pretty much intact, but not totally (we can't carry everywhere -- yet!).
For concealed-carry we must obtain a CHL (Concealed Handgun License).
An application, my DD214 "Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge" form, a passed background check (basically, no felonies), and $50.00 is all that is needed for me to obtain a CHL. Without the DD214 you must attend an NRA or similar class. NO TEST!
This is a pretty good combination that covers both freedom and responsibility.
Although a class is not mandatory for me I will attend a class anyway. I believe the additional information from someone more informed and more experienced than I am, with the advantage of being able to ask questions and get useful answers, will make me much more comfortable about carrying and probably safer as well.
Vern Humphrey
Member
svtruth said:
In other words, we don't have a problem. Lacking a problem, why do we need a solution?
Vern Humphrey
Member
LBTRS said:
I think you named that tune in one note.
cmidkiff
Member
Shooting Lessons
I believe (as the constitution states) that everyone has the right to keep and bear arms. No _permit_ should be required.
I took Missouri's mandated test, it was a joke. 15 out of 20 rounds into a 'man sized target' at 7 yards... no time limit. If you fail, you can keep trying until you do pass. Passing this sort of class isn't going to teach someone the safe gun handling skills that people should have. It's just adding another $100 and 8 hours to the cost of getting a CCW.
How about requiring 2 credits in 'gun handling and shooting' to graduate at a public high school? They seem to do so well teaching our children all of the other skills they need in life :banghead:
I believe (as the constitution states) that everyone has the right to keep and bear arms. No _permit_ should be required.
I took Missouri's mandated test, it was a joke. 15 out of 20 rounds into a 'man sized target' at 7 yards... no time limit. If you fail, you can keep trying until you do pass. Passing this sort of class isn't going to teach someone the safe gun handling skills that people should have. It's just adding another $100 and 8 hours to the cost of getting a CCW.
How about requiring 2 credits in 'gun handling and shooting' to graduate at a public high school? They seem to do so well teaching our children all of the other skills they need in life :banghead:
Vern Humphrey
Member
Like Sex Education? When I was a kid, there was no such thing, and the out-of-wedlock birth rate was 5%. Now it's mandatory, and the out-of-wedlock birth rate is 37%.
If our public schools taught gun handling, all our kids would be freckled with bullet holes.
Missashot said:
Disagree with your first point, agree with your second. I've taken MANY never-handled-a-handgun folks and had them hitting golf balls at 20 feet every shot at the end of the day, without ever violating the 4 rules. Having no bad habits is a real advantage.
I'm an instructor, and I encourage instruction and practice, but I'm against requiring it. The aggressive plaintiff's bar and motivated self-interest are a good safeguard.
Think of all the potential things that people might benefit from having training in, but you don't want the gov't REQUIRING it:
Raising children
Voting
Knowing first aid/emergency medical
Familiarity with fire extinguishers
Power tools/chain saws
Ladders
Etc.
JR
Old Dog
Member
When I obtained my first Washington Concealed Pistol License, I did have a few thoughts regarding how easy the process was: pay your 60 bucks, give a few fingerprints, wait a few days ... No training requirement whatsoever, so these thoughts almost became concerns: I'd already seen the sort of knuckleheads so pervasive on the local ranges and in the local gunshops; I shuddered at the thought of so many stupid people handling and carrying loaded firearms all around my family and me ...
Yet, experience has shown me that those who get the most out of their training are those that obtain training when there is no requirement to do so. Also, those who carry on a regular basis seem to be those most likely to avail themselves of training in the various concealed carry issues and actual shooting. I've also noted that the vast majority of gun-owners are very good, very proactive, about attempting to impart their knowledge, and the lessons they've learned, to those new to firearms and the shooting sports or armed self-defense world.
As far as Washington state -- the original "shall-issue" state goes -- the concealed carry permit system here seems to be an unqualified success. Accidents and crimes involving CPL holders are rare. Even the mostly liberal media here seems to have accepted this state's position on the Right to Keep -- and especially -- Bear Arms.
Yet, experience has shown me that those who get the most out of their training are those that obtain training when there is no requirement to do so. Also, those who carry on a regular basis seem to be those most likely to avail themselves of training in the various concealed carry issues and actual shooting. I've also noted that the vast majority of gun-owners are very good, very proactive, about attempting to impart their knowledge, and the lessons they've learned, to those new to firearms and the shooting sports or armed self-defense world.
As far as Washington state -- the original "shall-issue" state goes -- the concealed carry permit system here seems to be an unqualified success. Accidents and crimes involving CPL holders are rare. Even the mostly liberal media here seems to have accepted this state's position on the Right to Keep -- and especially -- Bear Arms.
beaucoup ammo
Member
In Texas..
Range time is part of the test. To get your CHL you must qualify with a S-A to carry either a revolver or semi-auto. Qualify with a revolver, and that's what your license limits you to.
I had never fired a semi-auto until qualifying with a Glock so I'd have the option. Fell in love with S-A and went out and purchased a little KAHR P9 the day my license arrived.
You can have a great car..but it's nice to know how to drive it properly. I'm in favor of dropping the cost of CHL so as to allow more people to carry.
Take Care
Range time is part of the test. To get your CHL you must qualify with a S-A to carry either a revolver or semi-auto. Qualify with a revolver, and that's what your license limits you to.
I had never fired a semi-auto until qualifying with a Glock so I'd have the option. Fell in love with S-A and went out and purchased a little KAHR P9 the day my license arrived.
You can have a great car..but it's nice to know how to drive it properly. I'm in favor of dropping the cost of CHL so as to allow more people to carry.
Take Care
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
