jackstinson:
In the class I took for my Ohio CHL, about 70% of the people had never shot a firearm in their life. Some had never touched a gun. I personally think it's prudent that people with Ohio CHL's have had at least a modicum of basic handgun training and a little bit of live-fire experience. Most of the Ohio classes are simply the NRA Basic Pistol course. And it is BASIC! The live-fire portion is critical for people who know nothing about firearms! It gives people who have never shot before the chance to learn loading (and unloading) revolvers and semi-autos, safe handling of loaded handguns, firing at targets, and ours included five shots in total darkness. And since a lot of these people had no idea of what kind of gun to carry, using the various gun types supplied was a great way for them to find what suited their needs.
I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather have people know how to handle and shoot the gun they are carrying, so they don't shoot themselves or me by accident. A basic course is not excessive. I was surprised it wasn't more. Probably a good thing though, as those of us who have been shooting for 40+ years got pretty bored with most of it; "this is the barrel, this is the trigger, this is the hammer......". Still, it's a good thing for the person who has never held a gun before to know what and where the trigger and safety are....and which end of the barrel the bullet comes out. BEFORE they strap on a Glock.
Jack
Most of us have opinions, Jack, and each of us forms our opinions from our own viewpoints and experiences. But personal opinions probably aren't the best ways to make laws or to enforce them, and they should never be allowed to deny anyone a
right.
An awful lot of people have the opinion that it's wrong for you and other individuals to even own firearms much less to carry them concealed. They have excellent reasons for their opinions. The response of many firearms owners to such people is that although we respect their opinions we have a
right to keep and bear arms, and that right is guaranteed by the Constitution.
I'd be reluctant to have that right changed to a privilege or modified in the light of their opinions or yours or anyone else's. If the right to keep and bear arms becomes a privilege, it can be withdrawn or changed at any time based on people's opinions. That's the way concealed carry permits are issued in many parts of the U.S., by the way: at the discretion of the sherriff or other law enforcement officer, and his opinion is what would determine whether you get a permit without regard to how much training you have.
It's at least a bit surprising to see an Ohio resident well along on the path to discretionary issue because your state is known for its cities that have taken that path. The opinion of the mayors and city councils in Columbus, Toledo, and other cities is that no one should even own a handgun much less carry one, and they've attempted to enforce their opinions on other people.
I don't suppose that you share their opinion but the point is that they don't share yours either. All you want is required training, which doesn't seem to be any big deal. And of course it isn't unless you recognize that once we start down that path in which opinions dictate where we go, you
will lose your permit.
It's easy to do. When you argue for a training requirement--or any other--you've agreed to requirements as a condition for issuing the permit. Where a training requirement is concerned there's nothing magical about 8 hours or 10 hours or any number of hours. It could just as easily become 40 hours or, what is much less arbitrary, a minimum of 8 weeks in basic training. That's the old Army training requirement so it could make sense to require it of anyone who wants to carry or even own a firearm. That shooting qualifier you mention is intended as the most basic of hurdles, not to admit only skilled people to the fraternity of CWP holders. As you imply, though, it could be made into a test of real skills. So it could be changed to require that you demonstrate your ability to shoot 3 rounds into a 1 inch group at a designated place on the target within 6 seconds from 3, 10, and 12 yards distance. Then do it again from kneeling, prone, and squatting positions. And then do it again while you move laterally.
For a test of your knowledge that could be required, try some of these from memory without referring to any aids:
- Name all parts of a cartridge, using the correct nomenclature
- Name all parts of a pistol, using the correct nomenclature
- Name all parts of a revolver, using the correct nomenclature
- Explain the differences between a single-action and double-action semi automatic pistol
- Explain the differences between a single-action and double-action revolver
- In what direction does the cylinder of a Colt revolver rotate when fired?
- In what direction does the cylinder of a Smith & Wesson revolver rotate when fired?
- What are the NRA safety rules, exactly as stated?
- What are the Gunsite safety rules, exactly as stated?
- Demonstrate your ability to disassemble and reassemble the handgun you will carry if you receive the permit--within 5 minutes. Then do it blindfolded--within 10 minutes.
- List every place in which CWP holders may not carry in Ohio.
- List and explain all requirements for owning a firearm in Ohio.
- List and explain all requirements for owning a firearm in Ohio.
You might not object to being held to such standards and, in my opinion, they aren't unreasonable on the face of it. But surely we'll agree that they and other requirements would drastically restrict the number of CWP holders.
More important, in my opinion, such requirements would bar a great many people from legally having the means to defend their lives against superior force. It might seem wise to deny a CWP to the little old lady who can't put 40 rounds out of 50 in the black on a paper target and who calls a cartridge a "bullet," but who are you to say that she won't exercise mature discretion in her actions and that she should be denied the right to defend her life against the 20-year-old meth addict who walks up to her screaming "I'll kill you for fun right now, you old biddy."
It's easy, I think, to write off the lives of other people but not so easy to accept it when other people write off our own life. My opinion is that
everyone has the
right to defend his or her life (even felons who have served their sentences and are released into society) and must not be denied the means to do so.
I know that other people have different opinions. But here's a situation in which opinions should not be allowed to count: it's a
right that either all of us have or none of us will have.
