People Who Should Not Carry

[Insignificant bill]

I tell you what: some of the people I see in the local gun shop buying small pistols makes me glad our state has training requirements. It's not onerous; just one four-hour class. It's the stuff I took upon myself to learn when I got my first pistol 24 years ago, but which a lot of people these days wouldn't if they're not forced to.

Again criminals are the ones most likely to shoot you. Infringements on a right that is supposed have none is not the way to go. I live in one of those permitless states in the 4th largest Metropolitan Area in the US. I have an LTC and i am fine with permitless carry.

 

[trackskippy]

Well, if youre going to require a test, then make it a real one. Make it easy, say, the same exact test your local police have to pass. You can pass that no problem with what you carry, right?

See where this goes?

 

[Smaug]

Well, if youre going to require a test, then make it a real one. Make it easy, say, the same exact test your local police have to pass. You can pass that no problem with what you carry, right?

See where this goes?

Well, you're sure putting a lot of words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about a test. Also, the police have to shoot people under a much wider array of circumstances, I surely wouldn't pick a police test for self defense.

 

[DustyGmt]

It would be cool, however improbable, if there was a training incentive (beyond the obvious advantage of being more safe and competent with a firearm). I am thinking like if maybe some retailers would offer a small discount or something to that effect to somebody who has attended some accredited training course, who would sponsor or fund such a thing I dont know, just a thought to promote safer gun practices. Idk, I was gonna say whoever provides funding for the free cable locks and lock boxes, etc...

It's possible such a thing would be good optics for the 2A community at large, to see that gun people were proactively taking it upon themselves to promote and possibly fund safer communities, etc...

But mandatory training, no that's garbage.

 

[trackskippy]

Well, you're sure putting a lot of words in my mouth. I didn't say anything about a test. Also, the police have to shoot people under a much wider array of circumstances, I surely wouldn't pick a police test for self defense.

Ive taken a couple of the CCW type classes in the past, just to have the documentation that I had in fact done so. They are not required here.

Those classes all had a shooting requirement part of that class and you didnt get the certificate, if you didnt pass the shooting portion of it. It was a VERY simple "test", but still, there were a couple of people who did not pass it.

Personally, I believe you should be able to (not "have to" ) pass a basic police qualification with what you carry. They are usually fairly simple courses of fire and anything that they have to face, could very well be something you might have to. The whole point is to show you have the basics down and can shoot, just like they have to show.

Just for your own protection too, for court, should it become necessary.

 

[Insignificant bill]

It would be cool, however improbable, if there was a training incentive (beyond the obvious advantage of being more safe and competent with a firearm). I am thinking like if maybe some retailers would offer a small discount or something to that effect to somebody who has attended some accredited training course, who would sponsor or fund such a thing I dont know, just a thought to promote safer gun practices. Idk, I was gonna say whoever provides funding for the free cable locks and lock boxes, etc...

It's possible such a thing would be good optics for the 2A community at large, to see that gun people were proactively taking it upon themselves to promote and possibly fund safer communities, etc...

But mandatory training, no that's garbage.

Well it seems to me to not being much of a problem. If it was those permitless states would be having them. Again criminals are carrying guns with no training and they are the ones who are the real danger

 

[aaaaa]

Michigan requires we take an 8-hour class but the content of that class depends on the caliber of the instructor, which I am sure varies as much as people's carry caliber varies. Anyway, the class included shooting 50 rounds and my instructor did not find any major issues with my shooting other than he tried to work on a flinch by putting some empty chambers at random and mixing some .38 Specials and .357 Magnums in the same cylinder. He also had me get my finger from being so far into the trigger to help stay on point. Ha, I was the only one of three who even showed up for class. But it turns out I knew more than he did on some things just because I had been poring over materials on carrying and general gun info.

In Canada the requirements are more rigorous--if you even qualify to carry. He can, but only on the job, because he runs a trap line in the wilderness.
Proof of Proficiency Test (2.5 minute video). Homemade holster and speed loader pouch too:

 

[DeepSouth]

Putting a key ring trough a trigger guard is pretty dumb. I hate to say to much, I did a lot at dumb stuff as a youth myself.

I bet he doesn’t do it again, I learned plenty of lessons the hard way to.

 

[PzGren]

Just driving two miles to the post office this morning I saw more than one person that should not be driving and while unqualified motorists are a real danger to everyone, we probably have gotten very used to that so that we overlook it. While we all think well of ourselves I can claim over forty years a driving without having caused an accident.
I don't care if people shoot themselves or kill only themselves with automobiles but it is when innocent people get hurt that is becomes a tragedy and goes beyond Darwin's theory of the survival of the fittest.

 

[Smokin Gator]

I tell you what: some of the people I see in the local gun shop buying small pistols makes me glad our state has training requirements. It's not onerous; just one four-hour class. It's the stuff I took upon myself to learn when I got my first pistol 24 years ago, but which a lot of people these days wouldn't if they're not forced to.

One four hour class may get a little information to a new gun owner who is willing to listen and learn. But it's not going to make stupid, careless people safer with a firearm. If you don't have to pass a test to vote you shouldn't have to do so to carry a gun.

 

[Smokin Gator]

As far as requiring people to pass a law enforcement shooting qualification to ccw, No. Law enforcement will usually do whatever it takes to get all of their officers "qualified". Shoot until you pass or poke holes in a target with a pen. Will they do that for a ccw applicant ?

 

[Ignition Override]

Dustygmt:

Will a hunter’s obvious orange vest keep him/her from being a target?

A respondent claimed that he was with another hunter who began to Raise His Rifle to his eye …because…he Clearly saw Orange being worn by Another Hunter !

Naturally he explained to the guy that “animals don’t wear Orange” or whatever…

Human expectations for “seeing something” they Expect to see can Suppress All Brain Functions. This has been proven many times.

 

[Officers'Wife]

I won't say shouldn't be allowed as that is protected. I would like to see carelessness be given legal punishments though. For instance a few years back some idiot (who was NOT my brother) was doing acrobatic dances moves in a crowded club using a holster that did not fully secure his weapon. That state's answer to the discharge was to design "drop tests" for allowed firearms in the state while the idiot walked away laughing about it.

 

[twofewscrews]

 

[CapnMac]

that won't work, because the klutzes often aren't aware of their own limitations.

First rule of Dunning-Kreuger club is that you don't know you are in D-KC . . .

It's a dilemma that has plagued gun owners since firearms were invented.
To me, this suggests that there is no one simple answer to this complex problem.
Sadly, simple, blanket, solutions will be offered to correct this problem.

 

[The_Quartermaster]

I won't say shouldn't be allowed as that is protected. I would like to see carelessness be given legal punishments though. For instance a few years back some idiot (who was NOT my brother) was doing acrobatic dances moves in a crowded club using a holster that did not fully secure his weapon. That state's answer to the discharge was to design "drop tests" for allowed firearms in the state while the idiot walked away laughing about it.

You referring to the FBI agent that did that?

 

[The_Quartermaster]

There was also an off duty cop who shot himself in the genitals when he went to holster it from the range trip.

FBI agent does a flip, gun drops and goes bang.

Police chief who almost Glock legged himself when tightening his jacket.

CSM Saddler gave us a tongue lashing in BIAP about threats to UCMJ the next person who AD's (ND's really) and then does one himself the very next day in front of us at the clearing barrel by racking the slide, dropping the mag, points and kaboom.

All of the above is why I hate appeals to authorities about proper gun handling.

 

[Officers'Wife]

You referring to the FBI agent that did that?

Quite frankly I only remember the dancing and not the particulars. If he was an LEO... A fool with a badge is a more dangerous fool.

 

[DustyGmt]

Well it seems to me to not being much of a problem. If it was those permitless states would be having them. Again criminals are carrying guns with no training and they are the ones who are the real danger

No I wasn't suggesting it was out of control or anything like that, just that it's important to have training is all, health of ther herd kind of thing. I don't think it's a big sweeping issue or anything like that, just that we all probably know that one person who sweeps everybody at the range or can't keep their finger off the trigger when they aren't firing, etc....

Eta: there is a few posts then went off and running about "mandatory training imposed by legislative action", etc, that wasn't really what I was driving at, and want to be clear I am not for any kind of mandatory training, but I think it would be great if we could institute some kind of incentive to instruct (esp) the new gun owner of safe handling and skill through training or something. The only thing I would ever appeal to the government to do Re: firearms is loosen restrictions, etc...

 

[DustyGmt]

I would never appeal to any government authority to solve the issue of occasional/inevitable ND's, etc.... they and the media are the same ones who will take one isolated incident of a youth hunter accidentally shooting their parent in an accident or something, play it on 24hour rotation news clips and use it as an excuse to introduce a bill to make the new legal hunting age 25 after 40 hours of Hunter Safety or some bs.....

 

[robin banks]

This is why I support concealed carry permits with required training. Requiring training at least provides an opportunity for people wanting to carry concealed to hear about things like the four safety rules, safe storage, proper holstering, local, state and federal rules pertaining to firearms and the use of force, etc. My personal experience as a trainer (former trainer) was very few people seek out training beyond what is required to obtain a permit.

I question this obsession with training. kyle rittenhouse with no training showed more courage and trigger discipline then any cop shooting I ever read about. same with that kid in the mall that made those long shots. you cant teach courage or being calm under fire. in both of those incidents one or two cops would have fired a fusillade of bullets

 

[Robert]

Idiots come in all shapes and sizes and stupid people do stupid things with guns every day. That doesn't mean we have to give these idiots more time in the spot light. As far as training, or not training goes, do as you see fit.