Should a shooting test be a requirement for concealed carry?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think anyone here would be opposed to a little more shooting.
Click to expand...

I'll be first to say I'd definitely oppose any requirement on my part, to fulfill my 2nd Amendment right. I recommend everyone, anti, pro, or neutral, do a little more shooting, but I definitely don't think anyone should be required to do so, especially for the purpose of receiving an inalienable right that was supposed to lack infringement.
I'm always disappointed to read how many "pro-2A" members here are willing to accept more and more infringement/restrictions/requirements/regulations, and unfortunately I suppose the trend will continue.
 
I agree that both a safety test and a shooting proficiency test should be required to get a CCW permit. The risk presented by an incompetent permit holder isn't to himself, it's to those around him. Those people deserve the protection provided by proven competency.
 
Just my personal opinion, but licenses/permits to carry are un-Constitutional! As far as a shooting test, in Texas it is designed to show that you can actually handle a gun before they issue the license. You have to take a driving test before you get a drivers license, or at least you used to back in the old days when I got mine, so why not show you can shoot. Any chance I have to shoot, for any legal reason, I do it. If it costs me the price of 50 rounds of ammo to keep my license, so what. The flip side is, the range test is the only time many people even handle their firearm for the term of the license, much less shoot it. We all know you need to practice regularly to keep proficient with a firearm. I would like to see the test raised to 100 rounds and a minimum score of 85 to qualify. The test in Texas is too easy as it is. Remember, just my opinion.
 
I live in Alabama walk in, pay your money, they do the background check, and you have a permit. To me that is to much. This is a right. Why should I pay for it? As far as a test goes should we have to take a spelling or grammer test in order to excersise our right to free speech in this forum? ( If that were the case I probably wouldn't be posting this.)
 
Right to drive?

You need to safely drive a car before you get your license.
Click to expand...

Driving a car is not a Constitutional Right.

I took the Utah CCW course and was surprised by the number of non-gun-owners there. Safety training is a very good idea but even requiring a permit infringes on our rights. It's not like we have to get training to prevent us from offending others before getting our Free Speech permit.
 
I agree that both a safety test and a shooting proficiency test should be required to get a CCW permit. The risk presented by an incompetent permit holder isn't to himself, it's to those around him. Those people deserve the protection provided by proven competency.
Click to expand...

Competency...yeah, right. Criminologist Don Kates did a study that showed police officers are almost 6 times as likely to shoot the wrong person as a civilian shooter.

Kates study also showed that, "Whenever a New York City police officer fires a gun (outside of a target range), police officials review the incident. About 20 percent of discharges are accidental, and another ten percent are intentional violations of force policy. That means that only 70 percent of firearms discharges by New York City police are intentional and in compliance with force policy. In Philadelphia, accidents made up 27 percent of police firearms discharges; in Dade County, Florida, 31 percent were accidental."

Here's a link to a very interesting article that talks about competency with guns: http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Mags/GORE'- DOUBLE-STANDAR- ON-FIREARMS.htm

Next time you think of competency, police, extra training, etc., think of the immortal words of highly-trained former DEA agent Lee Paige: "I'm the only one professional enough, in this room that I know of to carry this Glock forty..."

So much for competency and training. Do the myths never end?
 
twoclones said:
It's not like we have to get training to prevent us from offending others before getting our Free Speech permit.
Click to expand...

Exercising your right of free speech isn't likely to kill an innocent bystander.

Bailey Guns said:
Competency...yeah, right. Criminologist Don Kates did a study that showed police officers are almost 6 times as likely to shoot the wrong person as a civilian shooter... So much for competency and training. Do the myths never end?
Click to expand...

So, many cops are incompetent with their guns. Does that mean it's OK for some CCW permit holders to also be incompetent?

When we're conferring on a person the power to take a life (possibly the wrong life) with the pull of a trigger, it's not good enough to trust them to be and remain competent; we should require it.
 
Last edited:
NO.. NO... NO!!

It is a RIGHT!! There is no IQ test to vote... there is no logic test on the right to free speech.

Not to mention it keeps legitimate folks from carrying. In my state between the required class and fees to the state you have to pay about $250 and wait about a month (or more) before you can carry. That is quite a bit of money and what if a threat comes up and you need to carry now? What if a woman leaves her husband and she is afraid he will hurt her? Must she scrape together $250 and wait a month to protect herself?

Anyone who is negligent with a firearm needs to be held criminally and civilly responsible. Furthermore I believe that gun shops and the NRA should work together to ENCOURAGE people who are new to attend classes. That does not mean I believe it should be required.
 
Should you need to pass a test to qualify for freedom of speech? Should you need a license to enjoy any of your other rights recognized and guaranteed by the constitution?

The constitution recognizes your right to keep and BEAR arms. You should not need a license or have to take a test. Just like you should not need a license or pass a test to post on the internet, write an article, give a speech etc.
 
When we're conferring on a person the power to take a life (possibly the wrong life) with the pull of a trigger, it's not good enough to trust them to be and remain competent; we should require it.
Click to expand...
Let's not lose sight of the fact that I have the power to take a human life with a flick of my wrist, without the firearm, using nothing more astonishing than my basic kitchen knife. Yet CrateNBarrel didn't require me to take Ginsu training before I bought the knife.

You want life (and more succinctly, freedom) to be certified safe. It's not, and all of the socialist meanderings in the world won't make it so, no matter how hard folk try.
 
So, many cops are incompetent with their guns. Does that mean it's OK for some CCW permit holders to also be incompetent?
Click to expand...

You missed the entire point. Cops go through extensive and ongoing training and still make grievous mistakes. The vast majority of CCW holders do not generally go through such extensive and ongoing training and make far fewer mistakes.

How much training is enough, then? Where do you draw the line? I've shown you and others clear evidence that proficiency training should not be required prior to a person being allowed a CCW permit.

Can anyone...anyone out there...show me some real evidence (not an isolated incident...but a real trend) that requiring a few hours on the range is going to make most permit holders any safer than they already are? I know a lot of you "feel" it would...but your "feelings" really don't matter when we're talking about further infringements on an already overly-infringed constitutional right.

You wanna give up your rights, fine. But don't screw with mine. The government doesn't need your help.
 
Look at it this way, DaveBeal. I'm going to assume that you have a permit and feel fairly competent in your shooting and gun-handling skills.

Suddenly, I'm put in charge of CCW training requirements for the state. All of a sudden, under my program, you can't qualify for your permit. My guess is your attitude is probably gonna change assuming you still want a permit.

I could be wrong.
 
It would be my opinion that no you should not have to pass a test to get a CCW.However (again my opinion) there should be a minimum proficiency (not just safe firearms handleing either) test required for citizenship.
 
Suddenly, I'm put in charge of CCW training requirements for the state. All of a sudden, under my program, you can't qualify for your permit.
Click to expand...
When the Texas CCW bill was being debated, the antis tried to slip in a poisoned pill -- they tried to set the shooting standard higher than for the State Police.

The idea, of course, was not to promote safety, but to make CCW licenses hard to get.
 
For those attempting to equate driver training and licensing with CCW training and licensing I wonder:

What is the rate of trained and licensed drivers who've lost their driver's license for a some type of violation vs the rate of relatively un-trained CCW permit holders who've lost their licenses for some type of violation.

My guess (and it's only speculation) is the trained and licensed drivers lose their licenses at a rate far higher than CCW permit holders.
 
It would be my opinion that no you should not have to pass a test to get a CCW.However (again my opinion) there should be a minimum proficiency (not just safe firearms handleing either) test required for citizenship.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think that in order to vote, you should have to show up at the polls with your rifle, full ammo pouches, and show your current rifle qualification.:D
 
Originally posted by Vern Humphrey:
The idea, of course, was not to promote safety, but to make CCW licenses hard to get.
Click to expand...

My point exactly. Why is it the average person can't own full-auto guns? Government regulation is the answer.
 
Just my opinion......

A "shooting test", with official targets and a scoring system? No, I see no point in that.

A "firearms handling, operation and safety" test? Yes, I think it's important that anyone given a license to carry a gun should at least be required to show that they know how handle and operate it safely. To me, that's just common sense.

Again, just my opinion. There was a woman in my CCW class that had just bought a new .38 revolver and came to the class. First time she ever took it out of the box or handled ANY gun was at the class. My thoughts were "*** is she doing here? Learn how to shoot it FIRST, before getting a license to carry it!"

I feel differently about "rights" I guess. Sure, everyone should have the "right" to own and carry a gun for protection without having to get an official "blessing" to do so. But, everyone should also have the "right" to live their lives without living in fear of accidentally getting shot by some fool that has a gun he/she has no clue how to operate.

I learned how to handle guns at a very young age, and I grumbled about having to jump through hoops and spend money in order to legally carry one for self-defense. But every day, I see multitudes of idiots that I'm oh-so-thankful the authorities DON'T allow to carry guns.

Just this morning, entering my office building, I was right behind two women that were too stupid to correctly operate the damned revolving door to get in! I don't want people like that having the right to be armed in my vicinity, thank you very much.

In downtown Denver, 16th street is closed to traffic except for pedestrians, cop cars and shuttle buses. Make a trip up and down that street on foot and in a few shuttles on any day, and you'll see dozens, perhaps hundreds, of people you would NOT want to be armed without regulation. Goofy bastards and criminals are everywhere, and blanket gun rights for everyone just isn't sensible to me. Those people are the reason that I carry to begin with!
 
rbernie said:
You want life (and more succinctly, freedom) to be certified safe. It's not, and all of the socialist meanderings in the world won't make it so, no matter how hard folk try.
Click to expand...

I'm not asking that life be certified safe. I'm just suggesting reasonable steps that can be taken to make it safer for bystanders. Requiring someone to display a minimal level of competence while firing a box of ammo at a range isn't onerous.

Bailey Guns said:
How much training is enough, then? Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...

What I'm suggesting doesn't necessarily require any training beyond a test. When I took an NRA Basic Pistol class, I shot something like 95/100 despite the fact that I had never fired a handgun before in my life, and it wasn't because I'm a great marksman. The test doesn't have to be difficult, and failure on the initial attempt probably means only that the person needs to practice.

Bailey Guns said:
Suddenly, I'm put in charge of CCW training requirements for the state. All of a sudden, under my program, you can't qualify for your permit. My guess is your attitude is probably gonna change assuming you still want a permit.
Click to expand...

I don't have a permit because I don't feel the need. If I did apply for a permit and was denied because I couldn't demonstrate a safe level of competence, I probably wouldn't be happy about it but I'd understand that there's a public safety issue at stake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Should There Be More Proficiency Test Requirements for CCW?
2 3 4 5
Replies
104
Views
4K
Occam's Razor
O
L
  • Locked
  • Poll
Passing CCW tests - too easy or too hard?
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
CB900F
C
W
  • Locked
  • Poll
Concealed Permit Requirements
2 3 4 5
Replies
106
Views
5K
FiREhAwk
F
S
  • Locked
So the Boston Globe's Editorial Staff has this to say about carrying guns...
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
4K
Dudedog
Dudedog
fireman 9731
  • Locked
News Article-local lady oldest female in Ky. with concealed carry license
Replies
6
Views
556
Officers'Wife
Officers'Wife
Back
Top