Should Mandatory Skills Training Be Part of the Curriculum of Receiving a CWP?

[jcwit]

How bout no requirement but any accident of any kind caused by someone that did not receive any training in the operation of said firearm receives a 5 year mandatory sentence.

Nothing says you HAVE to get any training but it sure would be an incentive to get some.

 

[ATLDave]

I'd rather have some sort of competency demonstration than a class. We all know that people can sit through a class and learn nothing. What I want to know is not what they have been told, but what they have actually learned. And I don't care whether they learned it in an "official" class or not.

 

[HRnightmare]

How bout no requirement but any accident of any kind caused by someone that did not receive any training in the operation of said firearm receives a 5 year mandatory sentence.

When you accidently shoot someone not intending to be shot and they become crippled or dead does 5yrs bring solve that problem?

I tend to agree that you should try and avoid a problem before it occurs rather than wait until it does to decide how to fix it.

 

[IndianaBoy]

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!


You get something like that put in place and all it takes is some stupid bureaucrat to fiddle with the regulations. Then they make the criteria for passing the test so difficult that almost nobody can pass muster.




NO! Never! Not under any circumstances.

 

[IndianaBoy]

You guys who are voting yes....

I understand where you are coming from. You just want to see people behaving in a safe manner. I want that too.


No mandated class is going to take idiots out of the firearms pool. Remember, all those idiots on the road had to pass a driving test at some point.


Furthermore, you need to look at what is going on in the political spectrum right now. Nothing would make Democrats happier than a chance to deny people their right to carry.



Moreover, adding a mandated class means someone has to teach it. That person will have to be paid, and a range will need to be rented. In my experience in Missouri, the class for CCW added roughly $250 to the cost of the permit on top of the fees to the state.



No thanks.

 

[jcwit]

So what do you purpose?

It's obvious we can't have every slobbering idiot out at the range shooting every thing up, let alone out on the streets with a firearm.

Or maybe that IS ok with you?

 

[DeepSouth]

^^^^^

Enforce current laws..... How about we start with that.

 

[jcwit]

Enforce current laws..... How about we start with that.

It's a thought!

 

[Midwest]

If someone is interested in a subject Wouldn't they go out (on their own) and learn more about the subject that they are interested in? Wouldn't they be interested in the safety aspects, the responsibility, the how and whys of the subject? Yes they would. Why, because they are interested.

Lets say someone wants to take up welding, wouldn't they ask someone who knows how to weld about the basics on how to do it? Maybe view some welding videos on YouTube? Read some books on it, ask people, watch it being done? Of course they would.


But how can we ensure that people don't burn themselves (or others) with a welding torch? Do we have a government mandate license for that? Of course not.

Why don't we license people who use chain saws? Chain saws are dangerous and trees can fall on someone or some property.


But when it comes to firearms it is a different story. Why? To assume that all people are completely dumb and uninterested to learn about the subject of firearms and it's responsibilities .....so much that the government has to step in and license it, is ridiculous.

How do people know which firearm to get? They ask someone they know who already has a firearm. They might even ask to go to the range with someone who already has a firearm. How do people learn to shoot? They go with friends to the range. They learn about firearms through their friends. They don't need a Government Mandate and a License to do that (in most states).

I talked about this before and I'll mention it again, some states (like KY) you don't need a permit or training to open carry.

What is the difference between open carry and concealed carry? A piece of cloth. And we need an expensive day long safety course and hundreds of dollars in fees in order to put a firearm behind a piece of cloth? Where is the logic in that?

.

 

[JFtheGR8]

Due to the language of the Constitution the answer is no because it is a right and not a privilege. To change that would require the people to vote to change the amendment. Correct? Oh wait, our liberal leaders think the Constitution is open to THEIR interpretation and have brain washed much of the population to believe that.

 

[JSH1]

So you're against legally blind people from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights.

Blind people cannot follow the 4 basic rules of gun safety. So yes, I'm against them carrying concealed weapons.

 

[silicosys4]

So what do you purpose?

It's obvious we can't have every slobbering idiot out at the range shooting every thing up, let alone out on the streets with a firearm.

Or maybe that IS ok with you?

Could you cite something that conclusively links mandatory firearm training to a decreased amount of slobbering idiots shooting up the local range and city streets?
Could you also cite something that breaks down the percentage of slobbering idiots as compared to people fit to own firearms, so we can see if this demographic group of slobbering idiots is sizable enough to justify restricting the rights of hundreds of millions of people? Remember, criminal past resulting in firearm rights restriction is a disqualifier for this demographic group. We are talking only of people who's sole distinguishing factor from fit people is that they are too much of a slobbering idiot to own guns without careful tutelage.
And as long as you are finding those facts, could you also find and cite how many gun range accidents and wild street shootings this demographic of slobbering idiots are responsible for?

 

[IndianaBoy]

So what do you purpose?

It's obvious we can't have every slobbering idiot out at the range shooting every thing up, let alone out on the streets with a firearm.

Or maybe that IS ok with you?

Why don't you tell me what you propose?

Because right now you don't sound like a person who respects the inherent right of free men to be armed.

 

[45_auto]

Using a table saw you likely hurt yourself, untrained using a firearm your likely to hurt or kill someone else.

If your criteria is the harm that the object can do to others, how much mandatory training do you believe should be required before a person is able to purchase gasoline or matches?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire

 

[short barrel]

Just saw this post. Where in the 2nd does it even hint of that? The most incompetent person with a gun has a right to have it. Period. It's not a privilege like a driver's license. If I don't know the muzzle from the grip it's not the gov't's business. I don't need to be responsible with firearms to keep and bear. As long as the 2nd stands, I will refuse to be questioned or tested.

 

[oneounceload]

How bout no requirement but any accident of any kind caused by someone that did not receive any training in the operation of said firearm receives a 5 year mandatory sentence.

When the prison industry keeps REAL criminals in prison then let's talk......

So what do you purpose?

It's obvious we can't have every slobbering idiot out at the range shooting every thing up, let alone out on the streets with a firearm.

Or maybe that IS ok with you?

Why not? We let these same folks drink alcohol, drive vehicles, vote and breed

What if they make a requirement that YOU can't pass and now you are defenseless?

Is THAT OK with YOU?

 

[Officers'Wife]

Here is another thought... Has it been a problem? Indiana is a must issue state and I have yet to hear even one report of CCW with an AD or other symptom of careless behavior. Gentlemen, we have enough problems both here and abroad that need to be resolved rather than solving a problem that really doesn't seem to be that much of a problem.

 

[silicosys4]

Blind people cannot follow the 4 basic rules of gun safety. So yes, I'm against them carrying concealed weapons.

Okay, lets look at that.
The four rules of gun safety as given by the ADTA are;

1. Treat every firearm as if its loaded.

So how is that an issue with a legally blind person? To use a firearm one must touch that firearm, and blind people are perfectly capable of loading, unloading, and checking a firearm in a safe manner.

2. Never point a firearm at something you are not willing to destroy.

If a blind person is under attack in their own home with an assailant in contact with them while attacking, they have every right to stop that attack with lethal force. A blind person is just as capable as any seeing person of determining if they feel their life is in danger and they need to use lethal force if necessary.
The fact that they might not necessarily see an attack coming until they are being physically attacked gives them MORE justification in having the means to immediately stop a threat with force if necessary.

3. Always be sure of your target and whats beyond it.

This is entirely possible for a blind person, if they live in a rural area, or know the layout of their home. Blind people are more aware of their surroundings than you give credit for.

4. Keep your finger off the trigger until ready to fire

I don't see an issue related to sight here either.

 

[george burns]

As new gun owners enter the pool of sportsmen, hunters law enforcement and military veterans, they don't have the insight or experience to be left to their own demise, and that of other people who may be unintentionally injured as a result of their unfamiliarity with firearms and especially ammunition.
Most have no idea what a rifle bullet will do upon hitting a barrier or a person, or weather they have hollow point, or FMJ, Frangible, or wad cutters etc in their firearm.
They don't realize that having their finger on the trigger when someone yells, "HEY", and they turn and the gun goes off.
that's why you can't compare this to a chain saw. The person with the saw is likely to be the one who suffers for their lack of efficiency.
With 30 round magazines and buckshot, a small flinch can cause a major problem. There needs to be some kind of training for weapons that is perhaps not mandatory , but suggested for new gun owners, other than nothing.
Just because they sat through a class and fired 1 round, is not enough to make them safe around our family's and friends.
I don't even go to the range anymore because of all of the nonsense that I see with guys Putting a 44 magnum in their dates hands and telling her to shoot at the target, while she hits the ceiling and turns around with the hammer back sweeping everyone in the place.
As this turns into a more inclusive hobby, we are going to have more accidents due to lack of knowledge period. There is no respect given to the weapon by many a video gamer, who thinks they "got this", because they just killed 300 make believe bad guys in Black Ops.
I am and have always been for a reciprocal carry permit, open or concealed, for anyone who has not been arrested and convicted of a violent felony, or is not a citizen or handicapped in a way to make it unsafe to use a firearm. But I would prefer that they also spent one day out of their lives to take a course, on how guns function, what single vs double action means, how to tell a gun is not loaded, and what different types of ammo do and what their use is, along with the normal safety rules, that we take for granted they know.

 

[JSH1]

3. Always be sure of your target and whats beyond it.

This is entirely possible for a blind person, if they live in a rural area, or know the layout of their home.

A person is not required to have a concealed carry permit to have a firearm in their own home.

That said, it is impossible for a blind person to know their target and what is behind it. Even in their own home.

Blind people are more aware of their surroundings than you give credit for.

I'm well aware of what a blind person is capable of. My grandmother went blind in her late 50's. She was blind the vast majority of the time I knew her. That didn't keep her from living alone on a farm until the day she died.

 

[Robert]

I am sure all of the yes arguments sound like very reasonable restrictions to those who seek to ban all guns. Make no mistake, gun control has nothing to do with guns and everything to do with control. It starts harmless enough with mandatory training and "reasonable restriction" and ends in an unarmed populace that is much easier to control.

If I need someone else's permission to exercise my rights then those rights have become privileges and can be taken away on a whim.

 

[hso]

There should be no CCW since no one should have the state tell them if and when they can carry a firearm. That also means there should be no training or skills demonstration requirement anymore than there should be to vote or exercise religion or speech.

 

[RugerBob]

I voted no.
But here in Maine we are required to take an class. I didn't mind.
Also had military training and qualified with 1911. 19echo. tanker crewman.

 

[Akita1]

I get the drill-down arguments on what minimum requirements would be but I voted yes. I practice a lot and want my fellow CC brethren (and sistren of course) to know the tool before they wield it. Sure this sentiment has been orated better in previous posts, just my input.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Blind people cannot follow the 4 basic rules of gun safety. So yes, I'm against them carrying concealed weapons.

What about a knife? That's a weapon, and you'd be surprised what a blind person can learn.

Blind or not, they still have the right to keep and bear arms(of any kind) and government can't infringe upon that right.

Woody