Has anyone done this...

[gravedigger]

Has anyone done this "at-home" ccw? Anyone know George Hollmann? Just curious to see if anyone has done this and if any Sheriff's have actually accepted it. I personally don't see anything wrong with it, if you already know what your doing. I am sure this could turn in to a heated debate, but I am really just curious if anyone has done this or had any interaction with the instructor, George Hollmann? Thanks in advance!

http://www.highlandsranchfirearms.com/

[Beer] George Hollmann

[StagLefty]

As an NRA Instructor I'd have a hard time with this option being offered to someone who has no firearm related experience at all. If there was a way to verify someone's firearm experience I could see this as a good offering to them. A good percentage of folks on here probably didn't need to go through a full course to meet requirements due to firearm experience so I don't know how there would be a fair system to determine whether or not a home course would be sufficient. I just feel that folks would learn a lot more in a class environment. JMHO

[Irving]

I took an at home course. I had already researched the laws so I didn't really learn much at the time. I was accepted by the Sheriff though.

[55fmj]

As an NRA Instructor I'd have a hard time with this option being offered to someone who has no firearm related experience at all. If there was a way to verify someone's firearm experience I could see this as a good offering to them. A good percentage of folks on here probably didn't need to go through a full course to meet requirements due to firearm experience so I don't know how there would be a fair system to determine whether or not a home course would be sufficient. I just feel that folks would learn a lot more in a class environment. JMHO


+1

As a firearms instructor, I can't tell you the number of people that wanted to take a class but felt they "already knew" the basics and told me they were already proficient with shooting their weapon and very familiar with Colorado law. It did not take very long during the class to find out that they were not. Obviously there is a wide range of info that varies from class to class, but if you get in on a good class you will come away with learning something. If ( God forbid ) I was ever put in a situation that forced me to use my gun for self defense and I found myself in court, I would sure hate to state that I recieved my training in an online internet "test" and was never even required to show proficiency with my handgun. Just my opinion of course. Good luck.

[Bailey Guns]

To answer the OP's question, don't know anything about Mr Hollman.

In response to some of the other comments (and to beat on a dead horse just a little...) -

This has come up several times. This is just my opinion. Personally, I'm happy to have had the training I've received over the years from military, to law enforcment to private schools and classes. There's no doubt it's made me a better shooter and better able to make decisions under stress. I always recommend that people get as much training as their means will allow and that they practice frequently.

However, it's proven day in and day out that people with minimal firearms training (sometimes none) can effectively defend themselves and others. All one needs to do is look at news accounts of defensive shootings around the country to see this is true. You don't need to be some sort of firearms ninja to defend yourself with a gun...that's the beauty of having a gun. Not only that, but look at the number of accidents involving firearms vs the number of firearms available. Sure, one accident may be one too many. But seriously...in the grand scheme of things accidents involving firearms are very low in relation to the number of guns in the hands of "the people".

Even though I continue to make a living as a firearms instructor, I'd rather see Colorado adopt an Alaska model for firearms permits. If you can legally own possess a handgun you can carry it concealed for any lawful purpose without having a permit. I like the fact that AK issues permits if desired so AK residents can carry in other parts of the country (unlike Vermont). Minimal gov't intrusion at it's finest. I am absolutey, unequivically against more government intervention and more stringent requirements in Colorado for issuance of a concealed handgun permit.

Would I feel comfortable offering this type of class? Not really. But it appears to be legal and meets the state requirements for a "handgun training class" apparently. So, I don't have any problems with it.

Let's face it. Most classes that require range time and "qualification" really aren't offering "training". Having someone stand in front of a paper target from a few yards away and shoot it 20-40 times without making someone bleed really isn't training. There's no stress, no decision making required and no feedback from the target. It just seems to make lots of people "feel" good because they actually got to pull the trigger on a gun. This type of training in no way prepares someone for a lethal force encounter, IMO.

Flame on.

[55fmj]

You are correct. This is a dead horse that will never stop being beaten. While I agree with some of your statements, I will dissagree with others. That is OK. Although, I don't think "accidents" are what we are talking about here. Like I stated earlier, all classes are different. Find yourself a good one and you will benefit. While I myself also makes a living as an instructor, I am very much in favor of less government. The less they have to do with our rights the better. I would tell anyone, do yourself a favor and get some quality training. Not only will it help you, but it will help the rest of the responsible gun owners out there. On a final note, I am really glad to hear you say that you personally would not be comfortable doing this type of class. Neither would I.

[OgenRwot]

Even though I continue to make a living as a firearms instructor, I'd rather see Colorado adopt an Alaska model for firearms permits. If you can legally own possess a handgun you can carry it concealed for any lawful purpose without having a permit. I like the fact that AK issues permits if desired so AK residents can carry in other parts of the country (unlike Vermont). Minimal gov't intrusion at it's finest. I am absolutey, unequivically against more government intervention and more stringent requirements in Colorado for issuance of a concealed handgun permit.

It's funny/amazing that you say this and I respect you a hell of a lot more because of it. Not that I didn't respect you but you get the point.

Some of the BIGGEST opposition to the Constitutional Carry Law that passed in Arizona this legislative session was coming from none other than some of the most respected firearms trainers in the state. They said this that and the other about how it's not safe, you need training etc etc. This came after they clammerd on and on about how there needs to be no restrictions on 2A over the past few years of my participation of the boards down there.

But when it came down to money being removed from their pocket they threw fits. The going rate is 40-50 bucks for a ccw class down there. You do it once a month for 25 people at 50 bucks a pop you're talking an extra 1200+ dollars a month. Do it twice, you're making 2500 extra a month. Quite a bit of extra cash to have. Now that you don't need the permit, you don't need the class. These instructors saw this coming and saw that money going right out the window so they made a HUGE deal about how unsafe it was going to be. It really pissed me off and I lost a whole bunch of respect for a lot of what seemed to be good principled guys. Money talks and they all went the way of the NRA.

[Byte Stryke]

But when it came down to money being removed from their pocket they threw fits. The going rate is 40-50 bucks for a ccw class down there. You do it once a month for 25 people at 50 bucks a pop you're talking an extra 1200+ dollars a month. Do it twice, you're making 2500 extra a month. Quite a bit of extra cash to have. Now that you don't need the permit, you don't need the class. These instructors saw this coming and saw that money going right out the window so they made a HUGE deal about how unsafe it was going to be. It really pissed me off and I lost a whole bunch of respect for a lot of what seemed to be good principled guys. Money talks and they all went the way of the NRA.

People that will sell their ethics and principles for cash...

hmm... whats the word I'm looking for here?...


I Agree with many of you. Training is a great Idea.
I would like to see all CCW holders trained with enough efficiency as to give even myself a sense of security.

That being said. I do not believe that there should be a government regulation on it.
Should it ever comes to a civil point of "he didn't have a proficiency for his firearm."
I would rather not have some bullshit blanket of "I met the state requirements.". I also dont want it to turn into another bureaucratic bullshit tax revenue.

Deep within each of us we know three things as firearms advocates.

where our current firearms skills are at.
where our firearms skill need to be.
where we want our firearms skills to be at.and I honestly don't believe that any shooter worth his salt will ever say
"I am an expert and know everything there is to know."

so yeah, no govt... no taxes and I agree

I'm starting to rattle... time for more coffee

[OgenRwot]

Well, I've decided I'm ordering two of these, one for me and one for the wife. I've been shooting my whole life, taken the AZ permit course (which includes "training" 7 shots out of 10 in the "kill zone") and have shot a few competitions here and there. I know I don't need anymore classroom training and I don't need the "firearms training" you get at most CCW classes. My main goal in getting my CO CCW in cost effective manner. I'll let you guys know how it goes.

[Irving]

Oh, I hadn't clicked the link until now.

I didn't take an online course. I took a lecture only course at someone's house who hosted the get together.

[cowboykjohnson]

I did a lecture only class because it was cheap, and putting 10 shots on paper at 5 feet isn't training.

[gravedigger]

Well, I've decided I'm ordering two of these, one for me and one for the wife. I've been shooting my whole life, taken the AZ permit course (which includes "training" 7 shots out of 10 in the "kill zone") and have shot a few competitions here and there. I know I don't need anymore classroom training and I don't need the "firearms training" you get at most CCW classes. My main goal in getting my CO CCW in cost effective manner. I'll let you guys know how it goes.

Nice, let me know how long it takes to receive the packet/test now that you have ordered it and also let me know the turn around time on your certificate after you send the test back. Thanks and best of luck to you! I am thinking of doing the same, however I want my GF to take an actual classroom course with range time and live fire training as well.

[OgenRwot]

Yeah I hear you on that one. My wife has taken the AZ ccw class which is pretty good in my opinion. She learned a lot from it. Plus she hangs around me from time to time so she picks a lot up there too haha.

[OgenRwot]

I mailed the paper work and check off on Saturday the 3rd. Keep in mind no mail delivery on Monday because of the holiday. I just received the packets in the mail yesterday the 8th. The day he got my check he sent out the packets, that's pretty good if you ask me. Once I get the test finished and sent in I'll update you guys.

[gravedigger]

Nice, thanks for the update? How big is the packet? Is there a lot of good info inside or is it all basic stuff? Think I might order mine soon.

[OgenRwot]

It's all pretty basic stuff that you would learn in a regular CCW class. Came with a few articles on carrying and what not, pretty good stuff. The packet for the class was about 10 pages or so and has all the info in there for the test. Came with some pamphlets for firearm safety and the likes. Over all pretty good if you're familiar with firearms and carrying. Not much on Colorado law so you need to do your own homework on that one. If you haven't taken an in person class before I would highly recommend doing so and skipping this "at home" class. If you're very familiar with firearms, ccw law and have taken some sort of class before I would encourage you to take this class. As I said in an above post, I have my AZ ccw and so does my wife. We were looking for something to save money since most classes are around $100 bucks or so. This one was $50 and also didn't take up a whole Saturday so we opted for it. Again, if you have not taken a class before please go sit through one, you will learn a lot of great info that you need to know.

[OgenRwot]

I dropped off the finished tests at the post office on the 10th and assume they went out on the following Monday the 12th. Today is Thursday the 15th and I received the class completion certificates along with a letter instructing me where to find correct information on applying for my permit. That's a total of nine business days from my ordering the packets online to having completion certificates in hand. That's outstanding if you ask me.

A HUGE +1 to George at Highlands Ranch Firearms.

[Gritty]

That sounds interesting. I might give it a shot.

[Zundfolge]

The purpose of CCW training is not to make you into an effective gunfighter, the purpose of the training is to make sure you know the safety rules and the laws surrounding armed self defense so that you are both safe and legal when carrying.

The purpose of MANDATING training for CCW was so the CCW law could get past the liberals, moderates and other statists in the legislature so the law would exist in the first place.

Frankly I think the best way to handle it would be like your drivers license. You don't have to go to an expensive driving school to get your license, you just have to pass a multiple choice written test (for which you are provided a workbook to help you prepare). Maybe for your first CCW you should have to shoot a qualifying (the equivalent of the in-car drivers' test) but once you have your permit all you should have to do is demonstrate your understanding of the 4 safety rules and the legal ins and outs of carrying (what weapons can be carried, where you can carry, when lethal force is justified, etc).


It seems to me the added expense of a training course smacks me of the root of all gun control laws; keeping "undesirables" (ie: poor and non white) from obtaining a license to carry.

[OneGuy67]

The purpose of CCW training is not to make you into an effective gunfighter, the purpose of the training is to make sure you know the safety rules and the laws surrounding armed self defense so that you are both safe and legal when carrying.

Frankly I think the best way to handle it would be like your drivers license. You don't have to go to an expensive driving school to get your license, you just have to pass a multiple choice written test (for which you are provided a workbook to help you prepare). Maybe for your first CCW you should have to shoot a qualifying (the equivalent of the in-car drivers' test) but once you have your permit all you should have to do is demonstrate your understanding of the 4 safety rules and the legal ins and outs of carrying (what weapons can be carried, where you can carry, when lethal force is justified, etc).

The laws have changed for the driver's license requirements here in Colorado. Not speaking directly for a state-to-state transfer, but new drivers:


To be issued a Minor Driver's License (ages 16 - 20) you must meet the following requirements:


Must hold instruction permit for 12 months (if under 18)

Must be at least 16 years old

Present a completed and signed Drive Time Log (if under 18)

License will expire 20 days after your 21st birthday

A 6-hour Behind the Wheel (BTW) certificate is required, upon application for the license, for minors who obtain their instruction permit under the age of 16 years 6 months years. Exception: 12 hours of behind the wheel training may be administered by a parent, guardian or alternate permit supervisor if there is no approved school offering at least 20 hours of driver education per week located within 30 miles of the permit holders residence.

Pass a drive test with either a third-party tester or at a Driver's License office. *Drive Tests at Driver's License offices are by appointment only*

Every applicant under 18 years of age must submit an 'Affidavit of Liability and Guardianship' DR2460 (http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite?c=Document_C&cid=1211966056948&pagename=Revenue-MV%2FDocument_C%2FRMVAddLink) signed by a parent, stepparent, guardian or grandparent with Power of Attorney. The DR 2460 must be verified by either a Driver's License employee or a Notary Public. If the signer is a guardian, original court documents showing guardianship, custody or adoption must be presented. If the signer is a grandparent with Power of Attorney (POA), the original POA must be presented and a copy of the POA must be surrendered upon application for the permit. If neither parent is living, the legal guardian of the minor may sign the affidavit. In this case, court-ordered guardianship papers are required. The affidavit may be obtained at any Motor Vehicle Driver License Office, from the back of the Driver License manual or downloaded above.

It seems to me that it is easier to obtain a CCW in Colorado than it is to get a driver's license. That is a little disconcerting to me.

[Wulf202]

You know, this mail order class sounds more informative than the 8 hour basic pistol class from the NRA...

[OgenRwot]

It seems to me that it is easier to obtain a CCW in Colorado than it is to get a driver's license. That is a little disconcerting to me.


Why? Having a gun is a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Driving is a privilege, not a right. You put far more people in danger by getting behind the wheel than you do carrying a pistol.

[OneGuy67]

Why? Having a gun is a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Driving is a privilege, not a right. You put far more people in danger by getting behind the wheel than you do carrying a pistol.

I don't agree that one is more dangerous than the other. Both are potentially deadly when utilized. The fact that it is far easier to obtain a CCW by any nut who has managed to stay out of big trouble prior to sitting through a 2 hour class on holsters and imprinting and some legal issues. Owning a gun is a right that has limitations; a CCW isn't a right without limitation and one doesn't equal the other.

Before anyone's dander gets up, I'm not calling people with CCW's nuts, but I have run into some I would consider a nut who have a CCW solely because they haven't done anything yet to warrant them not having one. I'm glad the sheriff's I've dealt with are quick to yank the CCW when one of these people do finally step on it.

My point is, it requires a lot more to get a driver's license than it does a CCW, more practice, more training, more classroom time. I would prefer those who obtain a CCW to have gone through a training class that includes a day at the range to build skills, not the here's-ten-rounds,-hit-the-target-and-you-are-good or those classes that don't even require any range time, like the one my admin assistant recently took. I would also like to see a yearly range refresher to maintain the CCW.

To keep my CCW, I must qualify every 3 months, attend monthly firearms training and prove continuous proficiency. Additionally, as a firearms instructor, if one of the officers I work with were to be in a bad shoot on or off duty, I have the potential to be sued as well.

This is just my opinion, my $.02. You can disagree with me all day, but it is still my opinion.

[OgenRwot]

Deleted

[OneGuy67]

Wow! That's one hell of an opinion you have there. Forget about people's rights. Let's make them qualify to speak in an open forum. Speech is far more dangerous than a gun is. MLK Jr didn't fire a shot and look what he accomplished. How about Hitler, he didn't do any shooting after the Beer Hall Putsch (which didn't accomplish anything by the way) and yet he was elected because he could give a hell of a speech. He was elected because he gave the German people what they were craving, pride in their identity, pride in their heritage after being defeated in WW I and having to deal with the very oppressive and demeaning demands of the victors (I spent a few years living in Germany, got the information second hand by people there first hand). So by speech, he did give a good speech, but it was the content of the speech, followed by the actions of the supporters that got him elected.


Just because you think someone is a "nut" doesn't mean they shouldn't have a gun. If they are passing the background checks they are obviously not nuts and are not criminals. Making people shoot once a year to keep their CCW is pure lunacy, I can't afford to pay the fees to do that every year. And who are you to say that somebody hasn't done a crime yet? Who are you, Tom Cruise in Minority Report? Pre-crime division?

Nah, not as good looking as Tom Cruise, taller too. You watch too much tv. And frankly, yes, I have run across some who have a shall-issue CCW that shouldn't have one. Plain as day, nut-case. And we aren't talking about ownership of a gun, we are talking about the concealed carrying of a gun. Who am I to say? Just the damn cop who has to deal with this person on whatever call it happens to be on. Don't kid yourself about the background check, it isn't perfect and most Sheriff's don't do an annual check to see if you've screwed up to yank it; it predominately comes down to re-licensing or a call from another LEO advising of charges to get it reviewed.

You believe an annual refresher is pure lunacy. Your opinion. We differ. If you are an idiot driver, I can request DMV have you go through a review and another driver's certification to keep your license; can't do that with a CCW. Shall issue unless you got something concrete on the criminal history. So...you get charged with a felony, plead it down to a misdemeanor and do your community service, pay your court costs and get your CCW. Still a criminal, still get your CCW. Should someone arrested for 3, 4, 9 DUI's have a license or a CCW? Actions show poor decision making.


I'm looking around my computer desk and I can see no less than 10 things that I could easily kill somebody with. You want to make me get a license to carry these scissors too? Most of the time you have good, well thought out arguments to people's opinions. This one about the items on your desk...not so much. Stick to the topic of what you challenged me on and that was my comment that it is easier to get a CCW in this state than it is to get a driver's license.[Neene3]

[Irving]

It's much easier to kill a group of people with negligence with a car than it is from negligence with a pistol. There is no question that cars are more dangerous.

Also, if you aren't in prison, you should have full rights restored to you, no matter what you've done. If you can't be trusted in society with full rights, then you shouldn't have been let out in the first place.

My only concession on this is if you were sentenced to 7 years, have had good behavior, you can make a deal to voluntarily surrender some of your rights in exchange for getting out early. However, once that 7 years is completed, you get all your rights back.

This really isn't worth discussing though, as you'd have to tear down and completely rebuild the court and criminal system in order to accomplish it right?

[Gritty]

I just talked to George. Hes a great guy and is happy to help anyone get his CHP.

[nontactical]

If this wasn't a virtual conversation, I would buy you a beer. I think I would like you.

[OneGuy67]

If this wasn't a virtual conversation, I would buy you a beer. I think I would like you.


Ha ha! Thanks! Anytime!

[Paladin]

Make that two beers. We'll call a cab.

[OgenRwot]

Most of the time you have good, well thought out arguments to people's opinions. This one about the items on your desk...not so much. Stick to the topic of what you challenged me on and that was my comment that it is easier to get a CCW in this state than it is to get a driver's license.[Neene3]

The point was that guns become a hot button issue because liberals don't like them. It's a tool no different than anything else, you and I and everybody else on here knows that. So what I meant by that comment was that you can kill people with a lot of things. You can accidentally kill people with a lot of things. But you're not required to have a permit to operate a pair of scissors.

My main point in the whole argument is this. There is no other enumerated right that you must have a permit for. We have a right important enough that it was listed in the Bill of Rights that is taken away from us on a whim from politicians. It has already been marginalized beyond belief if you ask me. I don't like that you have to get permission to use the Second Amendment.

[OneGuy67]

The point was that guns become a hot button issue because liberals don't like them. It's a tool no different than anything else, you and I and everybody else on here knows that. So what I meant by that comment was that you can kill people with a lot of things. You can accidentally kill people with a lot of things. But you're not required to have a permit to operate a pair of scissors.

My main point in the whole argument is this. There is no other enumerated right that you must have a permit for. We have a right important enough that it was listed in the Bill of Rights that is taken away from us on a whim from politicians. It has already been marginalized beyond belief if you ask me. I don't like that you have to get permission to use the Second Amendment.


I'm not trying to drag this old argument out, but the enumerated right you are arguing for is for the people's right to keep and bear arms. It doesn't say anything to the point of concealing said arms. In fact, the enumerated right you refer to is the limitation of the FEDERAL government against your rights and the state constitution is very specific to the point that you cannot carry a concealed weapon.

"The right of no personto keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall be called into question; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to justify the practice of carrying concealed weapons." - Article II, Section 13, Colorado Constitution

I agree that firearms are a hot topic issue with liberal, social state politicians. I agree that they look to reduce or eliminate the amount of firearms in our society. On that, we can find common ground.

However, the 1st Amendment reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Do you not need a permit to assemble in groups? Yep. You have a right to assemble, but it can be controlled.

"Originally, the Bill of Rights restrictions applied only to the federal government and not to the state governments. Parts of the amendments originally proposed by Madison that would have limited state governments ("No state shall violate the equal rights of conscience, or the freedom of the press, or the trial by jury in criminal cases.") were not approved by Congress, and therefore the Bill of Rights did not apply to the powers of state governments.

States had established state churches (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion) up until the 1820s, and Southern states (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_United_States), beginning in the 1830s, could ban abolitionist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism) literature. In the 1833 case Barron v. Baltimore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barron_v._Baltimore), the Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States) specifically ruled that the Bill of Rights provided "security against the apprehended encroachments of the general government—not against those of local governments." In the Gitlow v. New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gitlow_v._New_York), 268 U.S. 652, (1925) case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion), which had been adopted in 1868, could make certain applications of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states. However, the Gitlow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gitlow) case stated (p. 666): "For present purposes we may and do presume that freedom of speech and of the press — which are protected by the First Amendment from abridgment by Congress — are among the fundamental personal rights and 'liberties' protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment from impairment by the States." However at p. 668, the Court held: "It does not protect publications prompting the overthrow of government by force", which Gitlow and associates advocated in their publications. The Supreme Court has cited Gitlow v. New York as precedent for a series of decisions that made most, but not all, of the provisions of the Bill of Rights restrictions applicable to the states under the doctrine of selective incorporation."

Just food for thought OgenRwot. We can agree to disagree.[Beer]

[jscwerve]

Sorry to bring up an old thread, but I wanted to comment on this. That is, the original topic of this discussion.

I just ordered and completed the course from HRFA and I thought I would share. The packet came in very quickly, I think I mailed out the check on a Friday, and it came in on Tuesday I believe. Very quick response. As for the course, it was ok, very basic, I think there could be some more content to it as to use of force and colorado carry law. I would absolutely not recommend this to someone who has little or no firearms training. I took it because it was inexpensive, almost all classes are held on weekends (of which I work every one), and classes are offered in the day (I work 12.5hr graveyards). This fit with my very odd schedule and I have prior military training (I didn't decide to get my cwp until after the 10 year cutoff for dd214 training proof (was just this July). For someone like my girlfriend who is still new to firearms and is slowly learning, I don't think this is a good option. To be truthful, the test can be completed with the one pamphlet in about 15 minutes, and if you have been around firearms, you will already know 95% of the answers. The other articles and pamphlets that come in the packet are interesting and informitive. It still only takes anout another 20 minutes to read through it all.

All in all, inexpensive and quick. Easy way to get the paperwork part of things done. As for the inexperienced, I would say no way, not without practice and face to face classtime.

[MichiganMilitia]

Is there anywhere to obtain a clearly spelled out pamphlet or booklet with all the rules and regulations for CCW in Colorado? If you take this course it doesn't sound like you are given all the legal knowledge that will keep you out of foolish situations.

[OgenRwot]

RMGO (http://rmgo.org) has good info, check there site.

[jscwerve]

Is there anywhere to obtain a clearly spelled out pamphlet or booklet with all the rules and regulations for CCW in Colorado? If you take this course it doesn't sound like you are given all the legal knowledge that will keep you out of foolish situations.


The CCW application package from my county (Douglas) is like 17 pages long and only the last 2 are the actual application. The rest of the package is the laws and regulations.

No, this course does not cover that stuff, it is very basic.

[MichiganMilitia]

Thanks for the heads up OgenRwot. I've been a while since I've been to the RMGO website, and I forgot how awesome they are. My NRA membership expires in a few months and I will NOT be renewing. Instead, I intend to send that money to Dudley Brown and the RMGO.

Jscwerve - Thanks for the info. I want to get my CCW in the next year or so and I want to be as well informed legally as I can be before I even start the process.

[Bongo Boy]

What's most intriguing about the whole thing is that no human intervention, anywhere in the process, would be required. If the State set up the same test on a web site, required sufficient personal information, they could:

a) administer the test automatically (as Hollman could presumably do)
b) score the test automatically, by machine
c) look you up in...the system...and presumably find you and your photo on file
d) perform the investigations, etc., needed
e) collect the payment/fees online, then
f) approve you for, print out and mail you your license

with the only possible human intervention being to pull the id card from the printer and stuff the envelope and maybe do a random spot check on the overall process. While that part could also be automated, it would probably cost far more than it's worth for the small market.

This might freak out the Brady Bunch and their ilk, but it sure would streamline things.