Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Spooky thought isn't it.Originally Posted by Sturtle
Never handle or fire a handgun (or any firearm) in your life, sit through the most basic 5 hour class available, and there you go.
Thank the gods we have not had any incidents.
Sticks
(Catchy sig line coming soon)
Seriously, who here thinks spending a couple of hundred bucks for quality training is too expensive? Hunter's Safety Card? Come on... We are talking about carrying a loaded pistol, shooting and killing someone situations.
I know I'm going to be in the minority here, but I'm going to get this side of the issue out anyway. There should be NO CCW approved unless the individual has had sufficient training and passed a basic live fire standard. You have to take a written and driving test for a car for god's sake to show understanding and competence. Unfortunately, the law isn't written like that.
IMO, the standard should somewhere along the lines of the NRA Basics of Personal Protection Outside the Home course. You can't pass the written and shooting tests, guess you better practice and study some more. My 14 year old step daughter can pass the course, then again she actually shoots competitions pretty regular. So, she get the practice and instruction needed.
The law doesn't mandate that level of training, but does that mean you should short stroke the training to save a few bucks? I hope you don't. You might be shooting around someone I care about.
Actually I agree with you 100%. I wish that a marksmanship test was required, I know that it was definitely part of the class I took, or at least the perception was there. I would think that they would want you to shoot under stress as well, even if its only running 50 yards before having to make shots (I know, some people can't do this, so I suppose its not really a viable option.) but I do think that some form of marksmanship proficiency should be demonstrated. If your loved one was being held or threatened, wouldn't you want me to be able to shoot accurately?
It's not a matter of receiving quality training. It's a matter of what the law requires. It's also a matter of this whole "people should have to shoot to qualify" argument as a solution in search of a problem.
AK and VT require nothing...other than you be legally allowed to own/possess a firearm. I don't recall hearing a lot of problems coming out of those states with people carrying guns and having accidents where innocents are harmed.
The bottom line is this. As soon as the gov't has the ability to make you "qualify", how long will it be before they make the qualification standards so stringent that few people will be able to pass them? I'd be extremely careful about wishing for more gov't restrictions on your right to carry if I were you. Also, if training is so important to minimizing accidents, why is it that by some estimates police officers shoot the wrong person at a rate about 6.5 times higher in armed confrontaions than legally armed citizens? Should I remind you of the "I'm the only one professional enough" video?
As soon as someone can show me statistics that prove a minimum level of training - or no training at all - is not sufficient for issuance of a permit, I'll change my opinion. Are there isolated incidents of permit holders causing negligent harm? Of course. Are there enough to warrant mandatory qualification training? No way! Until then, I think it's gonna take a lot more than comparing the God-given right to self-defense with operating a car to get me to change my mind.
And before you use the "training is required to operate a car" argument, you might consider how well all that training works to keep people from harming themselves or others with their car. That's a pretty lame argument and doesn't stand up well under scrutiny.
It's completely a matter of training and practice. That's why even the lowliest Airman in the Air Force gets firarms training... Wow, even the military figured that one out.
Vehicle training comparison is completely valid. You want to see a country where no driving training or licensing is required? I have. They are ripe with incompetence leading to death.
I fully agree it's everyone's given right to defend themselves, and even own a gun within the boundries of the law. It's also everyone's right to breed, but hey, we all know not everyone should be doing that either.
Don't even get me started on LE firearms skills. I'm a retired Fed for the USAF. As a whole they suck, but they don"t suck as bad as those who don't get training and practice with CCW's. I've shot with both.
I used to think I was a pretty damn good shot with any gun. Then I woke up and got training by professionals and have practiced my ass off.
4 years as a "Red Hat" in the AF. I know what military "training" is all about.
For the average person, it's still a solution in search of a problem.
I also agree...it's just dumb, and it shortchanges folks by giving them a dangerously false sense of security. Not to mention they're a danger to themselves and everyone around them. You don't learn how to avoid accidents, hit your target (and nothing else) by chatting about it in a classroom; however, I'd prefer the requirement be evidence of demonstrated safety and basic proficiency rather than proof of training, if the training is worthless. It's comical that there's far more rigor around getting a ham radio license.
Makes you wonder how many CCW people carry a weapon yet can't get the gun out of the holster (and recover to the holster) without an accidental discharge, or how many could clear a jam at all, let alone in a hurry. Not to mention the number of folks who have no idea what sort of targets they can actually hit vs just 'shoot at'. Such training, with no portion devoted to the weapon itself, is a disservice to the public.
It's a little goofy to conclude training doesn't do any good because there's so much 'evidence' that the highly trained screw up more than the untrained or that, in spite of training, folks still get hurt. I believe that if drivers in Colorado knew what a two-lane turn is, what a solid white line means, or that you can't merge onto the freeway by stopping...life would surely be better. Again, I'm not convinced it's the government's job to require training--but I'm okay with a requirement to pass a written and a practical, and I'll risk the chance of a government conspiracy designed to ensure no one passes the tests.
Last edited by Bongo Boy; 08-03-2009 at 21:49.
I'll ask again though I know any answer will be based on "feelings" rather than fact...much like the post above. What evidence do you have that permit holders, regardless of their level of training, are: (1) A danger to themselves and everyone around them, (2) can't get their gun out of the holster without an AD (I prefer the term "negligent discharge"), or (3) will ever have the need to clear a "jam"?
And, seriously, who are you to decide whether someone's sense of security is false?
Why don't you guys show some proof that backs up your fears of these dangerous people running around putting others at risk with their guns? I guarantee for every example of a minimally trained permit holder negligently causing harm to someone I can show you two examples of a "highly trained" person negligently causing harm to someone.
Why not try looking at the facts? Start by looking at stats from states that issue permits in an effort to find out how often permits are revoked for circumstances involving negligence. I can tell you because I've looked...it's pretty hard to find and the numbers don't support your misguided fears.
I certainly hope some of you guys are never placed in positions responsible for "allowing" me to exercise my 2A rights and my right to defend myself and my family.
It's kinda sad, really, to see this sort of sentiment on a "pro gun" forum.
Libertarian Streak
"The 2nd Amendment is my concealed carry permit" Ted Nugent.
I'd have to say I agree with Uncle Ted.
But I would add, training and education are your friend, just as long as it's not a mandate from whoever happens to be in power at a given time. I'm old school on gun rights gents.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote