Opinion: Should states have mandatory training to receive CCW license?

[cmshoot]

The OP trains snipers. Do you think he wants to sell you sniper training to carry your gun?

Not only that but cmshoot is one of the original members of this forum, is a wealth of knowledge that far exceeds 90% of the forums membership combined, and his reputation is beyond reproach.

Thanks! No worries.....Tvoyumat doesn’t like me and likes to take a swing at me now and then in the forums. It’s been a while, now that I think on it. What do you expect from a guy who’s username means “F*** your mother”.

 

[Mrs_Esterhouse]

Kinda curious what y'all have to say on the matter.

Should states like Georgia require classroom training and/or a pass/fail live-fire test before one is issued their CCW license?

If you're for it, and you don't mind, I'd like to hear your thoughts on what such curriculum/training would encompass.

If you're against, why?

I've got my own opinion on the matter, I'll chime in later. Personally, I feel that the government should not have the authority to regulate, and any non-felon adult should be allowed to carry, but let's disregard that. Let's say it's gotta be a permit.

Semper Fi!

Show data indicating firearm accident rates are lower in states where training is required vs. states which have no required training.

 

[cmshoot]

Show data indicating firearm accident rates are lower in states where training is required vs. states which have no required training.

That’s an excellent point.

 

[rockyfatcat]

No, I do not offer “said training” because “said training” does not exist in Georgia. I am not “licensed” or “certified” to teach any kind of state required courses that are mandated for an individual to obtain a firearms license. Therefore, I have never made any money off of this sort of training, and never plan to.

The only sort of “required” training that I conduct is for LEO’s and retired LEO’s.

If you read my original post, I stated, “Personally, I feel that the government should not have the authority to regulate, and any non-felon adult should be allowed to carry, but let's disregard that. Let's say it's gotta be a permit.“. So, SHALL NOT INFRINGE. I don’t believe that we should have a permit at all, let alone training or a test.

I would prefer that there not be training. If there is training, I don’t believe that there should be a scored qualification. I’ve seen those tests in states like Tennessee. It’s so easy that most anyone can pass it, but some don’t. So, some 86YOA woman can’t pass the test, so you’re going to deny her a permit?! That’s some BS! She needs a handgun for self-defense more than most as she would have a difficult time physically defending herself. A firearm is an effective equalizer.

If the state is going to mandate training to obtain a weapon’s license, then the state should pay for it. There should be no cost incurred to the individual taking the test. The states are already regulating a right that shall not be infringed, there is no way folks should have to pay for the curtailment of that right.

So, my opinion, in a nutshell:

1. Should not be any permits required at all
2. If you’re going to have a permit, then no training/testing, to include live-fire scored testing
3. If you’re going to have training, then it should be free to the individual

I agree. If it's a right, they can't license, permit ,or extort money.

In this country and the reciprocity laws, different states don't honor Georgia's permit due to lack of training requirement. That lack of training affects the number of states that honor my georgia permit.

I have many years of military and law enforcement training. States like California that routinely deny ccw permits, require armed security to test yearly. It used to be bi-yearly but they doubled that revenue by changing it to yearly.

I appreciate the legal and financial implications of carrying a firearm. I also know that a good portion of permit holders in this state may not have a clue in that regard or have ever fired a gun before in their life.

So how do you balance out the rights of the individual, the requirements of reciprocity, and the training and legal knowledge requirements legislatively?

 

[gh1950]

That’s an excellent point.

You still would have to correct for other requirements for obtaining a CC permit in each state.

 

[cmshoot]

You still would have to correct for other requirements for obtaining a CC permit in each state.

What I’m saying is that there should not be a requirement at all. If you’re a non-felon, you should be able to carry in all 50 states, as well as US territories and protectorates.

 

[dawg]

Free, non-mandatory classes. I was required to take a class to get my permit when I lived in Louisiana for 2 years and it was one of the best things I could have done. The class was more around the legality of using lethal force and de-escalation techniques.

 

[coach482]

NO! Georgia requiring classroom training and/or a pass/fail live-fire test before one is issued their CCW license, the powers that be could simply keep upping the training and skill set requirements till no one could pass.

 

[Discollector]

Kinda curious what y'all have to say on the matter.

Should states like Georgia require classroom training and/or a pass/fail live-fire test before one is issued their CCW license?

If you're for it, and you don't mind, I'd like to hear your thoughts on what such curriculum/training would encompass.

If you're against, why?

I've got my own opinion on the matter, I'll chime in later. Personally, I feel that the government should not have the authority to regulate, and any non-felon adult should be allowed to carry, but let's disregard that. Let's say it's gotta be a permit.

Semper Fi!

I have only read the last post that came up when I clicked on this topic, so I'm not tainted by the opinions of others (I will read the entire thread.)

I am against requiring people to take classes in order to get a permit to carry a firearm because I'm against permits in the first place. The Right to keep and bear Arms is an unalienable Right. An unalienable Right is best understood from the wording in the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Those Rights are unalienable because, according to the DOI, they are bestowed upon you at birth by your Creator (your God, whomever you deem that to be.) The Right to keep and bear Arms is an extension of your Right to Life and in earlier times that was understood in our country. Take the case of Cockrum v. State in 1859. The court in Texas ruled:

"The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of
himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it
from the State government. It is one of the "high powers"
delegated directly to the citizen, and 'is excepted out of
the general powers of government.' A law cannot be passed to
infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and
independent of the lawmaking power." Cockrum v. State, 24 Tex. 394, at 401-402 (1859)

This ruling was the view of the United States Supreme Court at the time as well. I do, however, have a way to get you where you want to go with this and it is something we could do at a grass roots level.

States should require all freshmen in high school to take a mandatory course in public safety. There, they would be taught about firearms and how to identify them, safely handle them, and what those weapons can and cannot do. Along with that, children could be taught what happens once a person uses a weapon (the legal process that follows.)

In order to make sure the liberals have little objection to that part of the course, it would include safety within the home i.e. evacuating in case of fire, inclement weather, etc. and how / when to summon police. Children could learn about smoke detectors, fire alarms, and avoiding potentially dangerous situations along with what to do if faced with a dilemma.

In addition, high schools should have an elective course for those students who handle weapons. They would learn all the rules of safety for shooting, handling, and storage. They could be taught basic marksmanship and all the things that you think would be mandated for an adult in order to exercise their Rights. What parent would not encourage their children to take such a course? What child who wants to own a firearm would not want the opportunity to learn about them?

 

[Radar363]

Oh, I do both! I mostly encourage folks to train, and have recommended Instructors and their courses other than just mine. I do advertise in the training forum and mention my courses in other forums when the topic comes up.

I encourage anyone that trains with me to get as much training as possible, with as many different Instructors as possible. Different folks do things differently and it is good to be exposed to different methods.

...oh, I have seen you self-promote in other threads...when a Chick-fil-A chicken biscuit was involved...