+1
And who would decide how strict the test is? How much would it cost?
Unfortunately any gun control laws put liberals closer to their goal of disarming the people. They are fighting a war of attrition.
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Opinion: Should states have mandatory training to receive CCW license?
- Thread starter cmshoot
- Start date
And who would decide how strict the test is? How much would it cost?
Unfortunately any gun control laws put liberals closer to their goal of disarming the people. They are fighting a war of attrition.
Exactly. When I see how many comments on sites like this one start with “I’m all for the second amendment, BUT...” it’s hard to imagine them not winning in the long run. We’re far too willing to compromise on something that is supposed to be an inalienable right.
It is an unalienable Right, but point taken. Psychologists say when a person says something then says the word "but" it really means, forget all that I just previously said.
The compromises have killed the Second Amendment.
Where do you see that?
You should watch the Dr. Phil show once in a while. While I think Phil is a flaming liberal (just opinion), he doesn't believe in running off and writing prescriptions as most mainstream mental health quacks do.
Many times Phil talks about body language and all the psychologists and mental health gurus agree with his oft used statement wherein Phil says a person can tell you blah, blah, blah, and then negate it by saying "but." Phil is ALWAYS admonishing his victims (guests that come for help) with saying to them, when you say but, you are telling me to forget everything I just said prior to that.
The other mental health gurus Phil invites agree with the assessment. You see the same thing on these shows that show police interrogations and the interrogators point this phenomenon out. So, at some point, you figure that is what the mental health community believes regarding the words people use and it's the same thing you'll hear when police interrogators explain their read on people after interrogating them.
I had major surgery once and after a few months of the Justice Network and Dr. Phil, plus reading a couple of books along those lines, I'm parroting what they say.
The original Declaration of Independence uses the word unalienable. Grammarists will argue that inalienable and unalienable are one and the same; they're synonyms.
Whether by accident or design, the two words in legal usage are different. Without quoting you a lot of cases (unless you want me to), the difference boils down to this:
An unalienable Right cannot be bought, sold, traded, forfeited, given up or with-held. It is literally above the law. You CAN give up an inalienable right.
https://adask.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/unalienable-vs-inalienable/
The moral to why I point that out is that you do not want to make a legal argument with the wrong legal terminology nor argue that point over what grammarists say. The words not only by legal definition are different, but by court rulings have been applied differently.
No, individual responsibility just like carrying one in the first place
I believe in Constitutional Carry and believe everyone should receive as much training as possible (
cmshoot
is a good choice, Provectus Group is another, and I hope to train with Tactical Response & John Lovell in the future).
However I don't believe it should be a requirement to obtain a carry permit. Everyone should get training, but many folks can't afford it (I couldn't when I first got my GWL and my first pistol) and may pass on owning firearms altogether if the bar for entry to carry is too high. Sad but true.
Then again in my experience, I've introduced several of my long time friends/coworkers to firearms, several have obtained permits and purchased pistols for self defense. None of them have become highly invested in practicing or buying essentials (ammo, cleaning supplies, holsters, etc). One didn't even own ammo for the pistol for a year. These folks would not have bothered with a permit if training is required, but then again they don't carry but keep it ready at home (which is better than nothing at all :/).
I've also heard that training requirements result inflation of training prices due to increased demand.
cmshoot
is a good choice, Provectus Group is another, and I hope to train with Tactical Response & John Lovell in the future).However I don't believe it should be a requirement to obtain a carry permit. Everyone should get training, but many folks can't afford it (I couldn't when I first got my GWL and my first pistol) and may pass on owning firearms altogether if the bar for entry to carry is too high. Sad but true.
Then again in my experience, I've introduced several of my long time friends/coworkers to firearms, several have obtained permits and purchased pistols for self defense. None of them have become highly invested in practicing or buying essentials (ammo, cleaning supplies, holsters, etc). One didn't even own ammo for the pistol for a year. These folks would not have bothered with a permit if training is required, but then again they don't carry but keep it ready at home (which is better than nothing at all :/).
I've also heard that training requirements result inflation of training prices due to increased demand.
