Should we even need a CCW - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > Handguns > Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection > Should we even need a CCW

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-01-2010, 06:04 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DrumJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Here in the holler....
Posts: 4,823
Liked 1616 Times on 944 Posts
Likes Given: 1894

Default

I guess the real litmus test will be what happens in Az after a year or so with Constitutional Carry. Personally I think that it puts undue regulations on our rights as stated in the BOR. And I"m sorry but I know too many people that have passed those tests in different states and they have no business with a firearm on their person. I'll wager we all know at least one person with a CCW that shouldn't have a weapon. Or at the least not be carrying one around with them. So I'm not too sure that the testing is weeding out the people near as well as some might think it does.If you do know one person like I'm talking about then the requirements are useless. Because that one idiot that tested well but is a true idiot or mall ninja will many times be the one we hear about in the papers doing something stupid.But hey...He passed the course.

But I will be watching the situation in AZ very close to see how things go with their Constitutional Carry deal. And I believe lawmakers in other states will be doing the same.

__________________

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson


Last edited by DrumJunkie; 09-04-2010 at 04:34 AM.
DrumJunkie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2010, 11:50 PM   #12
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Daoust_Nat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando,Florida
Posts: 2,163
Liked 1294 Times on 629 Posts
Likes Given: 77

Default

In Florida it is a 3 hour course at about $55, or a copy of your discharge if you are a vet. A passport quality picture, fingerprints and $115. Wait a couple of weeks and you have it. Probably a lot of Floridians carrying that may be unsafe to them selves and others. A little more training would not be a bad thing.

In Florida it seems like a way for the state to be profitable, though the permit is good for 7 years now.

__________________
Daoust_Nat is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2010, 04:21 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
lukeisme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 203
Liked 15 Times on 11 Posts

Default

I would be the first to agree that training is an absolute must. But three hours?? Give me a break!!! I am seeing these jackrabbit courses here where they never even go to the range. Is that training? Well in my opinion it isnt anyway. Another issue I have developed is the need to pay for constitutional rights. Hum that sticks with me. I have no problem with the background check but I also know that when you buy a firearm you have to have one then. Also a few weeks, what they can do a background check in minutes to purchase one but not to carry one. I think it really is just another way to make it a pain in the butt to exercise the 2nd ammendment.

__________________
lukeisme is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2010, 05:08 AM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DrumJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Here in the holler....
Posts: 4,823
Liked 1616 Times on 944 Posts
Likes Given: 1894

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeisme View Post
I would be the first to agree that training is an absolute must. But three hours?? Give me a break!!! I am seeing these jackrabbit courses here where they never even go to the range. Is that training? Well in my opinion it isnt anyway. Another issue I have developed is the need to pay for constitutional rights. Hum that sticks with me. I have no problem with the background check but I also know that when you buy a firearm you have to have one then. Also a few weeks, what they can do a background check in minutes to purchase one but not to carry one. I think it really is just another way to make it a pain in the butt to exercise the 2nd ammendment.
Agreed...Training is a good thing. The more the better. Most the permit holders I know get much more training than any LEO in this area does to qualify. And for that reason I'd more often than not prefer one of those permit holders having my back. Now I do know plenty local and state LEO that train more than anyone could consider necessary. But it's not the standard. I'm all for anyone that carries a weapon getting tons of training. They just might need it. My problem lies in the idea that to be allowed to flex your rights you need to give money to the government to take a class that is all to often not near what the state regs. require and if they do run it right once Billy Bad A$$ gets out with his shiny new card and a copy of Soldier of Fortune goes out to intimidate people or other stupid things. There's a guy on my wife's side of the family that the idea of him even having access to a weapon is a scary thought to say the least. This guy passed his course but is nothing short of a waste of human sperm. And I know others just as bad.I'm sure we all know at least one of these type of people. So I just don't see where putting these regulations in place. My wife's idiot family member can carry a weapon but another guy can't because he's behind on his child support but actually might have done more training, been trained in military but who cares?
Without the regulations the idiot still has his weapon. But we don't hinder a man or woman that is denied for some reason that has nothing to do with their ability to use their weapon.
It's supposed to be a right, so why are there stumbling blocks? Why are we required to pay off the government for what was given to us by our creator (As per the Constitution)? I really don't think the weeding out is doing near what we're supposed to believe it is. So the only reason for it has to be income. Simply we are being taxed to carry a weapon. A tax that need be paid again each time we renew.
A rose by any other name...

I guess this is one of the bigger reasons when at a public range I look for those that might need a little insight to proper handling of a weapon. If for no other reason just to try and plant the seed of responsibility. The test(s) try to instill this but we all know that you have to go into it with the right mind set or it's going to be like that class in high school that you really didn't care much about. Sure you can pass the exam but what did you learn? Maybe I'm wrong but I really don't think so. We will see how it pans out in Az. If it don't go crap house crazy then I"m sure other states will follow suit. And I don't see that as a bad thing.
__________________

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

DrumJunkie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2010, 02:27 PM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Daoust_Nat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Orlando,Florida
Posts: 2,163
Liked 1294 Times on 629 Posts
Likes Given: 77

Default

I agree on the 3 hours and no or very limited range time being an issue. Being years removed from regular shooting, and not growing up in a family that did any shooting, I took an 8 hour (that became a 11 hour) NRA course. We spent about two hours on the range shooting various size and calibre hand guns. I feel that was a well spent day for beginners or others who have been casual shooters over the years.

I now have a Florida CCW, but still feel that futher training will be good. That and a lot of shooting. Fortunately the shooting is to be looked forward to.

__________________
Daoust_Nat is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2010, 04:22 AM   #16
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Phelenwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 868
Liked 20 Times on 17 Posts
Likes Given: 52

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrumJunkie View Post
I guess the real litmus test will be what happens in Az after a year or so with Constitutional Carry. Personally I think that it puts undue regulations on our rights as stated in the BOR. And I"m sorry but I know too many people that have passed those tests in different states and they have no business with a firearm on their person. I'll wager we all know at least one person with a CCW that shouldn't have a weapon. Or at the least not be carrying one around with them. So I'm not too sure that the testing is weeding out the people near as well as some might think it does.If you do know one person like I'm talking about then the requirements are useless. Because that one idiot that tested well but is a true idiot or mall ninja will many times be the one we hear about in the papers doing something stupid.But hey...He passed the course.

But I will be watching the situation in AZ very close to see how things go with their Constitutional Carry deal. And I believe lawmakers in other states will be doing the same.
If I remember correctly Az is the 3rd state to pass a law that does not require people to have a CCW permit. So maybe you should look at the other 2 states and see how they are doing. I believe they are Alaska and Vermont.

I strongly believe that if you have never handled a weapon you should have to get some formal training. I have been hunting and shooting since I was able to hold a rifle by myself at age 6. So I have been around weapons going on 34yrs now.
__________________
Phelenwolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2010, 11:53 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Snubshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 90
Liked 4 Times on 3 Posts
Likes Given: 3

Default

The Constitution is Quite clear THE GOVERNMENT AT ANY LEVEL MAY NOT INFRINGE ON MY RIGHT TO OWN AND CARRY WEAPONS on my person. Constitutional Carry is the ONLY legal way to carry. Now, should a person have common sense enough to be properly trained and be proficient in the use of those weapons yes. But under the CONSTITUTION that is each individuals decision.

__________________
Snubshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 09:31 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: detroit,mi
Posts: 7
Default

I cringe thinking about how ignorant some gun owners are. But I cringe more thinking about how ignorant some law makers are.
I'd rather take my chances with the gun owners.

__________________
bullpuppies is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 11:28 PM   #19
N1431A
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
pmanton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Salome, AZ,Arizona
Posts: 88
Liked 28 Times on 16 Posts

Default

I'm an Arizona resident and I have to disagree with concealed carry without going through a course.

Both my wife and I went through the 8 hour classroom and live fire exercise to obtain our concealed carry permit. There were people who could NOT pass the live fire exercise despite being given numerous tries.

Now these same people will be packing pistols. They will put holes in everything except what their shooting at. Some applicants could not even loade their weapons.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Paul
Salome. AZ

__________________

Last edited by pmanton; 09-16-2010 at 11:28 PM. Reason: typo
pmanton is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 12:31 AM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
DrumJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Here in the holler....
Posts: 4,823
Liked 1616 Times on 944 Posts
Likes Given: 1894

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phelenwolf View Post
If I remember correctly Az is the 3rd state to pass a law that does not require people to have a CCW permit. So maybe you should look at the other 2 states and see how they are doing. I believe they are Alaska and Vermont.

I strongly believe that if you have never handled a weapon you should have to get some formal training. I have been hunting and shooting since I was able to hold a rifle by myself at age 6. So I have been around weapons going on 34yrs now.
Well, I'm 46 and have been around and using weapons since I was about 5-6 years old. But that isn't what qualifies me to buy or possess a weapon. I know people that have ben around them longer than me and they have a permit and the have no business with a weapon. I know at least one person that can not get a permit because he owes child support (he got hurt at work and was denied disability for 5 years but couldn't work) that is probably one of the most qualifies people I know.The paper serves no real purpose. if this is able to happen. You're only allowing regulations on something that was guaranteed to you by our Constitution. That's like saying you have the right to free speech but you need to pass an English lit class first. If this training actually weeded out the idiots then maybe it would hold water. But I am still waiting for everyone that permit holder that can honestly tell me that they know no one in their state that has a permit but really should not. If this is not the case then the entire argument that is serves a real propose is moot. Should people get training? Hell yes they should. But to say you have to get the training to buy a weapon or to carry one on your person is a rail against the founding fathers and their ideals of this nation. You can not possibly tell me that they trained every person that owned and/or carried a rifle in the 1700's If this was the case then I would think that it would have been written in also. Or at the very least there would be a lot of documentation alluding to this fact.

What I'm getting at with the Az. litmus test is it will be a little different than Alaska and Vermont. They have a much different demographic. So people will be looking to see what happens there before they look to the states that have been that way already.

I find it interesting that so many of us believe in getting back to the founding principals of this nation but are so willing to place restrictions. I heard so many times during election campaigns how they all supported the 2A. All they wanted was to put "a few common sense regulations" in place.
That quote "a few common sense regulations" scares the hell out of me. Who's common sense are we to use? Obama has been putting his "few common sense regulations" everywhere he can. And he probably really believes he is using common sense. But I think we can all agree that most all of it really makes not much or no sense at all. So who's sense do we use? It seems that most the people on this forum will agree that the Constitution makes sense. So why are we so willing to chip away at it? It seems to me that we either use the Constitution or we don't. This living breathing constantly changing document that the powers that be believe should be changed to force their will isn't a good idea. I have read many posts that reflect this. I don't think I'm near important or smart enough to decide on changes to or restrict the Constitution. It seemed to me that it worked pretty well until people went to using their magic eraser to make all the changes we see now.
__________________

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson

DrumJunkie is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes