In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

CCW testing

dakotashooter2dakotashooter2 Member Posts: 6,186
edited March 2006 in General Discussion
I know this can be somewhat of a touchy subject. Many think our constitution itself gives us the right to carry concealed, but for now we are forced to follow the interpretation, and I use the word loosly, of our government.My question is since we are required to be licensed in most cases do you think there should be proficency testing. Again you will find a wide range of opinions on this but I have to speak in favor of such testing. In my state the CCW test is a 10 question open book test dealing with the law and a proficency test that consists of 10 shots anywhere in the scoring rings, with one reload) from 7 yards with pretty much any handgun you choose. In my case the instructor had us qualify with a ruger MKII. A blind man could (and actually did)pass this test. It bothers me cause some of the yahoos barely kept all 10 shot on target. The problem I see is that I might be standing beside "John Wayne" when he draws on a BG robbing the 7/11 and shoots himself or ME in the foot because he has little or no training and/or experience with his weapon. I also have to wonder if there wouldn't be a liability issue for the state if no training is required. Even requiring a firearm safety course which most shooters probably have already taken would be better than nothing. While everyone should have the right to carry I'm not sure all are qualified to. Having a gun if you can't or won't us it is often worse than not having one at all.

Comments

  • agman1999agman1999 Member Posts: 981 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'm more worried about the idiots who drive down the same roads I travel everyday. Rights don't just come with responsibility; they also come with risk.
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,846 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    While I do believe that anyone who has made the choice to carry a firearm, SHOULD also take on the responsibility of becoming proficient with it. I know that is not going to happen in all cases.

    My thoughts go to Vermont, and now Alaska, (and maybe Wyoming soon?) who have the ONLY carry law that I agree with.
    (or lack of [;)])

    There does not seem to be a problem, with the lack of training, in those states.
    Hmmmmm........
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,672 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I think the folks who rob Seven/Elevens should have to take the training before they are allowed to rob a Seven/Eleven.

    Anybody who uses a firearm SHOULD make sure he/she is proficient in the use of that firearm, if for no other reason, for their own safety. However, I don't see how you can make mandatory training compatible with the Bill of Rights. Also, as we all know, many people go through training and testing on many things and manage to remain totally ignorant. Odds are the people who would benefit from training are the same people who do it voluntarily.
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • HDRIDERHDRIDER Member Posts: 305 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
    I think the folks who rob Seven/Elevens should have to take the training before they are allowed to rob a Seven/Eleven.

    Anybody who uses a firearm SHOULD make sure he/she is proficient in the use of that firearm, if for no other reason, for their own safety. However, I don't see how you can make mandatory training compatible with the Bill of Rights. Also, as we all know, many people go through training and testing on many things and manage to remain totally ignorant. Odds are the people who would benefit from training are the same people who do it voluntarily.


    Training which involves shooting, where do I report???? Is the ammo FREE???? [:D]
  • MVPMVP Member Posts: 25,074
    edited November -1
    I don't know about a required training but we in Washington state have an excellent facility for all kind of firearm training.
    http://www.firearmsacademy.com/free.htm
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,672 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by HDRIDER
    Training which involves shooting, where do I report???? Is the ammo FREE???? [:D]

    Look in the Yellow Pages under "Recruiters". FREE AMMO. [:D]
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • HDRIDERHDRIDER Member Posts: 305 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
    quote:Originally posted by HDRIDER
    Training which involves shooting, where do I report???? Is the ammo FREE???? [:D]

    Look in the Yellow Pages under "Recruiters". FREE AMMO. [:D]


    FUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNY!!!!!!!! [:D] BEEN THERE DONE THAT!!!!!!! [:p]
  • COLTCOLT Member Posts: 12,637 ******
    edited November -1
    ...I have had the same instructor from my first time, my renewal, and for my renewal at the end of this year. Not an open book for the written, but, you can get help with SOME of the answers. You have to KNOW the answers to the IMPORTANT questions, but you can get help with the answers to the questions of the "legaleze" type that really have no bearing on anything unless your a lawyer/DA; in other words, the statute 3:art.7 par 3.

    ...I agree, some of these yocals don't need a gun in their hands. I have seen 3 thrown out of his class. One asked if he could carry hand grenades after he got his liscense, the other came looking like he was headed out on a 6 day recon,replete w/K-bar,compass, you get the picture...and the third ask if he could now booby trap his home windows with a shotgun, DUH to all. 11 hrs. of class room, 1 hr range time. 98% of the people I have been in two classes with, I feel safe around...[;)]

    ...I always carried a handgun, even before we had the "right" generously given to us by the state,big of 'em, acknowledging the constitution, huh? It has always made me more tolerant, and a nicer person...slowed my quick temper. Carrying is a BIG responsibility, not to be taken lightly...[;)]

    ani-texas-flag.gif
  • yawarakaiyawarakai Member Posts: 2,688 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Ohio you can qualify with anything then carry anything else.
    I heard a CCW trainer state you can come in and qualify with your little 22 and then go out with your 44 mag for protection. The law requires 10 hours of class and range time.
    My instuctor told me that my security firearms training at 20 hours of range time plass classroom time qualified me to apply for a CCW.
  • dlrjjdlrjj Member Posts: 5,528 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    In Indiana all you have to do is apply, get fingerprinted, and clear the background check, so about 10% of our citizens have one according to the paper. You walk out the door with a temporary permit to use until the real one comes in the mail. Nice, quick, simple, easy, but I do wonder about some of the people who have their PPP here. There are NO requirements for instruction or any demonstration of proficiency which is great for the right to self defense, but there are those who should not have a gun outside of the house. The problem comes from trying to decide who "they" are.
    Tax evasion is illegal, tax avoidance is an art form.
  • HavegunJoeHavegunJoe Member Posts: 1,575 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Training should be highly encouraged, but I am against requiring it. Sounds strange from a guy who earns a few bucks as an instructor but my right to self protection is more important. You might be standing next to a well trained person that looses it in a self defense situation, training doesn't guarentee anything. I know a 70+ year old that has been a gun person his whole life. At this stage of his life he probably isn't the best shot any more. So he shoud forfeit his right to self protection? I don't agree with that.
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    Requiring instruction is another infringement on your rights. What's going to keep Congress from adding to those requirements, little by little over the years. They do that with every other law they make. Just take a look at how they have now forced states to obtain your social security number for your Driver's License. They did this by adding and ammending a law passed years ago and threatening to withold federal dollars from states that did not comply. I am completely against any and all laws infringing upon our 2nd Ammendment Rights.
  • IncarcerationFacilitatorIncarcerationFacilitator Member Posts: 103 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    You can just get a license to drive a car without some training and an exam... I think training / testing is good. Innocent bystanders will appreciate accuracy of the permit holder if the need to use the weapon arrises... Also, I have heard many people who have pistol carry permits say things that prove they do not know the law relating to use of force, etc. I think that is important also.
  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 14,790 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I would hate for it to be a requirement, but........

    From the type of questions and answers I see on this forum a lot of people would benefit greatly from classes detailing and teaching the lawful use of deadly force. Because if you don't know before you pull the gun or trigger, it's to late.

    Also classes teaching basic civics and everyday criminal violations. Most don't know the difference between a robbery and a burglary. Or the difference between assault and battery.
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
  • JamesRKJamesRK Member Posts: 25,672 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Alpine
    I would hate for it to be a requirement, but........

    From the type of questions and answers I see on this forum a lot of people would benefit greatly from classes detailing and teaching the lawful use of deadly force. Because if you don't know before you pull the gun or trigger, it's to late.

    Also classes teaching basic civics and everyday criminal violations. Most don't know the difference between a robbery and a burglary. Or the difference between assault and battery.

    Failure of the schools to teach the English language was another thread. [;)]
    The road to hell is paved with COMPROMISE.
  • 11b6r11b6r Member Posts: 16,725
    edited November -1
    Might I humbly suggest that when you apply for a CCW, that you be given a booklet that outlines the law on CCW, and use of deadly force (NO hand grenades). As far as knowing the difference between a robbery and a burlary, how many of you know the difference between Maiming and Assualt with a Deadly Weapon? If you are 75 years old, and on the recieving end, you won't care, either. My stepmother is 75- and has a S&W Mdl 37. If she uses it, it will be in "terminal powder burn" range. Who gives a hoot if she can put 10 in the target at 21 ft? And frankly, SHE needs her CCW more than I do. The forecast of streets running ankle deep in blood brought on by untrained, untested civilians is one that has been repeatedly made by the gun banners- and repeatedly had proven false. It's a non-issue, folks. Personally, I make a point of putting at least 200 rds a month downrange. (I am a professional paranoid- do not try this at home) Does that justify refusing a CCW to those of you that have not shot in the last month?
Sign In or Register to comment.