Jump to content
Downr@nge

Serious question about CCW training...

CCW Training, yes or no?  

81 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think ALL CCW permit holders should be required to AT LEAST take a Basic NRA pistol course?

    • Yes! I know my rights end where other's begin but I really don't want to be around untrained individuals!
      35
    • No! The costs would possibly get out of hand thus making it almost impossible to get the permit!
      1
    • EEEEEEKK!!!! I'm an irrational, hoplophobic Brady Foundation fan! PUT ALL GUNS ON A SPACE SHIP AND SEND IT TOWARDS THE SUN SO THEY ALL MELT!!!!
      1
    • No training PERIOD! Rights should not require training!
      44


Recommended Posts

you are talking about different rules.

 

you cant yell fire in a theater any more than you can open fire in a theater. but you should be able to carry the tools to do either inside, just in case there actually is a fire, or if you get caught in the middle of an all out gang war between team jacob and team edward

 

:facepalm::icon_lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am for training. I feel though that Veterans that have been HONORABLY DISCHARGED should be waved from the training. All vets have had a hands on firearms training course and qualifications that need to be kept up with. Vets have shown that they can qualify and if honorably discharged, they should have the training portion waived. Treat it like the CMP. There are too many Fugg-tards that I see at the ranges that shouldn't even own a gun let alone carry one. Just because you passed a background check doesn't mean that you possess the mental capacity to carry a firearm.

 

 

Agreed. Not every numbnuts knows how to safely handle a firearm so as to not accidentally shoot me or my family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There shouldn't be any mandatory training requirement, but I am obviously not against training.

 

What I would like, is there for to be free OPTIONAL training. Is this realistic? No, I'm not sure any state has the funding for this, but it would be cool nonetheless.

 

I wish everyone has the opportunity to receive firearms training if they want it. But it should never be mandatory. The reason isn't because people wouldn't benefit from it, or even that there aren't people who actually need it and shouldn't be carry without training. It is because as soon as you start to add requirements for things, they end up going overboard, getting out of control, and once "reasonable" requirements skew towards unreasonable before you know it. Kind of like, you know, requiring an FPID to purchase firearms and ammunition, specific handgun permits, multiple forms just to get these, multiple additional illegal forms depending on your town because they think they are reasonable. Those type of things. If it starts somewhere, where does it end? It is better to just not start anywhere.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can't hit a static target you're not going to miraculously be able to hit something at 10 yards under high stress unless it's blind luck.

 

right.. but an hour of shooting paper is in NO logical way ever going to prepare you to defend yourself with a gun.. and a "CCW class" almost creates a false sense of knowledge.. I can see it now.. "I took the NJ ccw class.. now I know how to use a gun to defend myself.."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Required: No

 

Stupid if you don't get some: Yes

 

I like the way South Carolina has it set up. You send in paperwork that shows you are a SC resident, they do a background check then give you your CCW. However, you must get some sort of training with in the first five years of having your CCW.

 

Either way, once states get involved there is bureaucracy, red tape and expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say keep it at the level of the Basic NRA Pistol Course.

I'd also have no problem with this as long as FL and/or VA were the (new) model for obtaining a CCW in NJ. I hope I'm wrong but let's face it, this is NJ and I don't ever see it happening here.

 

EDIT: if you already have a non-residence permit(s) you would be exempt

 

 

Let's remember the legislators that got us here. Bryant key ally of Florio who helped ram though the AWB, Vas your one-gun per month guru and Neil the creep who vote party line for years. It's no wonder why this guys don't want reasonable gun laws, below is the caliber of people would be writing these regs...

 

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/09/wayne_bryant_former_new_jersey.html

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/04/perth_amboy_letter_seeking_res.html

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/04/former_nj_assemblyman_neil_coh.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear a lot of assumptions that untrained people will be walking around carrying their pistols in their hands and just waiting for stuff to happen so they can let go and fling bullets everywhere killing massive amounts of innocent bistanders. Come on. Has New Jersey really made you that liberal?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

right.. but an hour of shooting paper is in NO logical way ever going to prepare you to defend yourself with a gun.. and a "CCW class" almost creates a false sense of knowledge.. I can see it now.. "I took the NJ ccw class.. now I know how to use a gun to defend myself.."

100% agree, and you can't teach common sense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely NO training required nor should it cost anything to exercise a RIGHT period!!!

 

Now responsible people should or will get some training, but under no circumstances should it be required.

 

Again I ask, what other RIGHT requires training???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear a lot of assumptions that untrained people will be walking around carrying their pistols in their hands and just waiting for stuff to happen so they can let go and fling bullets everywhere killing massive amounts of innocent bistanders.

 

This happens in NJ daily. Specially in Camden and Newark.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely NO training required nor should it cost anything to exercise a RIGHT period!!!

 

Now responsible people should or will get some training, but under no circumstances should it be required.

 

Again I ask, what other RIGHT requires training???

 

 

 

Absolutely,positivly ,no doubt about it correct,could not agree more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO TRAINING. Do other states have training requirements? How is that working for them?

 

There should be no "requirement" for a "right", period.

 

Your poll is skewed.

While I voted this way, Rights do come along with Responsibilities, While a training course should not be REQUIRED, I think it should be offered at no cost and strongly suggested, if for no other reason than to explain the laws and liability issues that follow along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I voted this way, Rights do come along with Responsibilities, While a training course should not be REQUIRED, I think it should be offered at no cost and strongly suggested, if for no other reason than to explain the laws and liability issues that follow along.

 

I agree, with a right comes responsibility and would hope people being responsible would take it upon themselves to learn not only the laws but also become proficient in handling and using there gun/guns. I think it's more up to us as responsible gun owners who have been to classes to advocate them to other shooters, I sure know I do and I have recommended and sent probably couple dozen to the school I went to and not to mention the number of people I have sent to ShoreShot to get here feet wet for the first time.

 

Like I do with motorcycles, I always promote the basics, take the course over even if you have been riding for many years and also the advanced classes, but like many things, the only saying Back to Basics is very true, and I have maybe not learned something new from taking a basic course a second or third time, I sure would be lying if I said I wasn't reminded of something that could save my life that I took for granted or over looked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems I'm in the minority here. I voted yes on requiring training. Florida requires it, so does a bunch of other states. It works.

 

Plus lets think about it like this, would you trust some one with no license to drive? I wouldn't. Hell I don't trust 90% of the people in the state to drive who have a license, let alone carry a fire arm with no training. The stupidity of man is to great. Accidents would be more likely to happen, I'm not saying that guys would be running around killing anything that moved, but drawing a gun in the wrong situation, shooting at a perceived threat - that was no threat to begin with, or just general stupidity with a gun is more likely with no training than if they sat through a 4 hour class explaining what and what not to do to stay legal when drawing and discharging a fire arm at a threat.

 

Thats just my opinion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems I'm in the minority here. I voted yes on requiring training. Florida requires it, so does a bunch of other states. It works.

 

Plus lets think about it like this, would you trust some one with no license to drive? I wouldn't. Hell I don't trust 90% of the people in the state to drive who have a license, let alone carry a fire arm with no training. The stupidity of man is to great. Accidents would be more likely to happen, I'm not saying that guys would be running around killing anything that moved, but drawing a gun in the wrong situation, shooting at a perceived threat - that was no threat to begin with, or just general stupidity with a gun is more likely with no training than if they sat through a 4 hour class explaining what and what not to do to stay legal when drawing and discharging a fire arm at a threat.

 

Thats just my opinion.

 

 

Yea states that don't even require a permit to CCW just are stacking up with the dead bodies aren't they..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This happens in NJ daily. Specially in Camden and Newark.

 

Did you have red herring for Thanksgiving?

 

Facts are also overrated.

 

Next time you have some relevant, that is also maybe true, to add, go right ahead and feel free to post that. In the mean time, enjoy your Thanksgiving.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this thread could have been locked after Post # 2....

 

Why?????? IMHO, I disagree. What's wrong with a healthy discussion about something I think we can all agree will be an issue in the near future if HR 822 passes?

 

My opinion is this, while I believe in my right to defend myself and loved ones, and my rights end where yours begin, ANY one who owns a gun should respect its power and get proper training to use it. Its the same thing as learning how to use anything else you own. There have been great points made in that reasonable eventually becomes unreasonable when it comes to guns. I also understand where others are coming from when they say no training period because its a right.

 

However, I don't at all think the "wild wild West" situation will ever occur,but I DO believe more people will carry if HR 822 passes the senate. I mean it is a GUN afterall. When it goes boom, something will get hit. Wouldn't you prefer it be the intended target?' Sure not all targets will be hit as Vladtepes kinda made the point, but seriously, who wouldn't want to learn how to properly use what they trust to help them defend their life? It makes no sense to me to not train.

 

Its the requirement part that is up for debate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea states that don't even require a permit to CCW just are stacking up with the dead bodies aren't they..

 

To this, in those states, there aren't many occurrences where someone has to use their gun either so your point is moot. Having no training with your weapon is downright irresponsible whether its a requirement or not. You would think that most of us here being the firearm enthusiasts that we are would agree that some form of training is better than none.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Next time you have some relevant, that is also maybe true, to add, go right ahead and feel free to post that. In the mean time, enjoy your Thanksgiving.

 

I don't recall asking for, nor requiring your permission to post.

 

My point, since you obviously missed it, is that: "untrained people will be walking around carrying their pistols in their hands and just waiting for stuff to happen so they can let go and fling bullets everywhere killing massive amounts of innocent bistanders" occurs with _unlicensed_ thugs on a regular basis without a training requirement from the government. Requiring training for licensed people won't change that at all.

 

You are 10 times more likely to be shot by a police officer(innocently) than a licensed concealed carrier. Highly trained police officers seem to do it regularly, while less trained concealed carriers seem to be more cautious. I am against any training requirement yet I believe it should be encouraged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea states that don't even require a permit to CCW just are stacking up with the dead bodies aren't they..

And how many people still get their states CCW permits? I'd be willing to bet a fairly large margin. Which involves some kind of class on what is a good shoot, and what isn't.

 

BTW, your argument is the same one the Brady Bunch and over Anti-Gun Lobbyists use day in and day to out to try and limit our rights...hows that argument working out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you please explain how my argument is the same as the anti's please.

 

If anything as I say all the time, the 2A is just that a right and not a privlege, it's not a drivers license you need to take a test for. It is as long as your not a prohibited person the ability to carry and is not conditional, period. I Agee that if you as a person decides to carry you should take it upon yourself and get some training, but I am sorry I can not see that as a requirement.

 

Why we have to even have these discussions is beyond me. To note why I said this thread could have been locked after PK90, Paul posted, well he answered the question with the right answer and everything else is opinion or someone's view, and unfortunately many times a very distorted view that gets passed along in a forum and becomes forum

Law. The next person starts quoting forum law and it grows and grows into total BS.

 

Sorry to me, post # 2 was Game, Set, and Match.

 

 

And how many people still get their states CCW permits? I'd be willing to bet a fairly large margin. Which involves some kind of class on what is a good shoot, and what isn't.

 

BTW, your argument is the same one the Brady Bunch and over Anti-Gun Lobbyists use day in and day to out to try and limit our rights...hows that argument working out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said yes I think if you decide to carry you should get training but it should not be mandatory. The 2A have no mandatory training provision in it does it???

 

 

To this, in those states, there aren't many occurrences where someone has to use their gun either so your point is moot. Having no training with your weapon is downright irresponsible whether its a requirement or not. You would think that most of us here being the firearm enthusiasts that we are would agree that some form of training is better than none.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you please explain how my argument is the same as the anti's please.

 

If anything as I say all the time, the 2A is just that a right and not a privlege, it's not a drivers license you need to take a test for. It is as long as your not a prohibited person the ability to carry and is not conditional, period. I Agee that if you as a person decides to carry you should take it upon yourself and get some training, but I am sorry I can not see that as a requiremenit.

 

Why we have to even have these discussions is beyond me. To note why I said this thread could have been locked after PK90, Paul posted, well he answered the question with the right answer and everything else is opinion or someone's view, and unfortunately many times a very distorted view that gets passed along in a forum and becomes forum

Law. The next person starts quoting forum law and it grows and grows into total BS.

 

Sorry to me, post # 2 was Game, Set, and Match.

 

Last time I checked, this was a public forum where almost ALL posts are opinions. If its "beyond" you as to why "we" have to have these discussions then simply scroll past the thread or don't enter or don't post. Are you a mod??? Did I break any rules by posting this thread? Or should I have asked YOU whether or not its a worthwhile point of discussion? Not trying to be facetious but I'm growing very tired of people on PUBLIC forums OTHER THAN MODS telling people what they should or shouldn't post in so many words or directly.

 

As far as your "forum law" stuff, I've never seen it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said you or anyone can't post or have an opinion, I said what is being said past post # 2 is now really relabemt. Fun to talk about at times but in the end does more harm than good. You may now have someone read this and say I read on the forum that you need training for the 2A.

 

I'm done for the night on this one. Have fun and just know my only position is I believe in the 2 A and don't like it when people out there own spin on it, that's the same reason we are in the boat we are in in regards to our 2a rights.

 

 

Last time I checked, this was a public forum where almost ALL posts are opinions. If its "beyond" you as to why "we" have to have these discussions then simply scroll past the thread or don't enter or don't post. Are you a mod??? Did I break any rules by posting this thread? Or should I have asked YOU whether or not its a worthwhile point of discussion? Not trying to be facetious but I'm growing very tired of people on PUBLIC forums OTHER THAN MODS telling people what they should or shouldn't post in so many words or directly.

 

As far as your "forum law" stuff, I've never seen it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said you or anyone can't post or have an opinion, I said what is being said past post # 2 is now really relabemt. Fun to talk about at times but in the end does more harm than good. You may now have someone read this and say I read on the forum that you need training for the 2A.

 

I'm done for the night on this one. Have fun and just know my only position is I believe in the 2 A and don't like it when people out there own spin on it, that's the same reason we are in the boat we are in in regards to our 2a rights.

 

Alright sir, Happy Thanksgiving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that many feel there shouldn't be any training requirements for a ccw because it's a constitutional right....BUT....there are many people who buy a gun and never even learn to clean, let alone shoot it...I'm o.k. with that if they want it for home protection....I feel that a minimal training requirement in safety and handling is not an unreasonable requirement. That is usually the tipping point for the comfort level of LEO's and politicians....and, quite honestly with me. I know many LEO's and have family members who are police and everyone of of them said that they don't have a problem with ccw 'as long as they have some type of training' All we need is someone with a ccw and no training to accidently shoot an innocent person and many of the politicians on the fence will lean toward more control. Just my 2 cents....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?????? IMHO, I disagree. What's wrong with a healthy discussion about something I think we can all agree will be an issue in the near future if HR 822 passes?

 

My opinion is this, while I believe in my right to defend myself and loved ones, and my rights end where yours begin, ANY one who owns a gun should respect its power and get proper training to use it. Its the same thing as learning how to use anything else you own. There have been great points made in that reasonable eventually becomes unreasonable when it comes to guns. I also understand where others are coming from when they say no training period because its a right.

 

However, I don't at all think the "wild wild West" situation will ever occur,but I DO believe more people will carry if HR 822 passes the senate. I mean it is a GUN afterall. When it goes boom, something will get hit. Wouldn't you prefer it be the intended target?' Sure not all targets will be hit as Vladtepes kinda made the point, but seriously, who wouldn't want to learn how to properly use what they trust to help them defend their life? It makes no sense to me to not train.

 

Its the requirement part that is up for debate.

 

SHOULD and REQUIRED are not the same thing..

like I said before..

 

the person who would benefit from a class is already taking one..

the person who would limp through the class let the info slide in one ear and out the other is wasted time..

 

the problem is suffering from the complete DELUSION that a single NRA basics style class is going to do ANYTHING in regards to actually preparing someone for a self defense shoot..

 

the assumption is purely emotion driven.. "oh can't have a bunch of untrained people walking around every day armed" so you "require them to take a class" as if that one single class will somehow be so filled with amazing instruction that it will instantly make anyone safer.. I have been to MANY a first steps classes.. and while yes at the end.. most people with a brain are marginally safer (keep in mind these people took the class even without being forced)many of them were in NO WAY prepared to defend themselves with a gun..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all of this is nonsense.. YES there are MANY people who cant shoot.. cant clean a gun.. can't disassemble it.. should probably not even own one..

 

but in the scope of ONE single class.. ONE time... how much will really be learned.. AND you are placing MORE faith in the government than the people.. you are assuming that the government must FORCE the class because people will not seek it out..

 

you are literally empowering this class to take average john doe off the street with NO firearms experience and elevating him to a status of being a safe self defense shooter.. so who is teaching this magic class? and where do I sign up..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all of this is nonsense.. YES there are MANY people who cant shoot.. cant clean a gun.. can't disassemble it.. should probably not even own one..

 

but in the scope of ONE single class.. ONE time... how much will really be learned.. AND you are placing MORE faith in the government than the people.. you are assuming that the government must FORCE the class because people will not seek it out..

 

you are literally empowering this class to take average john doe off the street with NO firearms experience and elevating him to a status of being a safe self defense shooter.. so who is teaching this magic class? and where do I sign up..

 

SMH... Its not nonsense or magic. If a person takes the class and doesn't learn anything, then that is on them. Sure, I agree that ONE class isn't enough. But at the very least, the four golden rules would be learned. Learning basics like that are indispensable to someone new to guns. If anything, the class could teach a person how to safely handle a firearm when not in danger. I don't think it's "magic" at all, and to be honest, that's overstating it quite it bit IMHO. It's just like learning how to drive a car. Those that just get behind the wheel without first learning how to drive usually wreak havoc that first time behind the wheel. These things we call guns aren't toys. Some form of training should be required IMHO. I offered a suggestion as to what level of training that could be but by all means, if you have a better idea, please feel free to add it. However, at the same time, I do understand the argument against mandatory or required training.

 

As a responsible and SAFE gun owner, I just think its highly irresponsible to advocate no training required. It puts me between a rock and a hard place because I also believe in our rights. I also know how crafty the antis are in usurping our right to bear arms. There has to be a happy medium. I made this thread because I believe this will be an issue when it comes time for the Senate to vote on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...