The “government” (i.e., the “people”) should get involved in others’ lives when there is a compelling interest such as ensuring the health and safety of members of society.

What is the compelling interest in mandating a certain type of training to carry a gun for self-defense? What is the actual, demonstrated danger that someone who doesn’t have that training will injure you or me? How many incidents like that occur in this country with its many people who carry weapons without really being very well trained in their use?

How does that level of danger compare to the danger of allowing people that we think are incompetent drive motor vehicles where we do? How does that danger compare to allowing untrained people to purchase guns and keep them in their homes, to hunt with, or to shoot them on public ranges? And for that matter, how does that danger compare with not having the police enforce government orders to wear masks in retail establishments? There are countless things that some of us believe are dangerous, including to ourselves personally, that we just accept as necessary parts of communal life.

Then who gets to decide what type and degree of training should be required? I can guarantee that my opinion about what is adequate is different from many others’. I suspect that even most members here wouldn’t like what I would require if I were making the rules based on what I believe people should know versus what most gun owners do know. (One hint: There are a helluva lot of gun safety rules that gun owners should know and understand beyond “the” four.) And to put a cherry on top of all that, there are professional firearms trainers that I wouldn’t trust to teach people how to perform basic hygiene functions, much less how to handle a deadly weapon; do I—or some government bureaucrat—get to decide who gets to train others based on our personal opinion?

Is firearms training desirable? Absolutely; that’s why I do it regularly and frequently. Is it something the government should mandate? No.

quote:

Originally posted by midwest guy:
My ccw instructor put on a vest when live shooting started.

Holy shit! Heard of some crazy stuff but never that.

quote:

Originally posted by Prefontaine:

quote:

Originally posted by midwest guy:
My ccw instructor put on a vest when live shooting started.

Holy shit! Heard of some crazy stuff but never that.

Not an entirely unusual practice.

I've even seen some experienced students do this.

taking a class this month,
only 6 people total ,
not 15 , like in AZ

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
taking a class this month,
only 6 people total ,
not 15 , like in AZ

. The 16 hours can drag, are you shooting indoors?

A few years back I had a discussion with one of the NRA lobbyists - happened when there was a proposed law change in NC.

My words, not his, but the point the NRA lobbyist made that anytime we put requirements into the law it opens the door to additional requirements.

If the second amendment protects the right to bear arms, why are we required to be licensed to exercise that right? Why do we condition the license on taking a class? Why would we then require a class before a class.

On the other hand, there are a lot of people that have no clue what they are doing making it a significant advantage to include (require?) some sort of basic training.

I don't know the answer but do know that after that discussion I've been less inclined to suggest training be mandated. Encouraged - yes.

My opinion, feel free to ignore it, dealers, government, any involved entity, should encourage training and publicize its availability, but government should not require it.

Maybe things like "new shooters orientation" sessions available at ranges. Maybe discount coupon for that offered with every gun purchase.

Need some creative thinking.

quote:

Originally posted by midwest guy:

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
taking a class this month,
only 6 people total ,
not 15 , like in AZ

. The 16 hours can drag, are you shooting indoors?

Well, yes
I found out that they want us to shoot 175 - 200 rounds in both day one and day 2

W.t.h. is that about?

The whole range ( in the basement) is only 35 ft. Long !

I might be balking on it.

Maybe I'am screwy ,
But if the 1st 25 rounds fit on a playing card,
Shouldn't that qualify ?

Unless he wants me to use a hand mirror shoot upside down and backwards .

Two courses prior , in other states
I only shot 40 each ,
I gotta go talk to him .

Classes around are bizzaro .

Two places won't answer the phone , a 3 Rd place just sends you their website , can't talk to anyone.
Oy!

I had hoped that this wouldn't become political, but of course like everything else, it did. I guess my primary thought was the CCW class itself. Try as I might I wasn't able to display the difference between a CCW class, open carry, and the second amendment. I found it scary that people with absolutely zero gun handling skills (other than the big four verbally advised) would be able to be firing a deadly weapon just a couple of feet from me. Like I stated earlier, one gun still had the price tag hanging on it!!! Another few hours of classroom training would have been great. I was wiping down a DA/SA Sig 226 this morning. I'm thankful that nobody had one of these at the firing line. Can you imagine them trying to remember to decock prior to reholstering?? Yikes, ND city!!!A close friend of mine asked about training as he has never handled a weapon in his life. He plans on taking an instructional clinic prior to his CCW class. Not only responsible on his part, but intelligent too.

quote:

Originally posted by MMSIG229:
I had hoped that this wouldn't become political ....

Well, let me ask this: When you said, “I'm just thinking it may be a good idea to require [emphasis added] …,” who were you thinking of that should establish the requirement and then enforce it?

The answer is of course obvious. You or I can’t do that and neither can any other individual or group I can think of besides the “people” who act through the force of laws and regulations established by the government. And once the “government” becomes involved in establishing and enforcing requirements such as you propose, then that’s by definition a political issue.

To reiterate my own position, you make perfectly valid points about what kinds of training people who rely on guns for self-defense should have, but if any sort or degree of training is required, as you think would be good, then it becomes a political matter. If we’re not going to require it through the force of law, the best we can do is try to educate the ignorant ourselves as individuals. I have done that myself, and if people are approached properly, most are willing to accept the little bit of instruction that goes a long way toward making them better and safer shooters.

I am also of the school that training standards should not be forced by the government. New shooters Should be encourages to seek additional training. I would say that the two biggest barriers keeping many from continuing training is cost and intimidation. For many new and not so new shooters, they go to a CCW class and believe they’re ready for an advanced class. They also think that they are completely ready to proficiently carry a concealed gun.

I just went through this with my 21 year old freshly permitted son. He grew up shooting with me from the age of seven, had taken a basic safety course, his CCW course, and had shot a couple of club matches. He was certainly nervous, intimidated, and stretched to his ability at the start of the class. Midway through the first day, things started to click, and he was totally getting it. His improvement over the two days was incredible. At the end of the class and 925 rounds down range at speed with precision, I asked how he felt. First, he said that his CCW class should have been like our class. Second, I now know that I have so much more to learn and master. Third, he’s hooked on training and can’t wait for our next class.

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:

quote:

Originally posted by midwest guy:

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
taking a class this month,
only 6 people total ,
not 15 , like in AZ

. The 16 hours can drag, are you shooting indoors?

Well, yes
I found out that they want us to shoot 175 - 200 rounds in both day one and day 2

W.t.h. is that about?

The whole range ( in the basement) is only 35 ft. Long !

I might be balking on it.

Maybe I'am screwy ,
But if the 1st 25 rounds fit on a playing card,
Shouldn't that qualify ?

Unless he wants me to use a hand mirror shoot upside down and backwards .

Two courses prior , in other states
I only shot 40 each ,
I gotta go talk to him .

Classes around are bizzaro .

Two places won't answer the phone , a 3 Rd place just sends you their website , can't talk to anyone.
Oy!

. I’m looking at my target from ccw and I think it’s 30 rounds total. Distance was 5,7 and 10 yards. Instructor then scores your target.

Yes yes, give more of your rights away and let the government control more of your life with these extra "training requirements".

Fuck That.

Beyond Stoooopid to require this kind of thing.

But some people like kneeling.

OK, for the final time!!!! My communication skills must be lacking. I an talking only about the CCW class itself, and my thoughts are only concerened with the safety of the people in the class!! I am not making any restrictions on the 2nd amendment or open carry!!!Go buy a 44 Magnum, strap it on, and go march down 5th avenue, I don't care!!! I was only stating that taking a voluntary class involving live fire, it may be a good idea if more classroom instruction was required. We had about 25 people in the class with one instructor. The wanna be gang banger standing a couple of feet to my right brought a holster that looked like it was made from a burlap bag. He didn't even to think to bring eyes, ears, or ammo!!! People were running their guns empty, the slide was locking back on an empty mag, and they kept trying to pull the trigger with a quizzical look on their faces!!!! Does anyone really think that a few more hours of classroom instruction involving a voluntary class isn't a good idea??? PS, Happy 4TH!!!

quote:

OK, for the final time!!!!

Promise? As sigfreund pointed out, you did kind of leave the door open.

Many, maybe even most, gun owners, especially first-timers, are not gun nuts firearms enthusiasts like us. Try to take some comfort in that there haven't been (that I know of) rashes of accidental shootings.

I don't agree with any state or federal mandated training but I would not mind seeing state or federal level offering rebates to those that take a suggested safety course, say $50-$100 upon completion. Rebate could be used toward purchase a new firearm.

Sure that would cost taxpayers a bit but I think it would be good investment and considering all the other useless and expensive crap we have to pay taxes toward.

Actually I think we as a country should go in the opposite direction to solve the gun violence problem and yes it is a long term very long term solution...

I think it should be mandatory through middle and high school to get proper firearms instruction.... along with the responsibilities involved. The only way a young person could get out of it is with a religious deferment.

I also like the idea a Vermont legislator tried to propose a few years back. If one chooses to not have a gun in their home then they are required to purchase a 'non gun' permit from the state and be registered as such.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Definitely should be a mandatory part of the public school curriculum.

I think it would be GREAT to include something like "Firearm Safety" as part of a High School P.E. curriculum. 2-4 week course on gun mechanics, field stripping, cleaning, ammunition types, and of course, shooting. Leftist and Demotarded heads would EXPLODE!!! Might be worth it just to see that!!

I am a BIG believer that people that decide to own/carry a firearm get initial training, get updated training at regular intervals (I'll let everyone decide what that interval is for themselves) and practice regularly.

I DO NOT want the Government mandating what and when that training should be.

These discussions seem to run down rabbit holes.
I believe the OP was ranting about the quality of the training not if it should be required and by whom. And I agree, there are some terrible instructors out there.

Also, schools should not be teaching any type of firearms instruction. They can't teach basics and you want them to teach this? What subject has any school done spectacularly?
Firearms training needs to start at home. Don't pass this burden/right on to someone else.