.
- Thread starter Millie
- Start date
- Replies 67
- Views 2,326
Wow. Sounds like you have had a reality check. The concealed carry program is a BASIC mandatory training that offers no training at all. It is a CYA class for the government. You have been misguided if you haven't been taught the basic firearms fundamentals, safety first. We should all be required to go through a training program. Then, we should have to qualify annually to guarantee proficiency. Laws change, the concealed carry holder might change as well.
Not everyone is meant to carry a gun. The days of assuming that everyone is competent with their firearms have come and gone.
Not everyone is meant to carry a gun. The days of assuming that everyone is competent with their firearms have come and gone.
Bradman, it has only been 7 minutes since you posted this. I am begging you to PLEASE reconsider this and edit or not. Please, just reconsider.
Government not big enough for you? Like to be given permission instead of using your God-given rights? Sounds like you may not be in the right place.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There never was a day of competent gun owners. When ones ego says they are, accidents happen.
As to your point of yearly qualification, go join a profession that requires it. Rights do not work like that. Only restrictioned license processes.
@Millie
Everything i do i learn from. The key is retaining and applying what one learns. Enjoy the class and i hope you can use the info.
OP
I agree with you. I did have a reality check not too long ago. ( I had a post about that too, as I do about everything!) This made me realize I had to get the basics first. Which I will.
Bradman, I have carried legally in S.C. since 1976. Before that I carried illegally. 43 years ago it was damn near impossible to get a CWP in S.C., I got one. From the day I got it until right now typing this and every time I look at it, I get pissed off. Nobody has the Authority under the Heavens to ALLOW me to carry a weapon to protect myself and my loved ones with.
When Georgia accepted S.C. CWPs and us them a Local TV reporter hurried to the border,down around Augusta and grabbed the first state representative she could interview. This turned out to be the shortest interview ever on WBTW. I was actually stunned that they aired it.
Reporter to Georgia State Rep...Sir, what kind of "test" will Georgia use for proficiency of using firearms???
Georgia State Rep....Why who amongst us would be so presumptuous as to try such a thing? End Of Interview.
Who indeed??? You either have this "Right" or you Do Not. As for me, I was BORN with this right.
When Georgia accepted S.C. CWPs and us them a Local TV reporter hurried to the border,down around Augusta and grabbed the first state representative she could interview. This turned out to be the shortest interview ever on WBTW. I was actually stunned that they aired it.
Reporter to Georgia State Rep...Sir, what kind of "test" will Georgia use for proficiency of using firearms???
Georgia State Rep....Why who amongst us would be so presumptuous as to try such a thing? End Of Interview.
Who indeed??? You either have this "Right" or you Do Not. As for me, I was BORN with this right.
OP
There is a law to have a hunting class before you get a hunting license, correct? I think I owe it to myself and others around me to get a basic pistol class, which I should have done a year ago.
I don't want the government any deeper in my business than it already is, but these are guns we're talking about. I think a basic class is a good thing when you're a new shooter.
No One is arguing That. Mandatory qualifications yearly and the CWP system is an insult. Everyone should want to know how to use their firearm. NO one should be Made to do it. This is one of those is or ain't things Millie. You right to free speech is not tested by your vocabulary.
Last edited:
OP
Well, then you guys quit following the laws and rip up your permits to CC and get on with it.
I don't like it at all, but I choose to follow the law and get a permit to carry my gun. I suppose if I was younger, I may not want to abide by the law, but I'm too old to stir things up now. LoL.
But we all have to choose what to do about following the law, even to do something we all know is a RIGHT we were given a long time ago.
Edit....rights we were BORN to. OK??
Last edited:
I can't tell you how much I appreciate you posting this. Now if all will just read.
We weren’t given rights. We were born with them. If they were given to us, then they could be taken away.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I started carrying a revolver when I was at the legal age to buy one. I have carried one everyday since,way beforeccw was ever though of. I was lucky enough to have an uncle that was very proficient with firearms. He started me and his son out early with training.He was a US Marine. He all thtaught us all the fundamentals of handgun shooting.. Then in 1974 I started BLET in the city of Durham PD. I thought I knew it all but I learned a lot that year. And Every year since that first day I've been required to qualify with my duty pistol and my edc pistol. Then About 15 years ago I decide to get a ccw permit so that I would not have to go to the sheriff's department to get a permit every time I wanted to buy a gun..I see Bradman's side about testing but I don't think it's for everyone. He to was a Leo. So that yearly training is burned into his thought process. Also for the record I do seem to learn something every year during qualifications or I'm reminded of something I had forgotten
.I do think everyone that carries a gun should be proficient with a handgun before they start carrying one. Atleast know enough about the laws of carrying one and the limits of their ability. As Clint Eastwood said "A man's got to know his limitations". Everyone is not as lucky as I was to have a competent instructor.To each his own. I think the majority of us on the forum have enough sense to seek training and get the best they can get. Having a gun for defence is a right given to us by our for Father's and the Constitution of this great country.
.I do think everyone that carries a gun should be proficient with a handgun before they start carrying one. Atleast know enough about the laws of carrying one and the limits of their ability. As Clint Eastwood said "A man's got to know his limitations". Everyone is not as lucky as I was to have a competent instructor.To each his own. I think the majority of us on the forum have enough sense to seek training and get the best they can get. Having a gun for defence is a right given to us by our for Father's and the Constitution of this great country.Requiring training of responible law abiding citizens (those who would acquire a CWP) is senseless. Those people will seek training on their own because - well - they are responsible citizens, like the OP. They are not the ones we need to worry about, those we need laws to “control” (punish).
“I think it’s a good idea to....”
“You should be required to....”
These two above sentences mean different things, unless you are beyond arrogant.
“You should be required to....”
These two above sentences mean different things, unless you are beyond arrogant.
2A doesn't state that we're allowed to keep and bear arms after we take a class and prove that we can hit the target.
That has nothing to do with RKBA. Do you believe that nobody ever dared carry a concealed sidearm before the states started (grudgingly) granting permission? Reality check. People...men in particular...have been carrying guns on or about their persons in this country...concealed and otherwise...legal and otherwise...for about 250 years. I'd estimate that for every legal carrier, there are two carrying without permission.
Hunting is a privilege unless you hunt on your own property, and even then you can't hunt out of season.
For the win.
Anyone who plans to go armed...whether in public or in the game field...should seek at least basic firearms training. That training can come from a friend or relative. For instance, mine came from my father and his from his father before him.
As a government requirement before exercising an enumerated Constitutional right? Nope. As Boyette noted...That ain't how the Bill of Rights works.
Millie, I applaud your efforts. We can never be too safe in our gun handling, but if you simply follow the four cardinal rules, you can't go wrong. Beyond that, it's a matter of hitting your target and not hitting anything else.
Bottom line: Is gun. Gun not safe.
That pistol on your belt isn't a toy and it's NOT your friend. It's as dangerous as a Rattlesnake whenever your hand is on it. It's up to you to be safe with it.
Just my 2% of a buck.
Last edited:
While I see your point on the surface who is to say to what level of proficiency? Just being able to load and fire a couple rounds without shooting yourself? Scoring “x”% on a state or FBI qualification course of fire? Last time I ran the NC LEO course it was timed ... not short but not a huge amount either and specific on hand usage and reloading. Also out of the 50 rounds fired, 12 were from 15 yards and 6 from 25 yards. If a liberal politician pushed for the NC DOJ course were made for CHP quals I’d venture to say a huge portion on people would not make the grade without a good deal of training. Would it be a bad thing for everyone to be at that level ... hell no ... the state would be safer from negligent shootings and criminals would really be afraid of facing a good law abiding citizen cause they would likely be a hell of a lot more likely to be stopped. On the flip side you’d be taking away the ability of an average law abiding citizen to carry to protect themselves. NC has over 600,000 current CHP’s under its current requirements and yes there are likely quite a few who haven’t done anything with a firearm since receiving their CHP’s but to what level should we be held and who is to set that level now and in the future as anti-gun legislation gets rammed thru more and more by liberal agendas?
LOL.
When I initially commented on this thread it was to say that not all of us were brought up in the country, raised by our fathers and grandfathers, hunting and shooting. Today, there are new shooters joining in with no training or awareness of how dangerous firearms are. We all have a responsibility to be reasonably well trained if we are going to carry a gun. We should expect that from one another.
Have you ever consoled a mother or father that killed their child with an accidental/negligent discharge of a firearm?
My dad taught me to unload my firearms before going into the house or getting into a motor vehicle. Just the way things were back then. I was later trained by the best on how to shoot, manage a firearm and survive.
I wasn't attacking the second amendment by saying what I said. What I was saying is that we should all be reasonably well trained and prepared to handle a weapon. We should all seek training, continuously.
I am never through learning.
When I initially commented on this thread it was to say that not all of us were brought up in the country, raised by our fathers and grandfathers, hunting and shooting. Today, there are new shooters joining in with no training or awareness of how dangerous firearms are. We all have a responsibility to be reasonably well trained if we are going to carry a gun. We should expect that from one another.
Have you ever consoled a mother or father that killed their child with an accidental/negligent discharge of a firearm?
My dad taught me to unload my firearms before going into the house or getting into a motor vehicle. Just the way things were back then. I was later trained by the best on how to shoot, manage a firearm and survive.
I wasn't attacking the second amendment by saying what I said. What I was saying is that we should all be reasonably well trained and prepared to handle a weapon. We should all seek training, continuously.
I am never through learning.
Last edited:
I agree, but for many people continuous training just isn't doable, either because of time or money or both.
This is where we parted company. The "require" word.
The right to keep and bear arms...own and carry...shall not be infringed. We've already swallowed too many infringements as it is. We don't need to add another one.
That's why I posted what I did Way up stream. A simple edit would have made this moot.
Personally I think @Bradman is a good man. He and I have talked. "WE" understand each other.
It was too late for me to edit Billy. Thank you. Other people had already posted once I realized my post was offensive. I could not retract the information. I was speaking to a particular situation, not to the forum. I am solid. All is well. Thank you for your friendship.
I wasn't offended and I doubt that anyone else was. We've just pointed to the danger of readily accepting"common sense" legislation and how easy it is for the sensible among us to accept yet another infringement. After all, we're all experienced gun handlers. Getting a passing grade wouldn't be all that difficult for the gunnies among us.
But, then what about the old man living alone on an isolated dirt road who just wants a revolver for his nightstand? Or the student nurse who doesn't have time or money for training and practice, but doesn't feel very safe at night after getting the attention of a neighborhood ruffian who promised to give her what she needs?
How long before 20/20 vision is a requirement? Or what if taking a fall in the last X number of months becomes a disqualifier? (You could stumble with a gun in your hand and hurt somebody.) Maybe a physical fitness requirement like covering the hundred yard dash in under 15 seconds. Once you start being "okay" with physical limitations...like firing a qualification course every year...the door to more requirements starts to open wider and wider.
Who determines a qualifying score? The state...or worse...the federal government. That's who...and before you know it, these will be requirements for merely owning a gun.
Death by a thousand tiny cuts.
I wish the Founders had simply written:
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
No room for interpretation there.
Last edited:
Each and every person that carries a gun for personal and family protection needs to remember ONE THING.It is that they are responsible for every round that they shoot out of their gun until it reaches it's terminal resting place.I don't think that good shooters are born,they are trained whether by a family member or a paid trainer. Proficiency is being able to hit what you are aiming at not what the government dictates. God help you if you don't hit your intended Target and hit an inocent bystander ,an adult or worse a child. What would happen to you if this were to happen. I think that most people don't think about this scenario when they complain and talk crap about a professional that has been a Leo or a soldier or a certified trainer. You are never to old to learn and when you think you know everything and you screw up the world will implode around you.Would you be able to live with yourself if you took the life of an innocent person. Think about this before you start bantering. I know some will disagree most won't
Last edited:
I started carrying a revolver when I was at the legal age to buy one. I have carried one everyday since,way beforeccw was ever though of. I was lucky enough to have an uncle that was very proficient with firearms. He started me and his son out early with training.He was a US Marine. He all thtaught us all the fundamentals of handgun shooting.. Then in 1974 I started BLET in the city of Durham PD. I thought I knew it all but I learned a lot that year. And Every year since that first day I've been required to qualify with my duty pistol and my edc pistol. Then About 15 years ago I decide to get a ccw permit so that I would not have to go to the sheriff's department to get a permit every time I wanted to buy a gun..I see Bradman's side about testing but I don't think it's for everyone. He to was a Leo. So that yearly training is burned into his thought process. Also for the record I do seem to learn something every year during qualifications or I'm reminded of something I had forgotten
Just curious: in your opinion is basic police pistol qualification a good indicator of actual proficiency with a firearm?
In other words: are police that pass it proficient with their sidearms?
This kind of illustrates the difficulty in determining what "proficient" means. And what the requirements would be for attaining proficiency.
You make some good points, but I'd be surprised if most people on the forum seek out the best training they can. Although I agree they should!
It seems like most people just like to collect guns and occasionally pop off some rounds at the range. A perfectly acceptable thing to do, of course.
No sir I don't, there are very few officers that have no previous experience that pass the range on their first try. Many go through training and still fail having to take remedial training for many hours. Some flunkout of BLET because they can't pass firearms.Take Leo's out of the equation and think about people that think they can be capable of protecting themselves with no training what so ever
That's what and who I'm talking about.I have seen several people on this and other forums shoot that would be in serious trouble if they had to use a firear mfor protection. Some people just can't shoot . I use to help a friend that did ccw classes. The lack of gun safety and shooting made me wear a ballistic best when they were on the firing line. But after a little one on one he had them all able to show some ability to learn what he was trying to teach them. I forgot to mention that he included a 4 hour basic handgun class in his ccw training
Last edited:
No truer words have been spoken. If you are gonna carry, you will be held accountable for your action(s).
The Battery Oaks Blind Stage Handgun Match in the spring will deal with this. It will be an excellent opportunity for those who want to run their carry gear in 3 or 4 "blind" stages and give the ole Wizard a try. It will also give the shooter an opportunity to identify strengths and weaknesses with their gear and skillset.
I thought the LEO part was relevant because we see so many that are really lacking in weapons handling and shooting proficiency, despite the training they receive.
It shows that the idea of "proficiency" is going to vary a great deal according to who you talk to. But I do agree most of us are sadly undertrained to be carrying a gun around. I just think most people aren't interested in shooting or getting better. Takes too much effort.
Also the state requires a passing grade of 70 percent. The two departments that I've worked with required a minimum score of 80%. Do I think that is enough. Absolutely not. I use to get pissed off with myself if I didn't shoot 100%.but I've Never shot less than 94.6. Owning a firearm is a a right under the Constitution but it doesn't protect you if you screw up
Winner...………...unfortunately.
Same as above.
This should be a must. Remember the old saying..those that can...do. those that can't...teach. Don't Tell me Shiite, Show me Shiite.
The NC police pistol qual is a fair indicator of proficiency, IMO. When I went through BLET, the gun nuts among us all shot pretty well right from the beginning of range week, but it's no cakewalk. Most of the non-shooters could be trained to qual within that week, but their skills are going to degrade much more quickly than those who shoot fairly regular & have years of experience to fall back on.
Still not down with any more requirements than those we already have to deal with.
@Millie - you continue to impress me with your level of commitment & constantly seeking out more knowledge. Kudos to you, girlfriend. For real.
I've been thinking about looking into some training, myself & I've discovered a weekday steels match nearby-ish. Been shooting over 40 years & no way I 'know it all' & my skills degrade just like anyone else's with disuse. I ain't no kinda gunfighter/pistolero & never gonna be, but I do want to be as proficient as I can possibly be with my weapons.
Still not down with any more requirements than those we already have to deal with.
@Millie - you continue to impress me with your level of commitment & constantly seeking out more knowledge. Kudos to you, girlfriend. For real.
I've been thinking about looking into some training, myself & I've discovered a weekday steels match nearby-ish. Been shooting over 40 years & no way I 'know it all' & my skills degrade just like anyone else's with disuse. I ain't no kinda gunfighter/pistolero & never gonna be, but I do want to be as proficient as I can possibly be with my weapons.
That's good to hear, and I trust your opinion of it.
I'm down for no extra requirements for private citizens. But for professionals, I am all for it. Within reason of course.
Since getting into shooting I've had the pleasure of meeting quite a few cops that are the kind of guys that train and shoot competition, and to be frank, if I ever have to dial 911, I hope its these dudes who answer the call! But it seems that the only police who are really good are shooting enthusiasts. I know ammo is expensive, and some places are tight with it, but I'd like to see generous ammo allotments to cops who want to train extra. Maybe some places have that, no idea, but I know most don't.
Police Instructors have to show their ability to be able to teach classes. Then take classes to become a firearms instructor. And police trainers have to be able to shoot a score of 90% . PPSB instructor's have to recertify every 2 years with a minimum score of 92%>Also on a side note PPSB certified officers have to shoot a minimum of 80%. 10%higher than Leo's. Hope that answers your questions
I have been to departments where if you dumped a tandem axle dump truck full of ammo into the parking lot for officers to train with, you might get ONE or TWO who take you up on the offer. The rest ain't interested unless the training is mandated ( which means getting paid).
Last edited: