Automotive Deals HPCC Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it Songs of Summer Fire TV Stick Sun Care Handmade school supplies Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection TarantinoCollection  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Segway miniPro
Customer Discussions > Survival forum

Are you in favor of requiring training before being allowed to buy or carry a gun

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-22 of 22 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 19, 2012 2:33:02 PM PST
Rob Bekker says:
If you are in favor of requiring training before being allowed to buy or carry a gun, would you also be in favor of limiting the right of free speech to only those people that have graduated high school? How about requiring a license to be a member of the "free press". Would you support a government controlled list of approved religions? How about offering the right of due process, and equal opportunity under the law, to only those that have completed 90 hours of education in the legal process?

Posted on Jan 19, 2012 6:19:32 PM PST
Eugene Jones says:

The only reason I would have anyone train before they buy or carry a gun is for safety reasons. People need to learn how to treat a gun with respect, know how to properly secure their weapon away from minors, and know how to shoot it properly. I do not have a problem with the mandatory training that I had to go through to get my concealed carry permit. Most of the stuff is elementary, but a lot of things that we take for granted, others do not have a clue...

It breaks my heart everytime I read a news story about a toddler who shoots themselves with an unsecure weapon. Or someone shooting themselves while cleaning an "unloaded" weapon...

What is the difference between getting a driver's license and purchasing a handgun? There is a great deal of responsibility associated with both. A car is just as deadly as a firearm. I know in many states, you need to go through a hunter's safety course prior to getting a hunting license. It's all about the safety, dude...

The other restrictions on our civil rights are not to keep us safe, but to keep us oppressed...

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 6:35:15 AM PST
No. No. No. No. And no.

While I understand that guns are "dangerous" just like cars and need to be handled properly, I don't think anyone should have to have a certain level of training before owning one. Our old friend Peter used to compare them to power tools. Power tools are dangerous. I've hurt myself more with tools (power and non-powered) than I have with firearms. Granted, most of those were just painful and not deadly, but I know people who have cut themselves very badly with knives and powered saws. People have shot nails through their feet with nail guns. There is a certain level of respect required to give anything we use: guns, cars, tools, etc. If we are going to require certain licensing for a person to buy a gun then it only makes sense that we would require a similar permit to buy power tools.

Carrying guns is only slightly different. I personally don't want every single person in America carrying a firearm. But it's not up to me. Just like I don't want every single person in America driving a car, or putting lies on the internet, or any other number of things I can think of that could make me wish I had power to control what people could and couldn't do (assuming I were blind enough to think that was actually a good idea). But it's not up to me, and it shouldn't be up to me. Nor should it be up to a biased and agenda driven agency of our esteemed government.

Sadly, we live in a coddled society. We rely on the government for everything: eductation, retirement, jobs, infrastructure, defense, protection, emergency response, economy, health....pretty much everything. Some of that is necessary but much of it is not. What happens to a society when we are coddled is exactly what causes us to need discussions like this. If everyone were used to the idea of defending themselves, and lived life accordingly, it would be a rare day when someone did something stupid with a firearm because everyone else around them has a firearm too. Probably more to the point of this discussion, in that world, people wouldn't be so ignorant about firearms and there would (hopefully) be less negligence. In the world we live in, people buy guns for home defense and slap them in a dresser drawer and never even practice with them. They think their problems are solved. Then they "hide" the gun from their children because society tells them to keep guns away from children and not let their children see, touch, or ask about guns. Is it any surprise that negligent discharges happen in this society?

So in my opinion, personal liberty and responsibilty should rule the day. Everyone can buy and carry a gun (as the 2nd ammendment states) but they are responsible for that gun. Just like you are responsible for any damage you cause with your car, so you are responsible for any damage you cause with yoru firearm. And if someone smokes you because you were being stupid with your gun, sorry.


In reply to an earlier post on Jan 20, 2012 9:01:24 PM PST
Rob Bekker says:
What is the difference between a drivers license and a gun license? Driving is a PRIVILEGE, gun ownership is a RIGHT. I STRONGLY advocate safety training before gun ownership, but not MANDATED training.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2012 9:11:54 AM PST
Good point and I agree. And if a person is being irresponsible or unsafe with a car they should be penalized, the same could be true for using a gun. Both CAN be very useful and fun tools but CAN also be very dangerous when used improperly.

"Proper use" can be a semantics issue as well since certain people believe that shooting more than once every 3 seconds is "unsafe" when others can't imagine taking that long to shoot at close range or even some medium range targets. So there are obvious safety issues that can't really be argued and other issues that become debatable.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2012 1:05:36 PM PST
Rob Bekker says:
I agree, and I'd even support more strict penalties for firearms violations, provided the second amendment was supported, including the "bearing arms" part. Things like a mandatory 5 year sentence w/no possibility of parole for comitting a crime with a gun, make sence to me.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 23, 2012 1:43:54 PM PST
Yes, and assuming there was no way an innocent person could be charged with such for defending themselves. I could see a situation where someone was right in their use of a firearm but could be convicted of comitting a crime, and thus sentanced to this punishment without reason. So assuming a system was in place that could be trusted to place good people on the right sided and criminals in the wrong, I'd be down like a clown.

In reply to an earlier post on Aug 17, 2012 10:43:47 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Aug 17, 2012 10:47:25 PM PDT
In support of Rob's commentary:
The Second Amendment states that "The RIGHT of the people to keep and BEAR arms shall NOT be infringed."

As an honest citizen and military veteran who has more training and experience with all manner of firearms than 90% of all police-officers, ...I have to PAY $75 dollars every five years for a concealed-carry "permit", ...otherwise I am "not allowed" to carry a pistol. I have to show "PROOF" of training in order to get my "permit" (so several years service in the U.S. Marine Corps isn't "good enough"?).

Paying a "fee" to excercise a Constitutional RIGHT! If this is NOT infringement, what is it?

So someone will inevitably blather on about the "necessity" of processing a background-check on our potenial pistoleros...

...But there are vast hoardes of people who ARE full-blown vicious criminals out there, with enormous volumes of criminal-records, ...and they are out there as thoroughly armed as they please, when they are not in prison.

There are criminals out there who have NO CRIMINAL RECORD whatsoever. They haven't been caught yet.

I notice this factor every time I see something on television about some serial-murderer/rapist type who has been apprehended after YEARS of predation: they interview his neighbors, and they say "but he seemed like such a nice man".

Posted on Aug 18, 2012 1:41:23 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Aug 18, 2012 2:48:36 PM PDT]

Posted on Aug 31, 2012 9:34:22 PM PDT
Rob Bekker says:
Nice, being forced to pay a "fee" in order to be allowed to exercise your rights sounds a bit like another of those liberal ideas...the Poll Tax.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 27, 2012 10:03:04 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 27, 2012 10:04:38 AM PDT
This is a great point. I was quite miffed at the hoops I had to jump through to get a CCW. I may have rambled on about this before. But....

$60 for an 8 hour class about how to carry and the laws thereof. Most of this was spent practicing how to load, hold, point, and aim a derringer, revolver, and automatic according to our instructors preferences (he had some great ideas on proper technique but it was not the only right way to do it). A good deal was also spent discussing what a person could and could not do according to the law. Very interesting and important, except for the fact that other people I know who went through CCW courses in the same state were taught completely different things. A short amount of time was spent shooting at something like 3 yards where the instructor was a little inconsistent with his instruction (I was shooting as fast as possible and he wanted me to see how tight of a group I could shoot, he told my friend to stop shooting groups in the head because that was "unrealistic" in a self defense situation).

Okay, moving on.

$10 or $12 for a passport photo. It couldn't be a properly sized photo that I did myself for free. It had to be a passport photo. When I got my license the first thing I noticed was that they messed the aspect ratio up so my picture is shorter in width than in height and my face is very tall and skinny. Good job OSBI. You failed and you cost me $12 to do it.

$100 for a five year license, $200 for ten. They don't warn you when it expires so I went with the five. The form I had to fill out was a bit goofy and I had to pay the OSBI directly for the fee.

$25 for finger prints at the Sheriff's office, payable only by Cashier's Check which cost me another $1 to get. More importantly, the first day I took off early from work to get there before five I was told I could not leave my utility knife with the guy at the front door I had to run it back to my car, then they told me that the Sheriff's office stops finger printing at 3:00. The next time I took off work early they informed me of the finger print fee and that I could not pay by check or cash so I had to leave again to go get the certified funds and return, going through security AGAIN. Also, you do finger prints in the same place where the sexual offenders have to go. Yippee. At least the girl doing my finger prints was attractive.

Oh, but she forgot to have me sign a line on the form and called me after I got home and told me I'd have to come in the next day. I told her to stay where she was because I wasn't taking off another afternoon of work. Luckily she did.

Four months later I got my letter. I had been forewarned to call to make sure they actually had it. Enough people get their letter only to find their Sheriff's office doesn't actually have it when they arrive. It took me 3 phone calls to know for sure that they had it. I had to take off another afternoon of work to go pick it up.

So, much time and $200.00 later I was able to finally start bearing a firearm. I, a law abiding citizen who has a very clean record (except a couple traffic citations a decade old), who has pretty good credit and always pays his taxes, finally got to bear a firearm.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Infringed: past participle, past tense of in·fringe (Verb)
1. Actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.): "infringe a copyright".
2. Act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on: "infringe on his privacy".

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 1, 2012 4:41:21 PM PDT
Eugene Jones says:
Yeah, my state turns an otherwise great occasion into a pain in the butt. I had to pay $90 for the class, which was four hours going over the laws, a bunch of corny videos and a little shooting.

I turned in my certificate with another $90 for the permit at the sheriff's office. NC at the time had a issue-or-deny rule of 90 days. On the 91st day, I called to see if my permit was ready. I was told no. I told him that it had been at least 90 days, I suggest he look again. Oh, here it is, he said... I would have been a little upset if I wasn't so anxious to get my CCW... The sheriff had signed it a month earlier... those bass turds. NC has since reduced the wait to 45 days...

My permit is good for 5 years. It costs $75 to renew. At least I do not have to have a photo on mine... There are so many restrictions where I live that the only time I carry is on road trips. You got that right: Infringed...

Congrats on getting your CCW, Doesn't it give you a great sense of empowerment? It makes you feel less vulnerable...

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 3, 2012 1:44:56 PM PDT
I have to admit I do feel empowered, but I don't want to feel empowered. I don't like getting a feeling of empowerment that I get to exercise my rights (sort of) after jumping through a lot of bureaucratic hoops.

But I do feel empowered. And so far, I have been in a vehicle involved in a traffic stop twice while carrying and both times the demeanor of the officer was vastly different than my average stop prior to carrying. Once it was me and me alone. The HPO was amazingly chipper for so early in the morning and despite the fact that I could not find my insurance card he gave me a very light verbal warning and warm, "Have a nice day!" The second occasion, last Friday, I was riding with a coworker to lunch and he was doing at least 10 over in a construction zone. He got busted and two of us were packing (the driver was not). We both reached for our permits and showed them to the officer, he asked the driver to come back to his car. The driver got a written warning but we were back on the road in less than 3 minutes.

In the past, a traffic stop has always taken me at least 5 minutes and while I've never had a moving citation they have rarely been that nice and cheerful.

So perhaps there is no connection; however, I feel there is. I've heard some theories that officers do not like people with concealed permits or that they hold them to higher standards. This could be the case but in my experience it has been rather nice to have the permit and exercise it. I try to carry every day and everywhere I can legally do so.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 7, 2012 10:56:59 PM PDT
"The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is MY concealed carry permit, ...and YOURS too."
-Ted Nugent

Its true about police and their atttitude toward citizens excercising THEIR RIGHT to be armed: Look up the Knox Report from Shotgun News. He has written several articles in regard to the stupidity, confusion, and outright discrimination that several police-officers have exhibited toward LAWFUL armed citizens.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 8, 2012 7:44:39 AM PDT
The 2nd Amendment should be our permits but they aren't. See what will happen if you get caught concealing without a permit. You may never be able to legally own another firearm. I'm not saying that is the way it should be, it most certainly should not. But it is the case in some areas. I know a person who was thrown in jail and had a rifle confiscated for over 2 years because it was laying in the back seat with a towel thrown over it while the guy was on the side of the road with a flat tire. It was "concealed".

Certainly there are some law enforcement officers in some areas that do not want people to carry at all and will treat them poorly if they get the chance. Even here we have many officers who have spoken out against the new open carry law that has been passed. But in my experience, I've been treated much more politely by LEOs who know I am carrying. They've not only treated me like a human but also as if I'm almost an equal, which is almost unheard of.

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 10, 2012 8:45:32 PM PDT
Eugene Jones says:
I'm a firm believer that rights should never be absolute. Without rules and regulations we would have anarchy. There are enough loonies slipping through the system as it is...

I have spoken to a few LEO's in my area and they actually feel more comfortable finding out that a traffic stop involves a CCW. They think that most CCW carriers are law abiding citizens who have already had criminal background checks...

I feel most empowered when I walk into a pawn shop or gun show and know that I can buy any pistol that I want on the spot. I walked into a sporting goods store and purchased a pistol and walked out the door in five minutes... That is a good feeling.

When I do carry, there is a certain sense of paranoia. I strictly obey traffic laws and I worry that someone will panic if I accidentally expose my weapon. The term brandishing is left up to the interpretation of the responding LEO, and the judge will decide whether the weapon was brandished or just exposed... The only time I don't feel paranoid is when I happen to find myself in a bad neighborhood. I recently bought something locally over the internet. I told my wife that I am not going into an unknown neighborhood unarmed. I was wearing a tee shirt and shorts carrying a full sized .45, and I was printing big time. She said, I can see your gun. I said good, I have nothing to hide.

I showed up in the trailer park and a young woman with a baby answered the door. I thought that I was in the clear, until ten guys filed out of the house. Nothing happened, but I felt good knowing that I would not have been another victim...

In reply to an earlier post on Oct 17, 2012 12:31:57 PM PDT
There are some rights that should be absolute. But probably more to the point, rights should not be denied unless there is a very exact and verifiable reason to deny them. I'm okay with rules, laws, and regulations. I'm not interested in interpretations of laws, vague laws, or laws that restrict the rights of many to attempt to control a few (or even restricting the rights of a few to attempt to control many).

Right now, in Oklahoma, any presentation of the gun is probably going to be labelled as brandishing. That is the only paranoia I feel when carrying. If I print, if I accidentally expose it, if I have to remove it to go into a building or holster it after returning to my vehicle, etc I could be charged with brandishing a firearm which would be treated the same as displaying or threatening to use deadly force. I feel paranoia about obeying traffic laws on an everyday basis regardless of my carrying status.

However, I do agree with you. In my experience, LEOs seem to relax when I show my CCP and so far have been very friendly and very forgiving in the limited encounters I've had. And I do like knowing that I at least have options if I find myself in a strange place around strange people. I may very well still become a victim, but at least I have one more option in my bag of tools.

Posted on Nov 3, 2012 2:50:04 AM PDT
Thats pretty much the way it is...
The anti-gun political pukes have made it almost a crime to merely defend yourself, in ANY situation, with ANY weapon.

It aggravates me to no end the hysterics that other people have regarding lawful citizens excercising out Constitutional Rights under the Second Amendment.
...But they refuse to acknowledge the fact that there are some serious criminal scumbags at large, ARMED TO THE TEETH, with NO regard whatsoever for ANY law.

Posted on Dec 18, 2012 5:00:06 AM PST
storm front says:
Proper and safe gun handling is common sense. Anyone not smart enough to handle a gun safely should not be allowed to drive or vote.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 2:12:14 AM PST
I think that about sums it up! Its true on multiple levels.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 14, 2013 7:38:17 PM PST
OldAmazonian says:
Why do we encourage training before allowing a person to drive a car nowadays?
It ain't 1899 no more.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2013 7:26:31 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 19, 2013 7:32:30 AM PST
RD Sill says:
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Survival forum (69 discussions)

  Discussion Replies Latest Post
The average Person does not have basic survival items stored up. Check out my list below. Are you ready? 1412 Mar 26, 2014
What type of guns should a novice begin with? 1400 May 16, 2013
Maine hermit living in wild for 27 years arrested 2 Apr 25, 2013
Are you in favor of requiring training before being allowed to buy or carry a gun 21 Feb 19, 2013
Why the Neo-cons, Tea-partiers, and fascists, will never rule my country. 7565 Jan 17, 2013
How much ammo is enough 124 Aug 17, 2012
De-Escalation in Self Defense 6 Mar 8, 2012
Street Robberies and You 4 Feb 6, 2012
Looking for a book of survival fiction... 40 Jan 18, 2012
Who knows a lot about underground shelters -without spending Millions to do it?? 17 Jan 13, 2012
Tactical Shooting Drills/Practical Shooting Drills 104 Dec 28, 2011
EDC 157 Dec 5, 2011

This discussion

Discussion in:  Survival forum
Participants:  8
Total posts:  22
Initial post:  Jan 19, 2012
Latest post:  Feb 19, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions