[RoadGlider]

It's not just Florida that has seen an increase in the number of CCW applicants...it's the entire nation (where available) as illustrated in the article from USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-03-guns_N.htm?csp=34

The article goes on to quote a few stats like this: •Florida. The Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services hired 61 temporary workers in spring to tackle a backlog in applications, says spokesman Terence McElroy. The department received 75,520 applications through June, on pace to beat last year's record of 90,331.

Interesting. Now you know why it's taking so long to get your application processed.

 

[fuzzy03cls]

Unfortunate though it's so easy. Guns shows are a joke. 2 hours & don't even shoot a gun & they give it to you.

A lot of people have them that shouldn't. Not with the proper training anyway.

 

[Steve48]

Unfortunate though it's so easy. Guns shows are a joke. 2 hours & don't even shoot a gun & they give it to you.

A lot of people have them that shouldn't. Not with the proper training anyway.

Unfortunate? I think most people here agree that the training given by most license classes is a joke. On the other hand, there's a lot of disagreement over whether it should be required at all. Many point to the second amendment and note, correctly, that it doesn't say that the right to bear arms is contingent on training. I, for one, hope that everyone who chooses to use firearms gets plenty of instruction on handling them correctly, but I don't like the idea of the government making it a legal requirement.

Imagine what would happen to the right of free speech if everyone choosing to exercise it was required to be knowledgeable about the safe use of the tongue. Hmmm. Maybe....

 

[Sprat]

I saw a concealed course being taught at a gunshow in Deland, it was more informative than the hunter education class I took as a teenager ( which was the only requirement for my carry permit.) so I don't know about the 2 hr class being BS that may be your personal opinion.

I was never much for training to be required until to took Massad Ayob's LFI class this year and I learned more in the 4 days then I ever expected.
I am now a advocate for training
I guess I could say if you where not trained by Mass then you may not have been trained properly!!!, but that is not the case, there are plenty of good instructors out there

sprat

 

[fridaddy]

Government ordered training is for privileges not rights, ie. driving. CCW is a privilege, open carry is a right that has unfortunately been taken away for the time being in most states, or requires a CCW before you can open carry. Ownership for sure is a right not a privilege.

Until open carry becomes a real recognized right again there is absolutely no excuse for any training requirement for CCW, and never for ownership. While we should all get training and encourage others to get training we should stand firm against any attempt to require training. Please do not criticize or denigrate those states who recognize they have no right to institute a training requirement.

Fuzzy, unless they are a felon or mentally unstable, there is no such thing as a person who shouldn't have a gun if they want one. Also just because you have a gun doesn't mean its for self defense or daily carry. It may just be target shooting or hunting. I don;t think they need LFI or comparable training. In FL however you almost always need a CCW because of the poor drafting of the statutes if you want to move guns between some locations.

 

[MPDC66]

OK, we have a difference between the RIGHT TO BEAR and the ,more practical but less libertarian COMPETENCE to bear.

IMHO, the RIGHT trumps the competence issue. The Constitution is clear. In a society, more attuned to staying within Constitutional boundaries, having certain requirements to have a level of competency is rational. That IS NOT the place we inhabit today.

I am all for tactical and practical education but making it mandatory is /has been used by anti gun lobbies to curtail our rights. IF our rights are lost, everything is lost. So I for one am willing to suffer some fools and blithering idiots for the preservtion of freedom. JMHO

 

[smbrewer]

Training (or not) concerns me also. I live in PA and training is not required. I believe that if you want to protect yourself and your loved ones, proper training can increase your ability to do that. I spent many hours in multiple classes and additional hours of range instruction. I can tell you that they were about as far from a joke as you can get and safety was in every other sentence. My instructors were all active duty law enforcement with decades of experience. There are great, practical, informative classes out there. These classes absolutely made me better and safer.

Regarding required training, if I had to vote I’d have a tough time deciding. To purchase a gun and keep it in your home, absolutely no training required. To actually carry, I’m not so sure.

Speaking of carrying, I have a great question for this forum. It’s easy to find every kind of statistic on carry permits. However I’ll bet that a large number of folks that have permits carry infrequently or not at all. I’ve seen articles that assume that if 5% of a state’s population has a permit, then 1 of every 20 people walking down the street is packing! I’m thinking that’s nonsense!

Has anyone seen any poles on permits vs. actually carrying?

 

[Mac45]

I have to agree with fridaddy and the others who advocate against government mandated firearms training for firearms purchases. After all, you do not have to have a driver's license to own a car, only to drive it.

I will also stipulate that I am not in favor of mandatory firearms training for the issuance of a CWL.

I am a very vocal advocate for people obtaining as much training in the handling and use of a firearm as possible. The reason for that is the assumption of civil liability for the improper, negligent or reckless use of a firearm. Interestingly enough, though, usually the less training you have, the less liabiity you assume for using an instrument in good faith. But, the less training you have, the more likely you are to have an incident for which you will be found liable.

 

[fuzzy03cls]

I'm referring to training for a carry permit. If your going to carry a gun concealed you better know how, when, & why to use it.
Not just owning a gun.

 

[Mac45]

I'm referring to training for a carry permit. If your going to carry a gun concealed you better know how, when, & why to use it.
Not just owning a gun.

I understand and agree with your stated position [bolded]. Anyone who is going to carry a weapon on a daily basis, concealed or otherwise, should make sure that they are competent in its use.

The problem with allowing the state to require competency training is it usually doesn't stop there. The next thing that happens is testing for competency, with the state setting the standards for competency qualification. Then, your qualification for a license requires periodic re-qualification for license renewal or even to keep it active. It would not be unthinkable for the state to require qualification with each and every individual firearm that you wished to carry and to require periodic safety inspections of every weapon to be carried, which would, of course require the keeping of detailed records concerning each of these weapons. And finally, the use, in any manner, of a firearm for which no safety inspection and qualification for use exists, could very well be a crime.

See where this goes? And if you doubt this could happen ask any LEO about the carry requirements and firearms qualifications they operate under. Trust me. The less government intervention in this area, the better.

 

[SGB]

I'm referring to training for a carry permit. If your going to carry a gun concealed you better know how, when, & why to use it.
Not just owning a gun.

Unfortunately the State of Florida has set training standards, fortunately they are minimal.

I don't mean this to sound harsh but the question is who are you (the public) to demand a set of standards for others to practice something that is none of your concern?

 

[Rvrctyrngr]

Well said, and many states are exactly like that, Mac. For example, Clark County, NV (Las Vegas) requires 'qualification' for every firearm that you carry, and each firearm must be documented on the license.

 

[T.S.]

Unfortunate though it's so easy. Guns shows are a joke. 2 hours & don't even shoot a gun & they give it to you.

A lot of people have them that shouldn't. Not with the proper training anyway.

According the the Second Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The Constitution states nothing about " proper training " as a prerequisite for keeping and bearing arms.

But, according to the Meriam Webster Dictionary:

http://mw1.meriam-webster.com/dictionary/responsibility

Responsibility

Main Entry: re·spon·si·bil·i·ty 
Pronunciation: \ri-ˌspän(t)-sə-ˈbi-lə-tē\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural re·spon·si·bil·i·ties
Date: 1737
1 : the quality or state of being responsible: as a : moral, legal, or mental accountability b : reliability, trustworthiness
2 : something for which one is responsible : burden <has neglected his responsibilities>

The personal responsibility to be able to properly handle and operate the firearm one owns falls directly upon the person who keeps and bears that arm.

The point being is this.

Should training be mandated by the government for the right to keep and bear arms? Absolutely not.

Does the responsibility of keeping and bearing arms fall upon the INDIVIDUAL? Absolutely it does.

The anti-Second Amendment crowd ALWAYS fails to recognize the responsibility of the individual, and wishes to punish firearm owners as a group, for the mistakes of individuals.

Now, should one have the proper training if one is going to have a firearm? Absolutely. But lets just keep the Federal Government out of this arena because as we all know they have a difficult time getting ANYTHING right.

 

[fuzzy03cls]

Whatever.....I'm not going to try & argue. As I continue to state anyone who expresses any opinion against guns they get jumped on...In fact I think I'll just stop posting in those areas.... Make it easy for everyone

 

[Steve48]

Don't let a lively discussion dissuade you from expressing your thoughts. That's what we're here for.

 

[Steve48]

Speaking of carrying, I have a great question for this forum. It’s easy to find every kind of statistic on carry permits. However I’ll bet that a large number of folks that have permits carry infrequently or not at all. I’ve seen articles that assume that if 5% of a state’s population has a permit, then 1 of every 20 people walking down the street is packing! I’m thinking that’s nonsense!

Has anyone seen any poles on permits vs. actually carrying?

I think you're right. I haven't seen any statistics, but I'll bet that relatively few permit holders carry regularly.

 

[T.S.]

Whatever.....I'm not going to try & argue. As I continue to state anyone who expresses any opinion against guns they get jumped on...In fact I think I'll just stop posting in those areas.... Make it easy for everyone

When you make a point such as this:

Originally Posted by fuzzy03cls
Unfortunate though it's so easy. Guns shows are a joke. 2 hours & don't even shoot a gun & they give it to you.

A lot of people have them that shouldn't. Not with the proper training anyway.

and a different opinion is presented with facts, then you can present your own facts to convince others of your point.

No one has " jumped on " you, but they have presented facts to the contrary. So if their facts are wrong, present yours to prove them wrong.

This is a discussion board, so discuss with facts, not rhetoric. :drinks

 

[SEE IT LIKE A NATIVE]

I somewhat agree !

According the the Second Amendment:



The Constitution states nothing about " proper training " as a prerequisite for keeping and bearing arms.

But, according to the Meriam Webster Dictionary:



The personal responsibility to be able to properly handle and operate the firearm one owns falls directly upon the person who keeps and bears that arm.

The point being is this.

Should training be mandated by the government for the right to keep and bear arms? Absolutely not.

Does the responsibility of keeping and bearing arms fall upon the INDIVIDUAL? Absolutely it does.

The anti-Second Amendment crowd ALWAYS fails to recognize the responsibility of the individual, and wishes to punish firearm owners as a group, for the mistakes of individuals.

Now, should one have the proper training if one is going to have a firearm? Absolutely. But lets just keep the Federal Government out of this arena because as we all know they have a difficult time getting ANYTHING right.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I believe that in the context of the constitution "well regulated " means well trained ! But I think it applies to the militia as a whole ! The prerequisite for being a part of said militia is the possesion of "arms" ! I dont want to state to determine the level of training required !! I also believe that the individual should make the effort needed to become competant ! I don't think he/she should be prevented from carrying while that competancy is achieved ! Kevin

 

[Hodawg]

lets just keep the Federal Government out of this arena because as we all know they have a difficult time getting ANYTHING right.

Hey now, let's not be so harsh there, TS. The Federal Gov does a great job on just about everything! Like, the Cash For Clunkers program. They figured the first 1 Billion would last until November. It was gone IN THE FIRST WEEK! Great insight and knowledge of the situation. We want THESE people in charge of our health care, and then mandate and control our firearms training?????? NO WAY IN HELL!

Beers y'all,
Ken

 

[Hodawg]

We already HAVE laws pertaining to the proper use of firearms by civilians. They go by such varied names as "Murder"..."Manslaughter"..."Reckless Endangerment"...etc. in Criminal proceedings, as well as a number of other names in Civil Court. Training is VERY important when it comes to carrying or possessing a weapon of ANY sort. There are more people killed with knives every year than there are handguns. Should the FEDS require your WIFE to undergo THEIR idea of training before she can possess / use a butcher knife or meat cleaver?.....Wait, that might not be a bad idea after all.

Beers,
Ken