New Mexico drops and then re-adds FL and others from CCW Reciprocity

[Longitude Zero]

In OK you spend more time getting fingerprinted and dealing with the paperwrok situation for a CCW. But the course is 8 hours class/range and all you really have to do is load and shoot at a B-27 or similar type target, hit it at least once and do not hit anybody else.

[Chief Joseph]

I agree. All you have to do is see the kooks/nutjobs/dolts walking around at a lot of gun shows to see why I feel that way. You know the type, all cammoed up and carrying more weapons than Carters got pills.

Never understood this attitude. The 2nd Amendment is about everyone having the right to defend themselves, not just those deemed "good enough" to have the right. I can guarantee you there are those who feel they're more qualified than you to carry and feel you shouldn't either. I suppose those who are handicapped shouldn't carry too, right? This smacks fully of the same libtard elitism that's ruining this country. It's also why I love seeing the self taught beginners on Top Shot whip the "highly trained", which they do a lot, and knowing those same "trained" guys feeling that the others don't even belong in the competition with them. Everyone deserves the right to defend themselves, not just those who are self appointed "experts".

[JFootin]

Never understood this attitude. The 2nd Amendment is about everyone having the right to defend themselves, not just those deemed "good enough" to have the right. I can guarantee you there are those who feel they're more qualified than you to carry and feel you shouldn't either. I suppose those who are handicapped shouldn't carry too, right? This smacks fully of the same libtard elitism that's ruining this country. It's also why I love seeing the self taught beginners on Top Shot whip the "highly trained", which they do a lot, and knowing those same "trained" guys feeling that the others don't even belong in the competition with them. Everyone deserves the right to defend themselves, not just those who are self appointed "experts".

The libtard anti-gunners are so ignorant and removed from reality about the issue, like Ralph Nader who wrote "Unsafe At Any Speed" and doomed the Corvair, yet to this day he has never had a driver's license or driven an automobile. And these idiots want to run our lives for us!

[Deano]

When I took my CHL class in Orygun, I didn't want to sit in a class for 4 hours and listen to boring lectures. We have no proficiency testing. It's all class room sessions. So I just took an online class. Pass the test afterward and you're good to go. Seems a bit loose, but that's the law here. Only requirement in Oregon is that you pass a class given by NRA licensed instructor, or LE officer, and it can be done on-line. Only took me a couple of hours sitting at my computer.

[muggsy]

I don't have a problem with having to qualify. Our military and police have to demonstrate some degree of marksmanship. In the CCW course I took we were required to fire 100 rounds with the last ten for record. Basically you had to be able to keep ten shots on a 10 X 12 sheet of paper at 21 feet. Piece of cake. If you aren't at least that good you shouldn't be carrying.

[Deano]

I don't have a problem with having to qualify. Our military and police have to demonstrate some degree of marksmanship. In the CCW course I took we were required to fire 100 rounds with the last ten for record. Basically you had to be able to keep ten shots on a 10 X 12 sheet of paper at 21 feet. Piece of cake. If you aren't at least that good you shouldn't be carrying.

Not 100% sure I would agree with that. Yes, some proficiency is desirable, but who decides what size target from how far? My wife might struggle with the 100% 10x12 at 7 yards. However, she can hit BG from 10 ft. After all, isn't that the point of carrying.

[Chief Joseph]

Not 100% sure I would agree with that. Yes, some proficiency is desirable, but who decides what size target from how far? My wife might struggle with the 100% 10x12 at 7 yards. However, she can hit BG from 10 ft. After all, isn't that the point of carrying.

Exactly, once the door is opened for a person to meet some elitists concept of "proficient", it could quite easily be moved to a point no one could qualify. And again, can someone point to that line in the 2nd Amendment that states you have to be an incredible good shot to be able to defend yourself? Honestly, even so called "experts" miss, so should they be judged unfit to carry because they occasionally miss? Some of these "Top Shot" people, some with extensive years in law enforcement and military fold like paper under the pressure, and their lives aren't even in danger. It takes a real arrogance to state that you believe yourself qualified, but can judge someone else to not be. Some of the most trained people in the world can't handle real pressure and panic, and some people are naturally cool under fire with zero training at all. Some things you can't be trained for, you either have it or you don't. All this aside, every law abiding citizen has the right, from little old ladies to 350lb cops, to defend themselves.

[Longitude Zero]

Never understood this attitude. The 2nd Amendment is about everyone having the right to defend themselves, not just those deemed "good enough" to have the right. I can guarantee you there are those who feel they're more qualified than you to carry and feel you shouldn't either. I suppose those who are handicapped shouldn't carry too, right? This smacks fully of the same libtard elitism that's ruining this country. It's also why I love seeing the self taught beginners on Top Shot whip the "highly trained", which they do a lot, and knowing those same "trained" guys feeling that the others don't even belong in the competition with them. Everyone deserves the right to defend themselves, not just those who are self appointed "experts".

In theory I do not disagree. Just because you can dress up like a circus clown does not mean it is a good idea. Sadly just because you can do something with reckless abandon does not mean it is a good idea. Discretion plays a part in the talents of a well trained individual. No discretion folks are frequently seen on the news ina bad light.

Sometimes not antogonizing the opposition is the same as a win and really should be appreciated.

The problem with most conservatives is that they only support another conservative if they agree 100% with them. This is counterproductive and sheer stupidity. For instance if a politician is 100% for 2A rights and 100% for abotion I am not so ignorant to not support them because of their stance on abortion, sadly way too many folks do exactly this.

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

[jg rider]

Never understood this attitude. The 2nd Amendment is about everyone having the right to defend themselves, not just those deemed "good enough" to have the right. I can guarantee you there are those who feel they're more qualified than you to carry and feel you shouldn't either. I suppose those who are handicapped shouldn't carry too, right? This smacks fully of the same libtard elitism that's ruining this country. It's also why I love seeing the self taught beginners on Top Shot whip the "highly trained", which they do a lot, and knowing those same "trained" guys feeling that the others don't even belong in the competition with them. Everyone deserves the right to defend themselves, not just those who are self appointed "experts".

I agree that everyone has the right to defend themselves, but not at the expense of some innocent bystander because someone doesn't think about their gun being loaded, or keeping the trigger finger out of the trigger guard, points it at someone, and worst of all, is to shoot and miss because there is no training. I for one am not proposing expert marksmanship or runnng an obstical course, but a knowledge of your limits when shooting your carry gun and the consequences of poor gun safety can go a long way.

When I took my CHL class in Orygun, I didn't want to sit in a class for 4 hours and listen to boring lectures. We have no proficiency testing. It's all class room sessions. So I just took an online class. Pass the test afterward and you're good to go. Seems a bit loose, but that's the law here. Only requirement in Oregon is that you pass a class given by NRA licensed instructor, or LE officer, and it can be done on-line. Only took me a couple of hours sitting at my computer.

Wow! It's worst then I was told.

I don't have a problem with having to qualify. Our military and police have to demonstrate some degree of marksmanship. In the CCW course I took we were required to fire 100 rounds with the last ten for record. Basically you had to be able to keep ten shots on a 10 X 12 sheet of paper at 21 feet. Piece of cake. If you aren't at least that good you shouldn't be carrying.

Amen!

[jg rider]

Deleted

[chrish]

guys, the military has standards and training b/c they have a job to do and that job is to kill people and win wars. they do not have training for the express purpose of keeping the masses safe or knowing how to safely handle a weapon. yes, that is a by-product of that training, but not the purpose. they train to be proficient in hitting a target under stress. so in the case of the military, i applaud training so they win and win decisively.

i'm with the strict constitutionalists here. no training requirements, no permits, no restrictions. open carry, concealed carry, anywhere, anytime, for any reason. if the 1A people can do and say what they want, anywhere, without restrictions, then i can do the same with my 2A right. are we going to require grammer training, debate classes, education, logic, etc. for people that want to stand on a street corner and yell 'save the blank'.

its up to me how i choose to exercise that right and how i wish to prepare to exercise that right.

i quite frankly do not care whether anybody else does or does not learn how to be safe with their weapon. if its concealed and/or holstered, i have no concerns. if it becomes unholstered and unconcealed in my presense, so will mine!

more regulations, hoops to jump thru, stipulations on how and when you can exercise your 2A right will only result in more regulations, hoops to jump thru and stipulations. nature of the beast.

[CJB]

When I was actively training 25-30 folks a week, my own curriculum included basics.

1. Overview of the law.
2. Arms types, brief description of double vs single action, revolver vs semi-auto, etc.
3. Firing the shot - how to determine the best safe direction for the muzzle to point, how to safely load, make safe, aim, fire, make safe again, unload, and demonstrate that the firearm was unloaded.
4. Live fire, approximately 15 rounds at a bullseye target at about 7 yards.
5. The licensing process.

I did fail a few folks - where were allowed to retake the class at any later date for no additional cost. The biggest complainers about "having to take the class", were the biggest foul ups, with a few going so far as to have ND's inside the showroom of the range (not in my presence or under my direct suporvision and/or tutorage).

~

No class will make you a great shooter. The class can make you a SAFE shooter. Biased opinion here from someone who has taught plenty of folks for money - money aside, its not a bad thing to sit through a class of basics again, just because.

I been riding motorcycles since before I was in Jr High School. This was first on grass, then dirt, then trails, then backroads (illegally but... oh well), then highways. Fast forward from age 10 or so to age 51. I am forced to take a class...to learn how to ride. How to duckwalk a bike, how to use a choke, how to use a clutch... the friction zone, the balance zone... I'm not so much bored to tears as anxious to not do poorly.

What I learned: How to do a figure 8 inside of four parking spaces. How to panic stop while downshifting, and avoiding an obstruction. How to pull up in a turn and renegotiate the turn, and how to creep at a snails pace with no feet down, by applying the back brake and keeping engine-power/torque up on the rear wheel.

The old dog learned new tricks Bawanna.... just sayin!

[Chief Joseph]

"I agree that everyone has the right to defend themselves, but not at the expense of some innocent bystander because someone doesn't think about their gun being loaded, or keeping the trigger finger out of the trigger guard, points it at someone, and worst of all, is to shoot and miss because there is no training. I for one am not proposing expert marksmanship or runnng an obstical course, but a knowledge of your limits when shooting your carry gun and the consequences of poor gun safety can go a long way."


Even the "most trained" can have this happen too. There's a video of a cop shooting his own foot holstering his gun in a school, in fact didn't I read here a Kahr employee accidentally firing a gun he was repairing? EVERYONE is prone to mistakes, trained or not. I saw a video of a cop in a gun fight at close range after pulling a truck over, both fired several shots at close range and hit nothing. We had a cop trying to shoot a bg here in portland 20 years ago and missed and killed the guys kid hostage. Based on accidents, NO ONE should carry. My nephew just bought his first handgun and he's more careful with it than guys I know who've carried for so long it's second nature and forget they're even carrying. Much like a cop locally who put his loaded gun down in front of his 3 year old and the child shot and killed him. Plus we had a detective here who took her gun off in the bathroom stall and forgot it when she was done, I don't think they ever recovered it. If mistakes are the concern, trust me, the "trained" make plenty of mistakes all on their own.

[jg rider]

deleted

[les strat]

While I don't like the idea of the Federal government sticking its nose into this area, it's also really annoying that each state does things differently, has different rules, etc. I hate it when you can be driving along being perfectly legal one moment and one mile down the road you are breaking someone else's law.

Seems like some generally-uniform guidelines would be useful. We have national standards in a number of areas, so why not firearms? Although there are many other counter-examples, such as in when cell phones can be used while driving, motorcycle helmets required or not, etc, so maybe it's hopeless.

The Utah carry permit is quite popular and training for it was offered as part of the carry training I did a while back in Minnesota, but as others have mentioned it is all about Utah laws and has no requirement for demonstrating proficiency, thus seemed pretty lame to me.

I'm all about freedom, but I think that anyone who carries a gun should have at least minimally demonstrated proficiency in its use, just like you have to do to drive a car.

guys, the military has standards and training b/c they have a job to do and that job is to kill people and win wars. they do not have training for the express purpose of keeping the masses safe or knowing how to safely handle a weapon. yes, that is a by-product of that training, but not the purpose. they train to be proficient in hitting a target under stress. so in the case of the military, i applaud training so they win and win decisively.

i'm with the strict constitutionalists here. no training requirements, no permits, no restrictions. open carry, concealed carry, anywhere, anytime, for any reason. if the 1A people can do and say what they want, anywhere, without restrictions, then i can do the same with my 2A right. are we going to require grammer training, debate classes, education, logic, etc. for people that want to stand on a street corner and yell 'save the blank'.

its up to me how i choose to exercise that right and how i wish to prepare to exercise that right.

i quite frankly do not care whether anybody else does or does not learn how to be safe with their weapon. if its concealed and/or holstered, i have no concerns. if it becomes unholstered and unconcealed in my presense, so will mine!

more regulations, hoops to jump thru, stipulations on how and when you can exercise your 2A right will only result in more regulations, hoops to jump thru and stipulations. nature of the beast.

^^^^THIS!

Either you go 100% by The Constitution, or you don't. ".....keep AND bear." It's scary, but what's scarier is when you have someone "smarter than you" making decisions on something like 2A. Now who would that be?