Automatic CCW permits for all military vets with honorable DD214 service?


But, disagree and believe that they should be required to at least go through a portion of a training class on how to conceal carry and legal portion of any state they plan to get there CCW license in."

Why? There are no problems in states that do not require any training in order to conceal carry.


Joseph
Chief CCW Instructor
Tri State Self Defense
Link Removed

Never mind. Question answered.
 

Careful NavyLCDR, the sheepdogs might get mad at you and start throwing their CCW Badges at you.
Clang!!!!!!! Then he could collect them and use them for target practice. It would be a better use for them. :biggrin:


Took dad to the range today. Now remember, this is a retired Navy Master Chief who had to stay qualified from 1946 till 1971 with a Colt 1911 in .45ACP. And he wasn't an MP. Out of a possible 75 in police scoring, he scored a 73. Not bad for an 83 year old using my blued Taurus PT 1911.
 
Yeah, he complained about the sights last night. Then found out they were better than he thought. Next time he can take his Colt Special Combat Gov't Model .45 if he doesn't like mine. :wink: I scored 127 out of 130 with the two different PT 1911s.
 
Surely somewhere the military would have some record as to what you have been trained to fire. This information could be used for ccw.

If they have trained with a handgun in the military, I see no reason they should have to go through another course just to carry.
 
I have to disagree. There should be no "special" or "elite" classes of legal residents in regards to carrying firearms. That includes presently employed LEO, retired LEO, military members or veterans. One rule should apply to all and all should be required to abide by the same rules. "Shall not be infringed."

BTW, there are thousands of honorably discharged military personnel who have never handled a handgun, and only handled a rifle in boot camp/basic training.

Bingo. 10-ringer.
 
I should have added politicians to the list. I wonder if politicians had to actually abide by the laws they make or suffer the consequences of their mistakes how many would change their decisions. Example: if the government shuts down because Congress can't get all their stuff in one sock, they are still going to get paid.
 
Before I get ridden out of the forum on a rail as a "commie', let me explain my own standing. I am a retired 30 Year Marine Master Gunnery Sergeant. I served 6 years " in country" in Viet Nam in combat billets.

That said, the whole question of the right to carry a weapon is a Second Amendment issue. The Second Amendment pertains to all citizens and no provision of it in use should favor one citizen over another.
Period!
 
If the government shuts down most government employees are paid to stay at home and not work, that's two freebies instead of just the normal one. :laugh:

Except those of us in uniform. We are expected to show up for work and not get paid.
 
If the government shuts down most government employees are paid to stay at home and not work, that's two freebies instead of just the normal one. :laugh:[/QUOTE]

My understanding is that they aren't automatically paid, the times the government shutdown the pay was authorized by Congress after the fact. And please clarify that you are referring to civilians, the contractors don't get the same treatment our benefits.
 
Navy concealed carry

As an active duty Navy guy myself, i happen to be fond of my concealed carry permit. I was not fond of the 10 months i spent in Iraq with the Army because they got rid of the Electronic Warfare capability and needed us Navy guys to come do it for them ;-) i still have some god buddies from that tour still in green!
 
There is a statist mindset running through this (and other) threads that only the government can set 'training standards' that 'allow you the privilege' of exercising a right. In no copy of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or the Arizona State Constitution have I found any authorization for any such 'requirement' (all my copies can't have been bowdlerized) - in fact, when the Arizona Constitution was written, just prior to statehood, the legislature was strictly enjoined from regulating the ownership of firearms, or how they may be carried. For centuries, people were either taught as a matter of course by a relative or other responsible adult, or sought instruction on their own (or did without, and suffered the consequences).

By conceding that 'government' - at any level - has the authority to demand 'cut-and-paste' training before allowing you the 'privilege' - revocable at whim - to exercise one right, you are acquiescing to the fiction that they have that authority over every right. Try these on for size: Amendment I - you must complete a 40-hour course, with a passing grade of 90, before being allowed to attend the religious institution of your choice - and may only utter authorized prayers. You may only publish a broadside, a weblog, or a pamphlet after a one month course with a passing grade of 75, and no errors on the grammar and spelling sections. Get the idea? You may only reproduce upon completion of a 90 day course with a satisfactory grade, to be determined by the instructor.

Far-fetched? Perhaps, but once you allow the government to mandate standards before granting 'permission' to exercise a right, you have participated in setting precedent, ceding what should - and must - be a matter of personal accountability (and yes, I'm aware that I'm repeating myself) into yet another area illicitly controlled by people who view your exercise of any right as a threat to their power.
 

New Threads

Staff online

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,542
Messages
611,255
Members
74,961
Latest member
Shodan
Back
Top