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


ShooterMcED

New member
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!
 

AmericanIcon

New member
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.
 

bowserb

New member
I'm ok with the reproduction rule. Too much irresponsible breeding is why the world is overpopulated and on the verge of WWIII.


Please excuse typos. Sent from my iPhone using Link Removed.
 

Rhino

New member
...in ALL states, subject to no mental issues...
Not all states have concealed carry, or at least not in a manner that ordinary citizens can reliably get a license. California for example would never go for this. Then again, if you're crazy enough to live in Kalifornia, you could be disqualified for the mental issues thing.
 

ptco911

New member
Being a military veteran I can see where you are coming from. Due to the law variations between the states it wouldn't be feasible. The criminal background of the individual and their mental stability would have to come into play. I agree with some of the previous posts that having served in the military doesn't mean competence with a firearm.
 

bowserb

New member
For such a rule on the national level, step one would be that concealed carry be a federal law. Anyone who thinks that would be a good idea, is automatically disqualified from having a permit...under the sanity clause! I'm not ready to follow Obamacare with Obamacarry.
-
Texas gives a discount on the state registration fee ($140 before the discount!!!). Also, as of 9/1/2013 the Texas CHL will indicate Veteran on the license itself, a dubious benefit. That and $2.50...as the old expression goes...will get you a coffee at Starbucks.
 

Zoomie72

New member
Sounds like a great idea to me. Like you, I have multiple Marksmanship medals, a TS clearance, which required a heck of a lot more detailed background check than NICS, and, if I could be trusted to fly a B-52 carrying nuclear weapons, I think they should trust me to carry a pistol.
 

Perkins patriot

New member
The problem is not fire arm proficiency...... The issue for training is to cover the rules of engagement, and the rules for use of deadly force. THE RULES ARE DIFFERENT!

While I found the training was not as expensive as one might think, I also found it to be very valuable, for a situation in which I might have used deadly force while Vin the military, is not a valid use in civilian world.....

The training is more about the laws then firearm proficiency, while they do go over fire arm safety. Some states require moderate proficiency on revolvers ( dbl action) and semiautos. Others require qualifying on the gun which will be carried.

They did not teach me a thing about my firearms, I welcomed the course and the training on the laws....

I took the hunters safety class in the mid 1970's and have taken it since..... I will be taking the carry classes again, for laws change, and the instructor we had is also a law enforcement officer which he also gave us info Mon how to deal with laws enforcement while carrying and not carrying (where I am, I can open or conceal carry) .....

There are some that I served with, I would not allow on my firing range. They should never handle a firearm much less be permitted to have permission to carry..... NO MATTER WHAT MILITARY TRAINING THERY HAVE HAD!!!

SO, A DD-214 OR HONORTABLE DISCHARGE SHOULD NOT BE A FACTOR IN SKIPPING THE TRAINING...
 

Rhino

New member
You're right. Laws DO change. And they can change the day after you graduate from your class. Yet you and all other licensed concealed carriers are still responsible for knowing them and complying with them, without ever having covered them in class. Not only can you know and comply with laws without ever having a class on them, you must know and comply with them without that class. Every state knows this, and every concealed carrier knows this. So obviously a class isn't required for people to know and comply with the law.
.
Concealed carry classes aren't for tactics and there are no rules of engagement. ROEs are a military concept and they're wholly situational in nature. Instances of self defense are almost entirely unplanned and unanticipated, so there are no 'standard' situations that you could establish rules of engagement for. Even if you could, no training class would be long enough to cover all of the possible ROEs for all of the different possible situations.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,434
Messages
623,592
Members
74,268
Latest member
zyvaaprilia
Top