An Indiana legislator wants to make attending a training and safety class mandatory to get your license to carry. Those who possess a license would be exempt. Do you feel this goes against our 2A rights? Do you feel that the license requirement in itself goes against 2A?
Sent from my KFOT using Tapatalk 2
I have mixed feelings about mandatory training. I think anyone that takes up the responsibility to carry a firearm should do everything they can to know how to safely and effectively use it, but I also know that I have no right to impose my opinions on anybody. I suppose the "well regulated militia" part of the 2nd amendment could be interpreted as meaning that anyone that chooses to bear arms must be trained in their use, but again that is just my interpretation; I enforce it on myself but have no right to force it on anyone else.
Read up on your history and what the founding fathers meant by "well-regulated".. it means a well armed and well staffed militia.... in other words, many people with many arms.
To me, no training requirement for a CCL makes about as much sense as no training for a drivers license - that is to say, none. I don't want folks who are either too stupid or too lazy to meet what are typically pretty minor training requirements causing problems for those who are more responsible. They train you in the military (militia?) so why should this be different.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?