OK here's my idea

Johnny Dollar

New member
In order to get a hunting license I have to show an NRA hunter’s safety card. The rationale is that if I’m walking around your fields with a shotgun or a deer rifle you have a stake in knowing that I’ve had some form of safety training.

So my idea is if you want to carry a pistol in public you have to take an NRA certified basic pistol safety course. You get the pistol safety card and once you do that you can carry the gun open or concealed as you please and the card becomes your permit.

It looks like a win win to me because everyone has had the same basic safety training and it provides revenue to the NRA to keep fighting for our rights plus it generates interest in NRA membership.
 
Alaska, Arizona,and Vermont (plus Wyoming CC for WY residents) allow you to wander around freely with no documents whatsoever. Not that your idea is not plausible and certainly an improvement over many other venues. But permit less carry should be the goal,IMO.
 
....So my idea is if you want to carry a pistol in public you have to take an NRA certified basic pistol safety course. You get the pistol safety card and once you do that you can carry the gun open or concealed as you please and the card becomes your permit.

There's no training requirement here and several other states to get a permit to begin with, so your idea immediately puts more restrictions on gun rights than already exist in such jurisdictions.

It's also an increased financial burden here, and likely in other jurisdictions as well. Our permit varies between counties from $7.50 per year up to $25.00 tops. The last time I took an N R A basic pistol course, it was either $80 or $100 bucks (can't recall exactly). Regardless of the exact cost, some cost vs. no cost because of no training requirements to begin with is not in the best interests of gun owners who are born with the right to keep and bear, as well as the natural right of self defense.

It looks like a win win to me because everyone has had the same basic safety training and it provides revenue to the NRA to keep fighting for our rights plus it generates interest in NRA membership.

Not everyone thinks the N R A is the be all, end all of gun rights advocates. The last thing on the planet that would be good for gun owners is to use government to provide revenue through involuntary mandates to a private .org. I'll decide for myself which gun rights .orgs to support or not, thankyouverymuch.

Blues
 
I got my certification as a NRA instructor in 1971. I'm still a lifetime member but allowed the instructor certification lapse several years ago. I firmly believe that everyone should receive training for their benefit and those around them. I'm, however, a firm believer in Constitutional carry and do not believe that there should be a test or course necessary to exercise any Constitutional right


The progressives would love to control the licensing of rights and place them under government restrictions. If they are allowed to limit firearm ownership they will attempt to control all of our liberties. Actually, these restrictions are already in place in some states. Iowa does require a permit to carry and a course, but it is still a shall issue state. There is no test and it isn't at the discretion of some bureaucrat to establishe a need to exercise a God given right. It is the nature of all government to attempt to increase its power over the people. The founders believed that it is the duty of citizens to resist the tyranny of government.
 
I would like to see a law enforcement agency offer free training once a quarter or something. It almost seems like the NRA safety card before you get your hunting license is a racket. There should be another choice in getting a safety card or there should be no requirement.
 
I took the concealed carry class that I was required to take for my permit. I am not an NRA member nor do I have any plans to become one. I have no problem with anyone who is a member, but just like anything else, why should it be a requirement?
 
I understand that a safety class isn’t going to overcome malicious intent and I understand that it won’t stop some batcrap crazy son of Randy Weaver who thinks every cop he meets is Long John Silver but let me tell you who it will stop.

A few years back I was at a gun show in Tulsa while I was wandering around I watched a woman walk up to a table, pick up a revolver finger on the trigger, she pointed it right at the seller and asked him “ is this a semi automatic?” It was like that one word was all she knew about guns, some of them are “semiautomatic”. I don’t want that woman anywhere around me with a gun until she’s had some kind of firearms safety training.

As soon as she enters my area with a gun she threatens me and I have a legitimate stake in ensuring that she has been properly trained
 
In order to get a hunting license I have to show an NRA hunter’s safety card. The rationale is that if I’m walking around your fields with a shotgun or a deer rifle you have a stake in knowing that I’ve had some form of safety training.

So my idea is if you want to carry a pistol in public you have to take an NRA certified basic pistol safety course. You get the pistol safety card and once you do that you can carry the gun open or concealed as you please and the card becomes your permit.

It looks like a win win to me because everyone has had the same basic safety training and it provides revenue to the NRA to keep fighting for our rights plus it generates interest in NRA membership.
The glaring flaw in this idea is once training becomes mandatory, regardless of what organization is named to provide it, it becomes easy to slowly change the criteria that the training must meet until it morphs from a "safety course" to a "gun control scheme".

Be careful what you ask for...

Today it might be the NRA course that is "mandatory" but tomorrow it might be a full blown 2 week course at a training camp that costs $5,000 for the course plus room and board ... and the only one is located somewhere 3 or more States away from where you live. Oh yeah... and there is a 7 year waiting list (unless you know someone or donate enough money to a politician's campaign).

Any and all "mandatory" requirements are NOT intended to make gun carriers "safe" but are intended to provide a means for the government to be in control of who is and ...most importantly.... who IS NOT! "allowed" to carry a gun. Fail the course or be too poor to pay for it and .... no gun for you!

Remember these words? "the right to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"
And requiring training (or a permit) IS an "infringement".

Now please allow me to offer some food for thought that is not directed at Johnny Dollar or anyone in particular....

I've noticed that there seems to be many folks who have the perspective that they must first get permission or meet some standard set by the government (or even public opinion since some folks are afraid exercising their right to bear arms openly will "offend" or "upset" other people) before they are "allowed" to exercise the right to bear arms. That is exactly backwards since the individual person's right to bear arms begins at the instant of birth... and if rights were recognized for what they are then no permission from the government would be required to exercise a right and "other people" would respect not only the rights they personally like but would also respect the rights they don't happen to like just because rights are rights. Actually, those who demand the rights they like be respected while they disrespect the other, equally as valid, rights they don't like are nothing less than hypocrites.

"The bill of rights isn't a list of things the government, in it's magnanimous benevolence, gives us permission to do. It is a list of things ... we the people... told the government it is NOT ALLOWED to control."
 
I would like to see a law enforcement agency offer free training once a quarter or something. It almost seems like the NRA safety card before you get your hunting license is a racket. There should be another choice in getting a safety card or there should be no requirement.

NRA card does not work for hunter ed in my state. A person has to go through Missouri's Dept of Conservation training. So you are looking at changing two things with another government mandate. No Thanks.

Think State's rights.
 
I understand that a safety class isn’t going to overcome malicious intent and I understand that it won’t stop some batcrap crazy son of Randy Weaver who thinks every cop he meets is Long John Silver but let me tell you who it will stop.

Interesting that you would pull Randy Weaver's name out of your butt while talking about government mandates that infringe on the 2nd Amendment. He doesn't have any sons, batcrap crazy or otherwise. His only son was murdered, shot in the back. He died just seconds before a rifle bullet shot from 200 yards away took out his unarmed mother while she was holding the now-dead son's baby sister in her arms. Both Sammy and Vicki Weaver were murdered by the government. As I recall, the N R A didn't lift a finger to even say so much as "Good luck" to him when he was arrested, charged with murder and the original charge of being in possession of a sawed off shotgun (about 1/4" shy of the requisite 18" barrel length) that a government informant hounded him relentlessly to so-modify. He was acquitted of all charges except one; failure to appear. The jury thought the US Marshal deputy who died was a self-defense killing, and the shotgun was entrapment. If the trial had not been so utterly awash in prosecutorial misconduct, it's likely he would've avoided the failure to appear conviction too - he failed to appear because of not being notified of a hearing date, but part of the misconduct by the prosecution was denying knowledge of that fact to Weaver's and Harris' defense team, so the jury didn't have a valid "out" to convicting him on that charge. (You do know who Harris is, don't you?)

No tellin' what lies and fantasies of government shills you've been listening to in order to spew the above disrespectful tripe about a man and his dead son who lost everything to the government that you now want to empower to further encroach on all of our rights. You should stop pretending that you support the 2nd Amendment in any way, shape, manner or form. Clearly, you haven't a clue what it protects if you can write from a position of such sweeping ignorance about the events and people involved at Ruby Ridge in 1992.

A few years back I was at a gun show in Tulsa while I was wandering around I watched a woman walk up to a table, pick up a revolver finger on the trigger, she pointed it right at the seller and asked him “ is this a semi automatic?” It was like that one word was all she knew about guns, some of them are “semiautomatic”. I don’t want that woman anywhere around me with a gun until she’s had some kind of firearms safety training.

Wow. You mean to tell me that they actually allow handgun neophytes to handle unloaded guns at a gun show???? Unreal! You must have been terrified, terri-fricken-fied I tells ya!

As soon as she enters my area with a gun she threatens me and I have a legitimate stake in ensuring that she has been properly trained

Then offer her the benefit of your vast training. What's so hard about that? "Ma'am, I wouldn't want to see you hurt yourself, and I sure as heck don't want you hurting me or mine, so please allow me to help you be as awesomely safe as I am." But no, you can't help someone while at the same time maintaining a perfectly 2A-compliant position, you want the government to impose this magical basic pistol course on all of us, even in states where no training requirements exist now. Yay 2nd Amendment, huh? Pffft.

It is precisely this attitude that there is such a thing as "reasonable" gun control that I detest in the establishment shills of the N R A. And I did see above where you claim they're the "tall hog at the trough," but tell me this about your tall hog, Johnny - Which .org brought, prepared, argued and won both Heller and McDonald? I'll give ya a hint: It wasn't the N R A, and in fact, your tall hog actively opposed bringing Heller. I'll take a short hog who's got actual fight in him over the fat lazy tall hog every time. You, Johnny? Not so much.

Blues
 
I understand that a safety class isn’t going to overcome malicious intent and I understand that it won’t stop some batcrap crazy son of Randy Weaver who thinks every cop he meets is Long John Silver but let me tell you who it will stop.

A few years back I was at a gun show in Tulsa while I was wandering around I watched a woman walk up to a table, pick up a revolver finger on the trigger, she pointed it right at the seller and asked him “ is this a semi automatic?” It was like that one word was all she knew about guns, some of them are “semiautomatic”. I don’t want that woman anywhere around me with a gun until she’s had some kind of firearms safety training.

As soon as she enters my area with a gun she threatens me and I have a legitimate stake in ensuring that she has been properly trained

I understand where you are coming from and as an instructor I have seen many of the bad habit / bad handling of firearms, but.....

It is called personal responsibility Johnny and should not be a government mandated issue. Each state's self-defense laws are different so the NRA would have to come up with a training program for each individual state. I don't see it happening.
 
I understand where you are coming from and as an instructor I have seen many of the bad habit / bad handling of firearms, but.....

It is called personal responsibility Johnny and should not be a government mandated issue. Each state's self-defense laws are different so the NRA would have to come up with a training program for each individual state. I don't see it happening.

Nor should it happen.
 
Folks need to understand a very simple thing.

Human beings have rights. EVERY human being in the ENTIRE WORLD has rights. Rights are imparted upon each and every human being at the moment of birth. Rights really are absolute. No one can ever take them away.

There are people who want to have the power to control other people. The way this is done is to put penalties upon the exercising of those rights people were born with. To make things pertinent to this forum I'll stick to the right to bear arms.

Those who want to have power over others understand that the one who has a gun has power over the one who does not have a gun. That is pretty straight forward. But they also understand that those who have guns can tell them who want to have power over them to piss off. And that is unacceptable. So the only way to resolve that is for those who want to have power to take away the guns of those they want to have power over.

Ok... that describes every 3rd world countries government that there ever was. Sooo... now... look at our own country... what do you see? Do you see a country that celebrates rights and freedom or do you see an elite group (in government) that wants to disarm everyone so they can have power over them?
 
The Second Amendment is perfectly clear. I'm quite certain there is nothing there stating; "...as long as you take a safety course".
 
It's also an increased financial burden here, and likely in other jurisdictions as well. Our permit varies between counties from $7.50 per year up to $25.00 tops. The last time I took an N R A basic pistol course, it was either $80 or $100 bucks (can't recall exactly). Regardless of the exact cost, some cost vs. no cost because of no training requirements to begin with is not in the best interests of gun owners who are born with the right to keep and bear, as well as the natural right of self defense.

I agree totally, Blues. In Washington, the last time I checked the Concealed Pistol License was $52.50. So anything above that would be more costly than what we have now. In addition if the class was any longer than the time it takes to get a set of fingerprints taken, it would cost more in time as well, because that is all that is required in Washington. And the class would have to be given at a location more convenient than the local LEO agency and would also have to be given more often than the local LEO agency takes fingerprints. It would be nice to not have the government snooping in my background, though, but I would not be willing to pay more or spend a longer time in a classroom just to alleviate that requirement.

Whenever we talk about making a requirement that is easier for some, we are also talking about making the same requirement more difficult for others. Unless we are talking about making the requirements that Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, and to a lesser extent Wyoming have (because Wyoming's permitless concealed carry is only good for Wyoming residents).
 
What we really need is for the NRA or others to to offer safety and accuracy training for gang members.

That way, when they go out to kill each other, there will be fewer bystander injuries.


Well, if us law abiding folk have to get training, so should the BGs.
 

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,525
Messages
610,667
Members
74,995
Latest member
tripguru365
Back
Top