Should Training Be A Requirement For Carrying Concealed?

[mmckee1952]

Should Training Be A Requirement For Carrying Concealed?

By R. Erin Lenth

As a firearms and concealed carry instructor, I get asked this question a lot. And every time I do, I have to pause before I answer.

You see, I’m of two minds on the issue. I do believe in the American constitutional right to own and carry a firearm and am proud to live in a state that honors that right with a “Constitutional Carry” provision. But I also believe that there is an ever-widening disconnect between rights and responsibility in American society.

When the generations before mine were children, their parents, community, and schools taught them, not only the rights afforded them, but also the responsibilities inherent in those rights. Generally speaking, people viewed rights and responsibilities as a matched set.

Sadly, that does not seem to be the case today.

Today it seems that most Americans are far more concerned about their rights, than they are about their responsibilities… more concerned about what is owed them by society, than what they owe to that same society.”

And that disconnect is equally, if not more, evident when it comes to the right and responsibility of carrying a firearm is not exception.

As laid out in the civil laws of each and every state, American firearm owners owe the highest duty of care to others to avoid harm or damage. The best way I know how to do that is by obtaining the best training you can afford.

I wish that training didn’t have to be mandated. I wish that, as responsible Americans, we could recognize the need for it and take the initiative to do it on our own. If we did, we wouldn’t even need to have the conversation.

What are your thoughts?

Read More: http://concealednation.org/2016/02/shou ... concealed/

[SHMIV]

Should Training Be A Requirement For Carrying Concealed?

By R. Erin Lenth

As a firearms and concealed carry instructor, I get asked this question a lot. And every time I do, I have to pause before I answer.

You see, I’m of two minds on the issue. I do believe in the American constitutional right to own and carry a firearm and am proud to live in a state that honors that right with a “Constitutional Carry” provision. But I also believe that there is an ever-widening disconnect between rights and responsibility in American society.

When the generations before mine were children, their parents, community, and schools taught them, not only the rights afforded them, but also the responsibilities inherent in those rights. Generally speaking, people viewed rights and responsibilities as a matched set.

Sadly, that does not seem to be the case today.

Today it seems that most Americans are far more concerned about their rights, than they are about their responsibilities… more concerned about what is owed them by society, than what they owe to that same society.”

And that disconnect is equally, if not more, evident when it comes to the right and responsibility of carrying a firearm is not exception.

As laid out in the civil laws of each and every state, American firearm owners owe the highest duty of care to others to avoid harm or damage. The best way I know how to do that is by obtaining the best training you can afford.

I wish that training didn’t have to be mandated. I wish that, as responsible Americans, we could recognize the need for it and take the initiative to do it on our own. If we did, we wouldn’t even need to have the conversation.

What are your thoughts?

Read More: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://concealednation.org/2016/02/shou ... 16/02/shou ... concealed/</a><!-- m -->

By requiring training and licensing, the government adds extra financial hoops through which to jump. To some people, the cost is pocket change. To others, it's half the weekly food budget.

I believe that training is a good thing. But, forcing it as a condition to exercise a Constitutional right is an infringement.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[jdonovan]

as soon as we require training to vote, publish something on the internet, or host a party, then you can come asking for training for the 2nd.

[FiremanBob]

If, as was true for our country's first 300 years, the proper use of firearms was a standard element of our culture, the question would never need to be asked.

Statism and its methodical infantilisation of citizens have destroyed the American culture.

You can think of our culture as an old, rusty and neglected, but rare and valuable "project" car. Yes, you can restore it to its original glory, but you will have to cut away and throw out many rusted and ruined parts, and rebuild with new ones, in order to do the job. It will be difficult and messy.

[Chasbo00]

What evidence is there suggesting that mandated handgun training results in reduced accident rates and inappropriate handgun usage?

PA has no training requirement for a permit. As far as I know, PA does not have a higher rate of NDs or inappropriate gun usage by permit holders than those states with mandated training.

[MarcSpaz]

You guys have all echoed my opions perfectly.

Also, I don't like the verbiage used in the story. Society owes me returns on the blood and sweat that poors from my body into the ground. I only owe society that same blood and sweat. When my labors are done and I reap those rewards, the obligation is over.

It doesn't take a villiage to raise a child, it takes parents. People who think they know what's best for Me and my family really need to mind their own business.

[kelu]

as soon as we require training to vote, publish something on the internet, or host a party, then you can come asking for training for the 2nd.

You know, training for voting would not be a bad thing...

[SHMIV]

I note that a right to vote is absent from the Bill of Rights. Originally, you had to own land in order to vote, if I recall correctly.

Voting is supposed to be a privilege. What voting has turned into is much like a group of squatters overrunning your home and demanding a say-so in how you run your household.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[MarcSpaz]

That is pretty much the extent of it, isn't it?

I would love to see something like that put into place again. I have been thinking for awhile that you can only vote if you regularly "pay" taxes (not to be confused with filing). We can define "regularly" as: Two or more consecutive filing years or eight of the last ten years, immediately preceding the current election year.

Or something like that...

[Swampman]

Good luck with that, Marc!

[MarcSpaz]

Don't crush my dreams!

[SHMIV]

Heh... I'd be happy with having to prove gainful employment.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[OakRidgeStars]

You know, training for voting would not be a bad thing...

That's what pop culture is for. You have Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, Bill Maher and any other TV shill you can name. Their only job is to teach young people how to vote for a living.

[Viper21]

I note that a right to vote is absent from the Bill of Rights. Originally, you had to own land in order to vote, if I recall correctly.

Voting is supposed to be a privilege. What voting has turned into is much like a group of squatters overrunning your home and demanding a say-so in how you run your household.

My father in law(82yrs old), a Dem most of his life, turned Republican later in life would tell me...... "Used to be, only land owners could vote. That made much more sense."

I don't really agree as, not everyone even wants to be a land owner. I think his frustration, like many of us..... comes from the ridiculous amount of taxes we all pay. It's nearly impossible to add it all up into a real number but it's ridiculous. Especially when you factor in, property taxes, personal property taxes, etc. It really makes me sick. Every year when I go into the county to pay mine....the clerk always smiles at me, & says.... Im sorry Mr. Viper......lol. Of all of em.... the personal property tax is the one that chaps my hiney the most. In Rockbridge County it's 4.25%....!!! Which is insane to me. That's every fricken year...!! You buy a new truck, or a nice car for your spouse...... geez..... they want to suck real money from you. I've had my personal property tax exceed my real estate property tax before...!?! I don't own a lot of vehicles or brand new vehicles either.

[SHMIV]

Consider why owning property makes sense as a requirement to vote; if you own land in the United States, that means that you literally own a portion of the country, and therefore, you have a vested interest in the country.

Consider, too, that tax dollars were generally spent on necessary things, at the time, as opposed to the modern way of funding useless bureaucracies.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[wittmeba]

...Especially when you factor in, property taxes, personal property taxes, etc. It really makes me sick. Every year when I go into the county to pay mine....the clerk always smiles at me, & says.... Im sorry Mr. Viper......lol. Of all of em.... the personal property tax is the one that chaps my hiney the most. In Rockbridge County it's 4.25%....!!! Which is insane to me. That's every fricken year...!! You buy a new truck, or a nice car for your spouse...... geez..... they want to suck real money from you. I've had my personal property tax exceed my real estate property tax before...!?! I don't own a lot of vehicles or brand new vehicles either.

I have always felt this is caused by those with much higher financial status have more deductions, hiding money in overseas accounts that keep them from paying their "honest fair share". The country/government requires some amount to pay for their programs. When the need goes up they have to suck more from those who pay...that's us.

[jdonovan]

Of all of em.... the personal property tax is the one that chaps my hiney the most. In Rockbridge County it's 4.25%....!!! Which is insane to me.

the government needs to extract money from the population to run itself... how do you propose they get the money they need then?

What new tax do you want created, or which existing one increased, so the one you don't like goes away?

[SHMIV]

JD, I see where you're coming from, and I agree.

However, it's also appropriate to first ask, what is the government funding that can be either eliminated entirely, or reduced in scale or scope?

I would say that the first step would be to trim away the wasteful spending, before we start adding new taxes.

****************************************

My, how far this thread has derailed, lol

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[jdonovan]

I knew someone would take the discussion there.... if we really slimmed the government services down to where they should be (IMO) then there wouldn't be a lot of bitching about taxes, because they would be so much less.

[WRW]

I knew someone would take the discussion there.... if we really slimmed the government services down to where they should be (IMO) then there wouldn't be a lot of bitching about taxes, because they would be so much less.

It is human nature to gripe, but there would be less justification for it.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]