Mr. Untactical
Master Class
Only with the driver!
Is Constitutional Carry a Mistake?
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
bc22wm
Custom
This sound great at first glance. However. The Gov. gives nothing without string attached. (to the taxpayer at least, they will give beaucoup $ to tin pot dictators with no accountability
) Before you could bat an eyelash there would be a skinny million strings attached starting with yet another list of who's got way and where, what acceptable and what isn't and if it isn't acceptable, what do you "need it for". Then training will turn into testing, and testing will turn into a document proving that you had the training. Add to that I don't want to pay for your training any more than I want to pay off the loans you took out to spend four or more years in organized grab @$$.
Lastly and most importantly It's not the Gov. job, responsibility, to train everyone in firearms and the G.D. Gov. needs to stay in it's own lane. Unless you want compulsory military service for everyone, questionable at the best of times, and under the current leadership of jack wagons in the military, you can damn sure bet you would receive more sensitivity than firearms training."However, Good Training / Education always pays dividends and I believe that private industry delivers better than the Public state (who sets the standards)...."
spot on!Agree with the idea and value of Constitutional Carry. I'm just not sure why it's an issue that hasn't already been addressed....as I believe it is more than adequately addressed in the Constitution as it stands today.
Article IV, Section 1, states that Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to public Act, Records, and judicial proceedings of every other State......
Since conceal carry permits are granted by the judicial system (at least in Virginia), this section of thew Constitution would appear to apply. We really do have to read the whole Constitution, not just the Second Amendment.
Article IV, Section 1, states that Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to public Act, Records, and judicial proceedings of every other State......
Since conceal carry permits are granted by the judicial system (at least in Virginia), this section of thew Constitution would appear to apply. We really do have to read the whole Constitution, not just the Second Amendment.
Constitutional Carry is great but for my purposes I still maintain my license, portability being at the top of the list. I also live in Texas and noticed after the carry bill passed there were several businesses that didn't allow carry, changed to licensed carry and some stayed no carry. It is a strange dynamic to own and carry a firearm (shouldn't be) as we navigate the maze of laws. The loss of the expectations of Responsibility and Accountability in our Society only adds to the issue. Neither can be legislated (although tried with futility) but must be taught which is where the shortcomings start. Train, Carry, and protect seems simple to me.
BassCliff
Professional
Hi,
I appreciate your views. Thank you for your service. Welcome to the forum.
I used to jump out of airplanes too, but for sport, not my job.
Thank you for your indulgence,
BassCliff
I appreciate your views. Thank you for your service. Welcome to the forum.
I used to jump out of airplanes too, but for sport, not my job.
Thank you for your indulgence,
BassCliff
Old Airborne Dog
Alpha
We once in a while used to get a look at something like that doing Hollywood jumps i.e. no equipment other than main and reserve.Hi,
I appreciate your views. Thank you for your service. Welcome to the forum.
I used to jump out of airplanes too, but for sport, not my job.
Thank you for your indulgence,
BassCliff
Nice to not have another 100+ lbs strapped to your ass. Sometimes we even got to do one of those higher than 1,000' AGL...
As a retired agency instructor but current private sector instructor here is what I see as far as LE vs y in abilities.
The majority of LE are better with firearms than the majority of average Gun Owners. However by average gun owners we are talking folks that own a gun or 2 but are lucky to shoot it. They aren’t on firearms related forums going to training or matches etc a gun is their fire extinguisher
Where LEO’s can’t compete is gun enthusiasts like folks on this or other forums or those that take professional private sector classes and go to matches. I have raked fellow LEOs that thought they were a gun guy to a USPSA match and he got smoked by a 17 year old girl.
So while some average cops are horrible so are average civilians as those are the ones some here have mentioned at ranges muzzle sweeping them etc
Bassbob
Emissary
Fair point.
On the other hand I also know quite a few cops who actually are gun guys and take it upon themselves to train outside of their agency. Many of my friends in fact.
It’s also worth noting that the kind of training we do isn’t really the same kind of training they do. The gun stuff is close to the same, but they have way different ROE and they train for lots of stuff we will never need to do.
In LE I saw a 10% 80% 10% breakdown.
The top 10 are the top shooters and like you mention they practice and go to training on their own time and dime.
The 80% were the majority and while some of them were upper scores the majority where the ones that barely passed and quipped “good enough til next year” and never touched it again other than putting it in a holster
Then the bottom 10 is what causes Unions and agencies to dumb down courses.
The 80% being the bulk is what we have some shootings that turn into utter abortion they shoot a minimum score and huge targets and then nobody can figure out why they hit the perp 1 or 2 times out of a mag dump!
Which what’s funny is as Chick Haggard mentioned the USAF doesn’t require F22 pilots to go get their Cessna license to keep their flight hours up for practice
They don’t require any of their Special Forces to buy their own ammo and shoot on their off time to keep up their skills
But here LE just checks a box and acts surprised when a problem pops up!!!
BassCliff
Professional
Hey!
I've never jumped that low, a "jump and dump". Rules are a bit different for sport jumping. I usually jumped from 13,000 feet, a minute's worth of freefall. Fun stuff! I did jump from the minimum altitude a couple times, 3500 feet, when I jumped from a hot air balloon. That was a blast! Stepping off what is basically a stationary platform, you really get that "whoopsie-daisy!" feeling in the pit of your stomach. But I can't imagine what it would be like with guns, ammo, rations, tools, etc, strapped to my person. I still miss it.
Thank you for your indulgence,
BassCliff
I've never jumped that low, a "jump and dump". Rules are a bit different for sport jumping. I usually jumped from 13,000 feet, a minute's worth of freefall. Fun stuff! I did jump from the minimum altitude a couple times, 3500 feet, when I jumped from a hot air balloon. That was a blast! Stepping off what is basically a stationary platform, you really get that "whoopsie-daisy!" feeling in the pit of your stomach. But I can't imagine what it would be like with guns, ammo, rations, tools, etc, strapped to my person. I still miss it.
Thank you for your indulgence,
BassCliff
Jfal
Professional
If you're looking to get back into jumping, I know 3 clubs in the greater Milwaukee area that still operate (it's a dwindling hobby...there used to be 10 in the region). I'm not a jumper, but my father was a pilot (and a jumper) and piloted jump planes in his spare time many years ago...
Biggfoot44
Elite
" Consititional Carry " is an ideal and goal .
Each individual State has their specific statutes, and state level Case Law
Some approach Rocking Like it was 1791
Some put Non Permit on parity with the Permitted .
Some have a whole lot of extra baggage .
At first, I agreed with some that folks who’ve never touched a firearm rushing out to buy guns, load them, then roam around would eventually lead to disaster. But then I realized how much hassle it is for me to dress around the weather, destination, type of gun I want to carry, etc. You have to be somewhat committed to make gun carrying work for you or you eventually quit carrying.
Now I just figure a lot more people might have bought guns after Constitutional Carry implemented, but most don’t carry them around very long. Sure, some do, but they are likely the type that want to get proficient.
I’m in Texas and, like someone else mentioned, I maintain my CCL because a lot of places only allow CC with the license, among other reasons, Cheap and convenient to renew as Veteran.
TBH, I believe my odds of getting killed by an uninsured untrained driver are astronomically higher than getting shot by someone taking advantage of their Constitutional Carry Rights.
Now I just figure a lot more people might have bought guns after Constitutional Carry implemented, but most don’t carry them around very long. Sure, some do, but they are likely the type that want to get proficient.
I’m in Texas and, like someone else mentioned, I maintain my CCL because a lot of places only allow CC with the license, among other reasons, Cheap and convenient to renew as Veteran.
TBH, I believe my odds of getting killed by an uninsured untrained driver are astronomically higher than getting shot by someone taking advantage of their Constitutional Carry Rights.
The Night Rider
Professional
After reading the article I find that the question wasn't is constitutional carry a benefit or not to me specifically.
The question that I read in the article is should the General Public be allowed to buy a gun and carry it as they see fit without government mandated training or a permission slip?
Should carrying a firearm be the same in the rest of the United States as it is in Vermont?
Short answer yes.
My reasoning is it's been my experience is the kind of people that benefit from firearm safety training will generally seek it out themselves. The kind of people that won't are not going to change no matter how many mandated classes you put them in.
In Colorado the Hunter's Safety course or an Army Handgun Familiarization (This is an M9. This is how you load it. This is how you shoot it. Keep the muzzle up and down range at all times. I f you can put 60% of your shots in a B8 at 10 yards you pass.) course meet the criteria for a concealed handgun permit.
I sat through one State mandated firearms safety class when I got my Colorado Concealed Handgun Permit.
There were at least 15 people in the room. The instructor had a set curriculum and a set time to get through the curriculum and he basically read the curriculum to us and everybody in the room was going to pass no matter what.
I went through Armed Guard training. The class was the NRA Basic Handgun Safety class. That class meets the criteria for a Colorado Concealed Handgun Permit and it was a good class and well taught. They took 40 hours plus a qualification to teach the class but again the people who were only there because they had to be paid zero attention and slowed the whole class down.
That's what you get when you mandate training.
So, IMO mandated training accomplishes nothing in terms of "public safety".
The question that I read in the article is should the General Public be allowed to buy a gun and carry it as they see fit without government mandated training or a permission slip?
Should carrying a firearm be the same in the rest of the United States as it is in Vermont?
Short answer yes.
My reasoning is it's been my experience is the kind of people that benefit from firearm safety training will generally seek it out themselves. The kind of people that won't are not going to change no matter how many mandated classes you put them in.
In Colorado the Hunter's Safety course or an Army Handgun Familiarization (This is an M9. This is how you load it. This is how you shoot it. Keep the muzzle up and down range at all times. I f you can put 60% of your shots in a B8 at 10 yards you pass.) course meet the criteria for a concealed handgun permit.
I sat through one State mandated firearms safety class when I got my Colorado Concealed Handgun Permit.
There were at least 15 people in the room. The instructor had a set curriculum and a set time to get through the curriculum and he basically read the curriculum to us and everybody in the room was going to pass no matter what.
I went through Armed Guard training. The class was the NRA Basic Handgun Safety class. That class meets the criteria for a Colorado Concealed Handgun Permit and it was a good class and well taught. They took 40 hours plus a qualification to teach the class but again the people who were only there because they had to be paid zero attention and slowed the whole class down.
That's what you get when you mandate training.
So, IMO mandated training accomplishes nothing in terms of "public safety".
To be fair, there’s been a percentage of these types in every course I’ve ever taken, firearms related or not. However, your point is taken.
I was teaching and occasionally working the counter at a large indoor range and gun store when my states constitutional carry passed. My observation
We sold more cheap handguns but that was more because people didn’t know they were already good to buy handguns and as far as a carry permit in my state it’s now free for a lifetime with the exception of usually a 10 dollar fingerprint fee. And there is no training requirement.
So while maybe more sales equates more carry I’m not so sure as the majority are probably fire extinguisher guns they somehow thought buying one you needed a permit. People get told wrong rumor mill stuff and don’t question it.
As far as blood in the streets Vermont has had Permit less scary for decades and yet no high noon shootouts!
Biggfoot44
Elite
If you want to get literal, true Constitutional Carry is rolling back to 1791 at the time of ratification of the Bill of Rights .
Which in the case of Keep & Bear Arms was essentially identical to July 2 1776 in passing the Declaration of Independence.
At which time , the starting point of American Jurisprudence was English Common Law at the Time of our Independence.
And in a handy coincidence, the single most definitive treatment of Common Law , Blackstone's Commentaries, was first published in 1776 . So we don't need to wonder , we know .
The starting point was : Anybody could carry anywhere , so long as not done with the Intent to Disturb the King's Peace.
Translated with American , that would be along the lines of Intent to create a Breach of the Peace , or Intent to Commit a Felony
Alas , since the late 20th Century, the generally accepted meaning is ability to carry a Concealed Handgun, without a Permit.
In the minds of most gun owners / gun rights advocates , they were * assuming * additional language after that to the effect of ' in same manner and circumstances as those persons Holding a Permit ' .
Most state legislatures didn't get that page of the memo .
babaylan
Alpha
My state does not issue permits, period. As a result, I can legally carry all throughout Northern New England, but I cannot carry if I head anywhere south or west until I hit Ohio, West Virginia, Georgia, Kentucky, or Tennessee. I suppose, if I wanted to, I could apply for a carry permit in a different state that would have reciprocal agreements with other states, but I forget which states even allow for that, if they even do or still do.
Last edited:
babaylan
Alpha
The only real problem I see with constitutional carry is that 2024 isn't 1924. What I mean by that is that firearms and other tools that could potentially be used negligently, carelessly, or recklessly are much less a part of most Americans' lives in 2024 than they were in years past. And because of this, firearms have acquired an aura of mystique and danger that they don't deserve. Many people are terrified and or horrified by their mere existence and begin to act irrationally the moment that find out one is nearby.
I'm old enough to remember when no one would bat an eye if you bought your child a pocket knife or a rifle. My mother bought me my first rifle when I was 10 years old. Sometime in the 1990s, I began to notice that people would take a step back if I took my pocket knife out to open a package. So, now, the knife I use most is a 58 mm Victorinox Rambler, so people don't freak out.
The only kind of training people need in the use of firearms is:
1. How to operate the weapon safely.
2. Knowledge of the legal regulations concerning operation.
For #1, this training was usually given by a family member, no need to involve the state. For #2, well...most of these regulations are modern inventions. Aside from NFA1934, most of our modern "gun control" laws stem from GCA1968. So, it's understandable that attitudes have changed in the past 50 years toward firearms, for those reasons, and because more and more people are living urban lives where the daily use of firearms is simply not a part of their lives.
I think that we, as firearms owners and advocates, should strongly encourage people to get the training they need to be safe and effective. I do not, however, think that this training needs to be mandatory, and furthermore, I believe that Amendment II prohibits requiring any training or permit. No other constitutionally enumerated right is subject to the prior approval of the government before it can be exercised, so why should this one?
I'm old enough to remember when no one would bat an eye if you bought your child a pocket knife or a rifle. My mother bought me my first rifle when I was 10 years old. Sometime in the 1990s, I began to notice that people would take a step back if I took my pocket knife out to open a package. So, now, the knife I use most is a 58 mm Victorinox Rambler, so people don't freak out.
The only kind of training people need in the use of firearms is:
1. How to operate the weapon safely.
2. Knowledge of the legal regulations concerning operation.
For #1, this training was usually given by a family member, no need to involve the state. For #2, well...most of these regulations are modern inventions. Aside from NFA1934, most of our modern "gun control" laws stem from GCA1968. So, it's understandable that attitudes have changed in the past 50 years toward firearms, for those reasons, and because more and more people are living urban lives where the daily use of firearms is simply not a part of their lives.
I think that we, as firearms owners and advocates, should strongly encourage people to get the training they need to be safe and effective. I do not, however, think that this training needs to be mandatory, and furthermore, I believe that Amendment II prohibits requiring any training or permit. No other constitutionally enumerated right is subject to the prior approval of the government before it can be exercised, so why should this one?