Sometimes a weapon doesn't even need to be pulled....a few years ago one of my family membersa and his wife came out of a movie theater late at night,and as they were moving across the parking lot, a group of four men started walking rapidly towards them,he lifted up his shirt,showing his holstered pistol, and they suddenly changed direction. he is a ccw holder, by the way
I had a similar situation. Some guy was playing with me at an intersection. I was behind him when the light turned green (turning left) - he headed out under the light then hit his brakes, then crawled under the light. I laid on my train horns as the light turned red and perpendicular traffic had a green. After finally making the turn he stopped his truck in the road, got out and started walking toward me. I got on my PA and told him to get back in his truck. He stopped for a second, I repeated it again, then he walked back to his truck and went on. I was heading to a restaurant just a half block up the road, he must have seen me turn in from his rear view. I went in and sat down at a table with friends, I was facing the door. The guy walks into the restaurant and starts walking toward me. At the time I was wearing a tucked in t-shirt with an unbuttoned, untucked, long-sleeve shirt covering my holster. I was sitting on the outside of the booth and pulled my shirt back, putting my hand on my pistol and yelled at him to "STOP!". The entire restaurant looked at me, then him. I told him in a loud voice that I was now threatened by his actions and that I was armed and he should not come any closer.. I never took my eyes off his hands. He stopped in his tracks and started jabbering about his new truck. He was obviously drunk. He turned and walked out. No telling what crazies out there are capable of doing.
So who gets to determine what the proper level of proficiency and competency? Here is why I ask. Cars are dangerous and can easily lead to fatalities without the proper level of proficiency and competency of the driver behind the wheel. Can we all agree on that? My 22 year old step-son is a bad driver. He doesn't pay attention and is easily distracted. He passed his written exam. He passed the driver exam. I've spent hours and hours trying to teach him how to drive, and I don't find him in any way competent or proficient in driving. I won't drive with him. I try to convince others not to drive with him. In three years he has been in eight accidents, all of them his fault. The state of Colorado, and through the state of Colorado every other state, deems my step-son a competent and proficient driver and allows him to share the road with everyone else. I hope and pray he doesn't end up killing someone, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did. How is this any different from the debate about CCW competency and proficiency? Unless you are going to get truly draconian about training and testing, people the state declares as competent for (insert licensed activity here) are not always going to be competent. Even if you do build a truly draconian training and testing battery a person has to go through to get a particular license, there are STILL going to be incompetent people slipping through according to some people's standards. Licensing is a balancing game. You want to try and insure people are sufficiently trained in the licensed activity without making it impossible or too expensive to get the license. Are the CCW requirements sufficient? If I were going to be really honest I would say no. I took the class. I thought it was pretty much a waste of time. At the same time, the historical lack of evidence of CCW holders misusing their weapons or not being competent enough with their weapons is distinctly lacking. Does anyone here think we need to scrap the current CCW system, recall all CCWs, and force re-training / re-qualification in order to obtain a CCW knowing what a PITA that would be to the vast majority of CCW holders that ARE competent in an attempt to weed out or make competent the few who are not?
I had two similar instances when I lived in Chicago and had a gun in my car even though it was not legal to do so. I never had to discharge the weapon. Simply showing that I was armed and not an easy mark convinced those thinking about it from proceeding any further. Did displaying that I was armed stop anything? Nobody will ever know for sure. They MIGHT have just been coming over to chat. This is a mystery I am perfectly willing to live with.
Um..... no where have I stated extreme positions. Basic competency is necessary, if you pepper a target at three and five yards, you don't get the permit. Plain and simple. If you put all or a large percentage in center of mass at the same distance, you get your permit.
Where did I say you stated extreme positions? The most I did was ask who believed we should repeal the CCW laws now and start over. Personally, I would go further than you. I would make people compete and still get a passing score on the targets. I remember when I was young and dumb and thought shooting was shooting..... until I competed in an IPSC match. It is easy to shoot at an unmoving target where you have time to aim, adjust your stance, and practice trigger control. First time I competed, I had so much adrenaline going through me I had tunnel vision. I would have hated to discover the effects adrenaline has on your body in a true crisis situation and I value the fact I at least have a clue of what it would be like in a real shootout. I'm sure I would still have to deal with the adrenaline, but now I know what it does to me and how to use it to my advantage instead of thinking "HOLY (*)(*)(*)(*)! A TUNNEL!" I would have liked to have seen a much more thorough section of the class on the legal ramifications of using your weapon and what is and is not allowed. Some classes teach it. Some don't. For instance, we now have several anecdotes of people getting out of sticky situations by showing their gun. Law enforcement can and sometimes does see that as menacing which, here in Colorado, can be a felony. Little things like that can be real gotchas to the unwary.
Oh, I misunderstood. I don't believe repealing the laws would be effective, just amend them to require X proficiency. I am yet to compete in a match, however when I am out shooting I do my best to conduct tactical type drills. We do not have a gun range within an hour's drive, so my basic set up are multiple targets, and varying distances, I will engage certain targets with a certain firearm (or until I run out of ammunition) at which point I will either make a quick reload or a weapons change. Over the summer I was able to reloaded my M&P45 in three seconds.... wasn't too bad. I haven't timed myself in a while. My NRA class was great, my only complaint being the lack of requirements for actual proficiency with a firearm. We spent about four or five hours on legal issues. Very interesting. However, the actual state requirement for the class is pathetic.
Really? The topic is about firearms training and conceal carry, which to some (such as myself) seems not to be a problem, yet officials that have been trained end up shooting themselves while handling firearms. So the argument is that training will somehow will keep the public safe from something that isn't happening, yet actual facts show that dealing with trained personnel while they handle a firearm in non threatening situations can be dangerous. So the real argument sounds like it should be to avoid training altogether and the public will be safer. I just think it is funny.
I think you guys are making more of this than necessary. If you think about it, CWL classes don't even teach you how to hold a pistol, much less how to hit a target. That doesn't mean to assume that nobody trains on their own, it just leaves that very wide open. Hell, some folks may think the correct way to aim a pistol is the gangster, sideways style like you see in movies. I don't see anything wrong with amending the current system to require classes to add an emphasis on proficiency and proper handling. To be very honest, if I was out with my friend (the one who shot his mattress) - and a bad guy got between us, I would very likely be distracted by watching his moves as much as the bad guy's. Just sayin. I'm using a real-life, personal example for this flaw in the system, not theory.
Your argument here is that training either does not make a person more proficient, or actually decreases their proficiency. Which is simply asinine.
The right is fundamental so the government cannot take it away. You see a problem with training. Tax incentives encourage training...non problem solved.
Tax deductions are not much incentive for most people. I wouldn't pay extra for something like training just for the deduction, it's not worth the hassle saving receipts and filing. Offering a deduction still does nothing to ensure carriers are well-trained.
Ok, so you can offer a tax break, but not require people to be competent shooters? Makes total sense.
Real world. Many cops are worse shots than the perps in shootouts. The cops are trained and the perps aren't but the it has been determined that the perps actually practice more and because of that, are better shots. So the problem isn't training, it is practice. Then you have the problem of statistics. It is more likely you will have a negligent discharge the more you handle weapons. I refer to where the agent shot himself in the leg showing proper handling of a gun in front of a school class. There are just things that some people cannot accept, and that is "(*)(*)(*)(*) happens". Most notably in a free society.
That does seem a little weak. I am very pro gun, but if we are gonna allow people to carry concealed weapons they need to be trained and prepared. I think Texas has a very good, or at least much better CHL situation. We require an actual class. its a short class, but still a class. You also have other fees and requirements and holds, etc. i think its a healthy system.
Is that not a lot like 'ensuring' folk are not stupid? It is a goal never met. If we can reduce a bad behavior by taxing it, we can encourage a good one by making it tax friendly.
Maybe so. But much like ensuring a teenager can actually handle a car before letting him drive on his own is a far cry better than just handing him a license wishing him luck.
However, you can create measures that prevent bad things form happening. Such as weeding out incompetent shooters.
