“Then in 2015 the same bunch of fools in the State House erased the law which required anyone applying for CCW to first take an eight-hour training course, as if sitting around in someone’s back yard and talking about the last time you shot a squirrel or a skunk constitutes training of any kind.” – Mike “The Gun Guy” Weisser in Want To Be A Gun Nut? Move To Kansas [via huffingtonpost.com]

57 Responses to Quote of the Day: East Coast Anti-Gun Elitism Revealed

    • Yet, here he is being featured in TTAG. Why Robert feels the need to offer up Mike’s musings is beyond me. We all know he is an overated gas bag who loves the sound of his own voice. The Huffington Post has him as a “columnist” because he says what they want to hear. We know better so please, stop giving him space here.

      • i understand why he does it but i can also see your points as well. we have to know how our enemy thinks so i think thats why he posts his stuff on here. and because he claims to be a “gun guy” so in a way the WasPo and others can claim he speaks for gun owners because he is one. so again, “know they enemy”.

        • “If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.” Sun-Tzu. “The Art of War”

    • Mike Weisser is an anti-gun writer from western MA. Ironically, he’s also a gun shop owner out there, although if/how he’s in business is beyond me. Last I checked, his “shop” was a boarded up shack, which is what I guess happens when you’re philosophically opposed to your own business.

      • Anyone who owns a gunshop in MA is a moron and a fudd to begin with, and thats best case. If TTAG needs clickbait that bad, just have another caliber debate. Why give this asshole any free publicity?

        • Thats not entirely true. We have some good shops here, and a few more that price themselves too highly for such a small market, but this guy is the only one I’ve heard of in any state actively campaigning against his own business.

        • “Anyone who owns a gunshop in MA is a moron and a fudd to begin with, and thats best case” -Really? Would pay to see you say that to several of them.

      • Wasn’t it his failure as a gun dealer that turned him against his former customers?
        I can imagine him thinking something like: “I’m a good businessman, it must be those damn gun nuts’ fault that I have to close my store. If only I could get even with those assholes. Now this Bloomberg guy is willing to pay me to bad mouth them – double win!”

  1. There are 12 states that have restored constitutional carry, and several others that are shall issue without a training requirement. There are about 15 million licensed carriers in the US (not counting the permit-less carriers in constitutional carry states).

    There should be more than sufficient data to demonstrate a correlation between state-mandated firearms training and occurrence of accidental injury due to negligent firearm discharge and/or unlawful use of deadly force by law-abiding carriers. If the data showed a statistically significant correlation, we would know, because The Trace or some other Bloomberg front would be shouting it from the mountaintops.

    They aren’t, because there is no such statistically significant correlation.

    When/if I get some spare time, maybe I should spend some time digging into those data. (Though a proper treatment is really something that should be undertaken by John Lott et al. I would largely be working from CDC state-by-state data.)

    • Bingo, Chip. If removing requirements for training and licensing had a negative impact on public safety, data from the CDC and/or FBI would indicate as much, and it would be front page news on the New York Times.

      It’s been thirty years since the modern right-to-carry movement started in Florida. Laws in most states have changed over the years and there is a mountain of data to indicate that armed citizens, with or without compulsory training, pose no increased threat to public safety.

      • I never understood how “safety classes” and “licensing fees” on Amendment 2 were any different that “poll taxes”, or “literacy tests” on the right to vote.

        • Safety classes make perfect sense. There is nothing wrong with them.

          If you want to take one, then you should. If you don’t want to take one then you shouldn’t.

          Any new gun owner who didn’t grow up shooting is an idiot if they don’t want to take an appropriate class. (not necessarily NRA sanctioned)

          However, making the free exercise of your 2A guaranteed natural right contingent on completion of a class is wrong.

        • They are exactly like poll taxes and literacy tests for voters. No getting around that.

          We live in a society where we are accustomed to asking government permission to do anything perceived to be dangerous. People who had to pass a test to get a driver’s license think it sounds reasonable that a similar standard would be applied to gun ownership. Heck, in my state you need a license to cut hair!

        • Exactly. They are impediments which are deliberately intended to limit our ability to exercise our constitutional rights. In addition to gun-rights, my other favorite hobby-horse right now is the proliferation of toll roads, HOV lanes, and calls for by-the-mile charges for roadway use. This kind of regulation of our ability to travel when and where we wish, is a direct violation of our constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of assembly. Think government wouldn’t love to restrict our freedom of movement just as it wants to control our right to keep and bear arms? Think again.

        • “I never understood how “safety classes” and “licensing fees” on Amendment 2 were any different that “poll taxes”, or “literacy tests” on the right to vote.”

          The difference is that I’m in favor of poll taxes and literacy tests to keep out the riffraff and the brainless.

        • Heck, in my state you need a license to cut hair!

          That is true in a number of states. It’s a system set up to make money for the state and create hurdles for new entries into the marketplace.

          Such rules also often apply to cabs. Look at NYC and Las Vegas for examples of that where the licensing scheme is plainly designed to bar entry to the market and create an “old boys club”.

          By another name it’s referred to as “crony capitalism”.

    • “They aren’t, because there is no such statistically significant correlation.”

      Spot on. Not only that, but given the scale of the numbers (10^7 CCW’s, 10^8 gun owners, 10^8 guns, 10^3 accidental deaths) even a notable percentage increase or decrease in the number of accidental injuries/deaths would represent an almost immeasurably small fraction of guns, gun owners and CCW holders. Any time one is studying an occurrence that represents such a small fraction of the potential occurrences, it is very difficult to conclusively assign cause. Given that every time any one picks up any gun, an event that happens at least tens of millions of times a day if not hundreds of millions of times a day in this country, the necessary conditions for a negligent discharge are present and yet, they almost never happen.

      In other words: Rare events rarely occur and, given their rarity, one can rarely identify what causes them and rarely reduce their rate.

    • Check out his shop, the Ware Gun Shop, on google maps street view, and tell me if it looks like it belongs to the 1%. The place looks condemned.

      You’d think with the HP tripping over themselves to pay him for this junk, he could afford a place, you know, on the ACTUAL coast.

  2. HuffPo is chock full of inane opinions and always short on facts.
    Liberal/Progressives BELIEVE it is morally OK to lie, fabricate and cherry pick data in order to advance any of their causes. In fact, the bigger the lie, the better.

    • “Liberal/Progressives BELIEVE it is morally OK to lie, fabricate and cherry pick data in order to advance any of their causes”

      Ya know, I say the exact same thing about cops

  3. The article talks about the horror of campus carry which has been law since 2015 in Kansas, but he fails to mention one single instance of an issue. Seems like someone looking for a problem where one can’t be found.

    • It has been law since 2015 but that is only half the facts on Kansas (former resident). The only way campus’ can get around people carrying is if they have the proper security measures to detect firearms at every entrance aka metal detectors and security to operate them full time. There was a 2 year grace period build into the law in 2015 to allow campus’, should they chose to upgrade their security measures, they could restrict carrying of firearms until the grace period was over.
      That 2 years just ran out last month, so while you are correct it has been “legal” since 2015, we are just now getting ready for the first semester of kids actually carrying on campus (legally)
      Although from my experience my friends and I all carried on campus the 5 years we were there anyway and nobody every got shot or knew the difference

  4. Want to be an American? move to (not just “towards”) supporting the Constitution. And, while you’re at it, better support the RTKABA, because while the Constitution may sunset, the RTKABA does not.

  5. How much training do you really think you need to take a shot inside of 3 yards, the typical distance for self defense interactions? I’d like to see his impression of an 8hr class and what it should include.

    Texas’s class was 5 hours, but most of it was covered by “You signed an affidavit certifying you read the laws applicable to self-defense before you showed up here, so you already know this”.

    • Texas’ class was originally 10 hours, with the very scientific rationale that it would take 2 days, causing fewer people to be able to swing it. Instructors responded by offering a 1-day class which was exhausting due to poor classroom facilities, and people swarmed to it. Afterwards, those same people fought to fire the legislators who made such a stupid demand on their time and money, until the class was shortened and finally dropped.

    • The Texas LTC is joke.

      Here is pamphlet with the laws and can you shoot a taget from various ranges and hit it… most of the time

    • California is “up to” 16 h ours of training. Usually this consists of 4 to 8 hours of classroom/home reading going over the laws and 8 hours of “training.” The amount of training varies widely, as do proficiency requirements, from county to county. I’ve read that San Diego requires the same level of proficiency needed for a police officer to pass recertification, at ranges from 3 to 15 yards. Other counties require no proficiency demonstration, merely the instructor’s certification that you can safely handle your firearm and hit a target at ranges of no more than seven yards. The “safe handling” part is kind of bogus since we have to pass a written test to get a “firearms safety certificate,” as well as be able to demonstrate proper loading and unloading of every firearm purchased at the time of transfer, administered by the FFL.

  6. The only thing this demonstrates is that Huffington Post is nothing but a Leftist propaganda organ. Mike “The Gun Guy” Weisser is nothing more than HuffPo’s “useful idiot”.

  7. Then in 2015 some old fool, who had a gun store that wasn’t making any money, drank some questionable kool-aid. Afterward, he was hired to spout nonsense from the Leftist propaganda playbook that Stalin himself loaned to Arianna Huffington, which she had left behind when she sold out to AOL.

  8. “in 2015 the legislature restored some liberty, as if it’s any of your damned business when one last shot a squirrel”.
    There, fixed it for him.

  9. In other words, he doesn’t think discussion and analysis of practical marksmanship is relevant to firearm safety.

  10. One interesting thing is in my part of NYS there is no class to take and prior to the Safe Act my permit never had to be renewed and in 30 years of carrying I nerve once saw a no guns sign posted in a business .

    Most other gun things tend to suck though .

  11. I was trained to shoot as a child by my maternal grandfather who shot expert marksman and fought in the Battle of the Bulge. I’ve been shooting for almost 26 years, had a carry permit for 11, and have never taken a class. I know more about the gun and carry laws in this state than most because I *read them*. Scary, I know. I’ve corrected LEOs who were giving, while well intended, misinformed/outdated information about the carry laws of my state in gun stores. While I would love to take some well-taught, quality training, it was previously out of my reach (financially), and now I have a lack of time (family). I’ve yet to cause any harm to anyone.

    The big thing that gets left out of the training requirement debate are the problems related thereto: Who approves the curriculum? Who trains the trainers? Who certifies the trainers? How much will it cost? Will the training be done by the state, and if so how much will it cost? Will the trainers be required to make accommodations for persons with disabilities? Will the training require a shooting component? If so, what is considered acceptable accuracy? Will the curriculum and instruction be differentiated for different learning styles and those with educational impairments? Will the assessment be differentiated as well? What about individuals who live too far away from a certified training facility to attend the training at a time convenient to them? And last, but not least, why in the hell should I be required to take a class to do something when A) it’s a Constitutionally protected right (I would argue uneducated voters cause more damage in this country than gun owners, but that’s another can of worms), and B) I – a certified educator with a graduate degree in education – would probably be more qualified to teach a class on a law I’m very well versed in than some 72 year old retired cop, who works 10 hours a week in a gun store, that went to a six hour seminar four years ago?

    • Exactly right, sir. I’m formally from WI, and we just recently passed concealed carry; and many such issues came up.
      Many “progressives” in the state demanded an education requirement, but due to “access laws” on the books, they had to amend that to basic “Hunter’s Safety” courses as they had to allow a certain length of time of notification, and actually draft what the classes had to entail, etc.

      Much consternation and weeping and gnashing of teeth ensued.

      It was great.

      • “formally from WI, and we just recently passed concealed carry”

        Recently? Um, that was six years ago, Evan… Is the memory going so soon? LOL I know that’s considered recent compared to many states that have allowed it forever, but…

        And besides, where are you from informally? 🙂

  12. Agreed. 8 hours is insufficient. Firearms safety should be part of Health and Safety in high school and should be a graduation requirement

  13. Does MikeTheGunGuy mention that he has a dog in this fight? Since he lost his FFL in 2014, the only revenue his gun store generates is through training. It’s financial incentive for him to demand as much mandatory training as he can bleed his clients for.
    His other commercial venture is the owner and founder of the ‘National Medical Council On Gun Violence’. Kind of strange that a self professed ‘GunGuy’ would start up and anti-gun organization.

  14. Why not change that to “Northeast”? Just cause they move down here in droves doesn’t mean the entire eastern seaboard shares their view.

  15. Fat dude gets more free publicity here than anywhere else…since I have to type my required fields I shan’t (LOL) bother with him again.

  16. So he thinks, after admitting the classes are bullshit, nobody should carry without having first attended the bullshit class?

  17. Factually incorrect article.

    The state of Kansas didn’t eliminate the training class requirement for those applying for a CCL, like the moron HuffPost “gun guy” states.

    They did implement a Constitutional Carry law, which means that no permit is required for carry within the state of Kansas, but those, like myself, who did apply for a CCL in order to carry in other states, still need to take that 8 hour using class. He’s thinking that a CCL and Constitutional Carry are the same thing.

    Just like the idiot police chief in L.A., these people don’t seem to understand that Constitutional Carry and the CCL permit process aren’t mutually exclusive in states that have Constitutional Carry.

  18. Also factually incorrect is the anti-silencer video at the bottom of the HuffPo article: “What Happens if Millions of Gun Silencers Get Into the Hands of the American Public?” Absolute rubbish!

  19. Yeah, people are all about that class if they:
    1) never had to take one or
    2) make money off them

    Anyone who’s ever taken one knows it’s next to worthless and is basically a time sink so that someone, somewhere can say “hey, we require an EIGHT HOUR class!”

    I would say just give people a test, like one you would take at the DMV, at the licensing office. Written would be fine (True\False: The best way to check if a gun is loaded is to look down the barrel). For accuracy just let them play a computer game since I’m always hearing that they’re somehow training kids to shoot (sarcasm).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *