By Lee Williams
Nearly every anti-gun group in the country has descended on Tallahassee to try to stop Florida from becoming the 26th state to allow residents and visitors to carry concealed firearms without a permission slip from the government.
It’s an important mission for the gun banning industry, because once Gov. Ron DeSantis signs the bill – and he will – a majority of states will have allowed unlicensed or permitless carry. For pro-gun advocates, this would be a significant victory in the war to restore our Second Amendment rights, and the other team will do anything they can to prevent that from happening.
It’s important to point out that neither Florida’s HB 543 nor its companion bill, SB 150, are traditional constitutional-carry bills, since neither bill legalizes the open carry of arms. True constitutional carry allows gun owners to decide for themselves whether to carry arms openly or concealed.
Despite Republican super-majorities in both the House and the Senate, and a governor who’s promised to sign “constitutional carry” legislation, open carry wasn’t included in either bill. We still have not been told why, at least not officially.
In what has been called “smart bundling,” SB 150 also includes numerous school-safety provisions, such as expanding Florida’s School Guardian program, adding funds for hardening schools, providing additional money for gun-sniffing dogs, clarifying zero-tolerance policies and ensuring every law enforcement agency has an active-shooter policy. So, a vote against the bill can be seen as a vote against school safety.
Regardless of what the bill is called or its other offerings, the very thought of restoring more gun rights – especially in Florida – has brought the gun banners out in droves. We’ve seen members of Everytown, the Demanding Moms, Demanding Students, Giffords, Brady and Florida’s extremely anti-gun League of Women Voters all shuffle to the mic.
Their testimony before House and Senate committees has been interesting, desperate and at times, comical. If the gun banners sent their A-team to Tallahassee and this is the best they can do, freedom will most certainly prevail.
It’s clear the gun banners’ moves are well-organized and orchestrated. Too many of their objections seemingly come from the same playbook. Keep in mind anti-gunners have phones, Skype and Zoom, too. They’re sharing information and ideas. Florida has become their latest battle template. They’re throwing a lot of crap against the wall. That which sticks likely will be used in the next state they attempt to victimize.
Here are some of the lowlights of their testimony.
‘Untrained carry’
Currently, unless the gun owner has a DD 214, they must provide proof of training before qualifying for a Florida Concealed Weapon or Firearm License, or CWFL. One of the byproducts of HB 543 and SB 150 is an end to this training requirement because a CWFL will no longer be needed to carry a concealed firearm.
As you can imagine, more than a few rabid Demanders railed against “untrained carry,” even though nothing could be further from the truth.
Their tactic was unwittingly bolstered by Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri, who serves as the legislative chair of the powerful Florida Sheriff’s Association. Gualtieri testified about how poor some of this mandatory training had become. He described several firearm instructors who only required students to shoot one round into a water barrel before issuing them the certificate needed to obtain a CWFL.
Gualtieri’s comments, which are somewhat dated, set off a firestorm among the anti-gunners. Rather than allowing unlicensed carry, they said, the state should fix these training issues. The bills’ Republican supporters never adequately explained how any government requirement, even a training requirement, infringes upon the Second Amendment.
The gun banners never acknowledged that most Floridians who choose to carry a concealed firearm will seek professional training first, nor did they ever mention the more than 1.5 million well-trained veterans who call Florida home, many of whom have already put their training to use downrange.
‘No one wants the bill’
Most of the pro-gun advocates who testified at the House and Senate hearings said they supported the bill, but they wanted it amended to include open carry. One Demanding Mom seized upon this. “Apparently no one’s for this bill today,” she said. Several Democrats on this committee echoed her comments and called for the bill to be withdrawn.
It should be noted that NRA, GOA, NAGR and Florida Carry, Inc., have all voiced support for the legislation. Sure, it is hoped that it will be amended to include open carry, but it is still the most significant restoration of our gun rights since 1987. This was ignored by the legacy media who covered the hearings.
Frivolous amendments
The Democrats tried to amend these bills to death. However, every amendment the Democrats attempted to tack on failed, which is a good thing for gun owners since they would have scuttled the legislation. Here are some of their amendments.
The Democrats wanted gun owners to:
- Obtain $100,000 worth of insurance if they “opt out” of the CWFL program and carry concealed.
- Be prohibited from possessing homemade firearms.
- Be prohibited from carrying in grocery stores, gas stations, music venues or any religious institution.
- Be prohibited from open carrying at concert venues and polling places. (Under current law, open carry at polling places is already prohibited, as is concealed carry at polling places.)
- Be prohibited from carrying firearms in cars.
- Submit to background checks for private sales or when a firearm is loaned to family members for hunting or recreation.
- Take a firearm safety class and pass a written exam.
- Provide a written statement from a Florida physician certifying they are mentally fit and free of drug abuse.
- Pass a mental health exam and drug screen.
- Take and pass a one-day firearm class that includes a live-fire test.
- Establish secure storage for guns and ammunition, which would be inspected by a law enforcement officer.
- Submit to fingerprinting and a background check.
- Be limited to carrying only one firearm at a time.
- Be prohibited from carrying a firearm if convicted of domestic violence. (Florida law already prohibits someone with a domestic-violence conviction from carrying a firearm.)
False Equivalencies, false statements
Throughout the bills’ three committee hearings numerous comparisons were made between driving a car and carrying a firearm: “You need a license to drive a car so you should also need a license to carry a gun,” they said. To be clear, driving is a privilege. Carrying a firearm is a constitutional right. You don’t need a license to exercise a constitutional right.
Both HB 543 and SB 150 enjoy strong support from law enforcement, including the Florida Sheriff’s Association, the Florida Police Chiefs Association and the Police Benevolent Association, which represents rank-and-file officers and deputies.
Despite this strong support, nearly everyone who testified against the legislation claimed that law enforcement opposed these bills because it would make their job more difficult. Even after Sheriff Gualtieri testified that the bills would not prove problematic for his deputies, the false claims continued unabated.
Going forward
Florida’s unlicensed concealed-carry bills are rocketing through the state legislature. Since the Republicans have super-majorities in both houses, no roadblocks are foreseen. The next legislative session begins March 7 and Gov. DeSantis will likely sign this legislation into law far sooner than its July 1st effective date.
Lee Williams is a board member of Florida Carry, Inc.
The Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project wouldn’t be possible without you. Click here to make a tax deductible donation to support pro-gun stories like this.
This story is part of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and is published here with their permission.
“The Truth About Guns Passing Constitutional Carry in Florida Means a Constant Fight Against Gun Banners’ Lies and Distortions”
Not passing “Constitutional” carry has the same effect.
And with a lower starting point for rights affirmed.
The photos of sporty Gun Control busy bodies is very misleading. No way can such Gun Control zealots be sugar and spice and everything nice when the Gun Control they worship puts them in Sheets and Brown Shirts.
Constitutional carry???
=
=
There has been PATRIOT CARRY SINCE 1774/75!!!
=
Once a right is exercised, it can never be negated, for if one right can be negated……….THEN ALL RIGHTS CAN BE NEGATED.
=
Hmmm, when did Patriot Carry cease to exist and be negated?
The Patriots had no license, permit nor paid any fee or tax to CARRY and REVOLT!
=
Anyone?
=
i will crack sumpthin’ special when this is finalized.
I might join you in spirit at a local watering hole…
jr. you are a butt crack head.
The fact that the Mad Mommies (most of whom are NOT really Moms, I’d bet) feel the need toresort to lying, pleading, emotional trigger phrases, proposing ammendments to the bill that are already law, and yelling clearly establishes they are losing and know it.
Dude at the podium is most LIKELY not, but you never know, tampons in the BOYS bathrooms and all that…
Paid agitators.
The Mad Mommies probably already killed a baby.
That democrat wish list is pure insanity. Its the New York tyranny regime concepts all over again, and that resulted in the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision.
Happy to see it shut down hard in Florida. It is an expensive waste of time as a law and does nothing to help in preventing crime. But less than a month to the next step in court.
I especially liked the “Be prohibited from carrying firearms in cars.”
That effectively bans over 90% of carry outside the home. You use your car to go to the very places where you might need your firearm for self-defense, in other words out in public away from the home, but you can’t carry the gun in the car?
These people are nuts.
Lol that is one of the few places besides some streets™ that we can carry so I guess they learned something. Anyone who is at all dismissive towards either democrats’ desire to see citizens disarmed (RINO, neocons, and other false conservatives included) or the value of even incremental improvements to gun rights needs to come visit NY and see how things end up if left unchecked.
come visit NY and see how things end up if left unchecked.
BIG PASS!!!
Yeah can’t blame you there, maybe after we have gone full totalitarian and gotten slapped down by the courts so many times we make New Hampshire look restrictive.
yeah,..they keep dragging out that ridiculous “wish list” at every opportunity…hoping at least some of it will pass…
“Both HB 543 and SB 150 enjoy strong support from law enforcement, including the Florida Sheriff’s Association, the Florida Police Chiefs Association and the Police Benevolent Association, which represents rank-and-file officers and deputies.
Despite this strong support, nearly everyone who testified against the legislation claimed that law enforcement opposed these bills because it would make their job more difficult. Even after Sheriff Gualtieri testified that the bills would not prove problematic for his deputies, the false claims continued unabated.”
anti-gun: “it will make law enforcement’s job more difficult!”
Sheriff’s Association, the Florida Police Chiefs Association and the Police Benevolent Association and law enforcement: “No, it won’t”
anti-gun: “it will make law enforcement’s job more difficult!”
Sheriff Gualtieri: “No, it won’t.”
anti-gun: “it will make law enforcement’s job more difficult!”
😂
anti-gun is just plain nuts.
“Both HB 543 and SB 150 enjoy strong support from law enforcement, including the Florida Sheriff’s Association, the Florida Police Chiefs Association and the Police Benevolent Association, which represents rank-and-file officers and deputies.”
This is absolutely amazing to me and personally gives me a really good feeling about LEO’s in Florida. I hope it passes for the mommy’s sake.
These “Moms” should get jobs, then they should actually learn about what bullshit they are spouting. You know reading from a script is means you are actually just a puppet, right?
It’s like a evil cult, “Have you heard about Xenu?”
No and I don’t care, Do you have a job?
Probably a bunch moms not getting the right kind of action and they are pissed off!
Most of them are ugly beeches who aren’t getting any action.
They should concentrate on finding some chump.
The best place to find a chump? At WORK.
They do have jobs. Their job is to ensure the predators have defenseless prey.
They do have jobs, they are “PAID ACTIVIST”!!!
Actually MDA women don’t get paid. Shannon Watts got paid.
I asked my rep about this when they spouting BS a couple of towns over.
They aren’t “paid activistS”, they just spout BS based on what they are told.
They are bused in to make a presence, it’s all a farce.
Do cult members get paid? These “Moms” should get JOBS.
Three exclamation points, you must feel strongly about this.
Good for you that’s the spirit
Is it in fact Constitutional carry, or merely permitless carry? Any FL people have real info?
Actually, just permitless carry, Constitutional Carry would be unrestricted and include open carry..
We can’t have real constitutional carry (open ) because we might lose the tourist dollar. Why do you think people are MOVING TO Florida? It’s free and it’s safe, That’s why so many tourists become residents. If the yankee (literally) tourists feel threatened by open carry they should stay in New York.
in their defense
they only lie about stuff that:
A they have to lie about
B they dont have to lie about
That about covers it!
quote———-The gun banners never acknowledged that most Floridians who choose to carry a concealed firearm will seek professional training first———-quote
Pure right wing lies and bullshit. Most people do not take training classes because they cost money and they have to find time to take them.
When I took my concealed carry class many of the students thought in the beginning they had a license to shoot anyone they wanted to and for any reason until they were taught the truth in the course. Not requiring such a course is pure insanity.
Most people in the training class did not know the first thing about how to safely handle and carry a firearm.
Most people in the class could not even hit the stationary target at 7 yards.
Not having training in the laws of the state on when you can and cannot shoot and not having training in safe gun handling will only result in many needless shootings and accidental deaths. When you consider the fact that studies show the average educational level of most Americans these days is at the 6th grade level it makes it even more necessary that they receive this mandatory training. Its pure insanity not to make it mandatory. But when did any Republican have even brain one or any common sense.
A gangster criminal fascist talking about lies and bullshit. The irony.
Jethro, you’re giving hard working janitors a bad name. I’m wondering if you have the abilitiy to respond to anything that would require humility, intellegence, and the promotion of proper discourse. Are you part of the problem or the solution?
YOU respond to that idiot (dacian) with humility, (intellegence?) intelligence, and the promotion of proper discourse. That would be like offering your hand covered in chicken blood to a shark…
MD. If you’re new here you’ve just shown it. You have no knowledge of what you’re stepping into.
Hey we may have innocent bystander returning 😃 good luck with your whataboutisms
“. When you consider the fact that studies show the average educational level of most Americans these days is at the 6th grade level”
Resources to this info?
He’s just recounting his own personal experience with education.
Don’t NEED no stinkin “RESOURCES” he’s dacian the Magnificent and ALL knowing, just ask him…
“. When you consider the fact that studies show the average educational level of most Americans these days is at the 6th grade level”
I might believe that number when you toss in MILLIONS of illegal aliens that lack even a 1st grade education
now just stick to FULL citizens and I am sure that number is well past 12th grade on avg
US scores have been dropping for decades. IQ and standardized testing in all subjects.
Of course this has nothing at all to do with government schools pushing kids who fail through the grades or shifting focus from real subjects like math an instead making sure every student gets properly school in 64 genders and proper use of butt plugs.
I guarantee if anyone suggests going back to real core school curriculums dacian will be first in line to say you’re racist and phobic.
“US scores have been dropping for decades. IQ and standardized testing in all subjects.”
Politicians can fix that! They just need more money! They need more administrators. They need more employees to join the Teachers Union. Federally subsidize teacher salaries. Problem solved! Right?!?
“When Standards Are Lowered, Mediocrity Increases.”
That is and undeniable Fact.
“When I took my concealed carry class…”
liar
Hey dacian, I see your avatar and scroll right on past your 25 minutes of wasted typing.
Keep up the typing work at least your using your fingers for somthing else besides filling your ass.
You were in a class people chose to go to Because they didn’t know enough about guns.
It is a God given right to protect yourself and others.
I’ve never seen God put on a gun class so he doesn’t care if you have one but most people know they need to learn more so they go to classes and watch youtube videos,,, oh sorry they brain challenged leaders of youtube think people are better when they don’t know how to use guns so that venue is limited.
I’m an instructor and currently people are willing to pay ALOT to learn. Some people won’t like criminals most likely don’t since you can’t be a criminal and take the class so criminals have freely used guns to kill people forever while honest people are limited.
How does that make any sense to you?
I agree in part with Dacian–sort of. Again, rather than required training that costs money I’m thinking we would be better served by a simple 15 minute test to prove you are proficient in safety and have the ability to hit what you’re shooting at when in the public square and I’m generally a Conservative for the record.
its overall a stupid idea that because a person demonstrates they can hit a target so they can ‘check a box’ to satisfy some requirement of the state, suddenly it means the person is ‘proficient and safe’.
that’s worked out so well for the thousands injurered or killed in car accidents.
the fact is that law abiding gun carriers are overall, state mandated training or not, permit or not, least likely to cause any harm to others (excluding that caused to the criminal if DGU becomes necessary).
heck, just being in or near car traffic a person is 1,200 more likely to be run into or over by the licensed driver of a car than they are to be shot by a law abiding gun carrier (excluding that caused to the criminal if DGU becomes necessary), and the state said that licensed driver was ‘proficient and safe’ by issuing them a drivers license. And indeed this is played out thousands of times daily around the country in car accidents of some type and its common, but its actually rare that a law abiding gun carrier even without ‘training’ or permit causes harm to anyone else (excluding that caused to the criminal if DGU becomes necessary).
it is simply not true that state mandated training or requirement results in ‘proficient and safe’. its the false logic of anti-gun/gun-control.
correction: “… is 1,200 more likely…”
should have been…
“… is 1,200 times more likely…”
LOL no you didn’t and you don’t even own a gun in your constitutional carry state.
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!!
You are a “BRITISH SUBJECT” stop trying to claim you are an citizen of the USA!!!!
LOL you took a CCW class? BOI Nerf guns don’t count as firearms!
“Most people do not take training classes because they cost money and they have to find time to take them.
When I took my concealed carry class many of the students thought in the beginning they had a license to shoot anyone they wanted to and for any reason until they were taught the truth in the course. Not requiring such a course is pure insanity.”
Dacian makes a claim – and then one paragraph later contradicts that claim. This is the gaslighting clown-world that only exists in a leftist’s brain.
Carrying a firearm in Florida currently requires a training course. This is a LEGAL requirement.
Illegally carrying a firearm requires no training whatsoever. Criminals don’t attend training courses and never will.
There are already millions of people in this country carrying firearms daily with no training whatsoever. Deaths by gun are largely committed by criminals who intend to shoot someone regardless of their training level.
Peaceful, law-abiding people carrying firearms without a government permission slip will endanger no one.
Peaceful, law-abiding people carrying firearms without a government permission slip will endanger no one.
Except the criminal who attempts to relieve them of their possessions or their life…
dacian the demented dips***,
” When you consider the fact that studies show the average educational level of most Americans these days is at the 6th grade level it makes it even more necessary that they receive this mandatory training. ”
So, dacian, you persist in being below average. If you had even a sixth grade education, you might occasionally make an actual point. Instead, you are intent on spreading your lies and Leftist/fascist propaganda. Piss off, dacian, you are boring us.
When you consider the fact that studies show the average educational level of most Americans these days is at the 6th grade level it makes it even more necessary that they receive this mandatory training..
Guess you’ll need a lot of pictures. Actually, it’s NOT the “education” level, 54% of adults can’t READ at a 6th grade level, studies also point out that 27% of those adults were NOT born in America and do not use English as their first language… Once again you leave out pertinent information AND incorrectly cite a “study”… Whatever works, right?
dacian, the DUNDERHEAD. Not hardly DUNDERHEAD. You anti-gun nut jobs are trying desperately to emasculate the 2nd Amendment and it’s not working, is it! In part I agree a lot of people don’t take firearms classes due to cost and time, but again, you Lefties are trying to legislate common sense.
You are blowing smoke when you lay claim that the people in your firearms class thought they could now go out and shoot any old person they see. You are a prevaricator extraordinaire. If one person in your class felt that way it would be only your imagination running away with you.
I don’t know about the other people in your class, but have you ever found out the firing sequence of a cartridge. None of the classes here in NY can have the student fire as possession of a loaded pistol without a permit is a felony and too boot, the idiots in Albany can’t seem to figure out how to implement such a requirement. But then bird of a feather flock together? The new law here in NY is already being challenged and an TRO has been entered indicating that the suit will be successful in throwing out your crazy law.
“…Florida Sheriff’s Association. Gualtieri testified about how poor some of this mandatory training had become. He described several firearm instructors who only required students to shoot one round into a water barrel before issuing them the certificate needed to obtain a CWFL.”
Mine was more useless than that.
It was one round of a .22 CB cap through a silenced Ruger Mk.4 (?) into a bullet trap…
Hmm. My NV permit test required me to fire 36 rounds of 9mm or larger. My CA permit test required be to shoot more than 50. And both required the instructor to verify that a minimum percentage hit the target within the acceptable boundaries.
50 rounds for NY and FL and keep it on paper under 7 yards, so not hard but for some of the class first time holding a pistol due to the needing a pistol permit to touch/buy/own a pistol to begin with.
Just to provide context. I’m not opposed to Constitutional Carry and 100% agree that folks should have the right to carry. I have a license to carry in Maryland which was way too difficult to get–so I think I get it. I also get that you don’t need a license to speak because it’s a constitutional right. However, i wonder how many folks will purchase a firearm and learn how to properly use the weapon? I spent 24 years in the military–in two different branches that included active ground combat as an Airborne Infantryman. I won’t name the second branch, but I can tell you that they rarely used their firearms and almost never carried them from day to day. I can’t properly express the number of times I had to intervene in live fire settings because of lack of experience, confidence, and or safety violations. You might say I was a poor instructor, but I would argue otherwise. Like any skill it takes time to master, and when service members came to the range to qualify–which was only required once a year, there were many who had little time to master, let alone remember skills/knowledge that enhanced safety after just a brief training. In my first branch we were always required to among other things keep the weapon up and down range among other safety protocols. I think that back in the day when our founding fathers formed our great nation, that most folks had access to a rifle which was most likely a muzzleloader and perhaps a black powder pistol (hope I’m correct on those points) that their way of life involved common use of a firearm. I’m not sure what the answer is–maybe that the consequences of misuse do to lack of knowledge will be severe as they should be. I have a hard time getting out of my head the case where a person in Walmart had their young child shoot them with the loaded weapon in their purse. Again, I don’t have the answer. I think it would be almost impossible to get some kind of national training requirement especially when we can’t even get nationwide reciprocity for carry laws. Just trying to promote some thought and ideas regarding safety realizing I might get hammered 🙂 But, that’s OK too–freedom is a beautiful thing.
I’ve never met ANYONE who wore a government costume of any kind who wasn’t as arrogant as all holy hell. “Civilians”, they sneer.
Ok, there’s an intelligent reply 🙂
I’ve interacted with a mix of law enforcement. Approximately 65 percent of the time they are assholes that don’t give a crap about you so your mileage may vary. But the ones that are nice are beyond nice. Just my experience.
“However, i wonder how many folks will purchase a firearm and learn how to properly use the weapon?”
Doesn’t matter. Which other natural, human and civil right requires any preparation at all? “Misuse” of the First Amendment an result in devastating outcomes, including death.
The only proper means to address your concerns is repeal/alteration of the Second Amendment (and there is the argument that human rights exist regardless of social compacts).
Beat me to most of it. Most of the training should be provided as cheaply and as at a young age as possible preferably at home/family or local organizations. School if needed but getting harder to trust them to teach kids to read, write, or do basic math every year. Over credentialing basic firearms handling is beyond retarded but here we are with a 16 hour training requirement that is utterly unnecessary for half(soon more) of the rest of the country.
“Most of the training should be provided as cheaply and as at a young age as possible preferably at home/family or local organizations.”
Availability of firearm training is a good thing. A mandate, of any sort, government control of training, of any sort, is an exception to a natural and human right. “I support the Second Amendment, except….”
Associated consideration, there is no statistically significant occurrence of legal gun owners causing collateral damage when using a firearm in a self-defense episode. Significant collateral damage happens in the crime-infested inner city neighborhoods, caused by people who are not legal gun owners.
Agreed and personally my initial “training” with firearms came from a few range rentals after a friend let me mess around with a 1911 in a gravel pit so……yeah mandatory training may not be necessary let alone desired.
I agree, 16 hours is a lot especially today. Everything happens in a nano-second.
I think that a better requirement might be that you need to prove you have what it takes with a 15 minute test that you could study for on your own time. Required for carrying in public, again when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?
Nope, no requirements they will always be abused see NY and others for examples. Buy gun carry as you will and responsible for your actions. Anything else is a violation of civil rights.
MADDMAXX February 24, 2023 At 21:11
Your comment is awaiting moderation
when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?
What “rights” would that be?
MODERATED??? REALLY??? For what, proper punctuation?
I get the infested inner city deal–spent a lot of time in Baltimore without concealed carry. I also agree on the self defense reasoning. However, I’m not sure I would agree on your comment regarding any exception to a natural or human right. For years in many states reasonable training was required for concealed carry and most people were OK with that. I don’t believe in fees to exercise your right. However, self defense in your home is somewhat different than self defense in public. When a person responds to a self defense situation outside the home they are in the public square. I would prefer not to be accidentally shot or killed by a misfire or lack of training. Generally speaking most people are not killed when they have a 1st amendment misfire. I know my post stepped on some toes. That was the idea–to create intelligent discussion. I fully realize coming up with some training that everyone might agree on is probably not going to happen. Regarding natural rights, i have a right to feed my family but I’m not upset that I had to take a hunter safety course in order to hunt. Your right to free speech has always had requirements that must be met–you can walk into a police station and yell that you have a gun and are intent on killing everyone, but probably not a good idea. They will quickly infringe on your right to free speech. No right on this planet is absolute except your right to worship, you can do that internally without restriction. I’m not saying I’m right or wrong, just wanted to deal with the inherent safety issues regarding 2nd Amendment right(s).
“I would prefer not to be accidentally shot or killed by a misfire or lack of training.”
The likelihood of that is all but entirely restricted to gang shootings. As noted, there is no data that legal gun owners using a gun to defend themselves in public routinely injure bystanders. You are as safe as you are likely to be. Training is good; mandated training is evil.
If training is mandated for any natural, human right, it must be mandated for all.
If your right to religious worship is dependent on stealth, your right is compromised to the point you are a prisoner in your own land.
BTW, “training” does not equal prudent action, or even “safe” action.
walk into a police station and yell that you have a gun and are intent on killing everyone,
Uttering a threat is not protected speech… 1st Amendment only prohibits the federal government from restricting speech… Bad news, you walk into a cop shop acting crazy and yelling crap like that you will most likely be deprived of a lot more than free speech like that whole life, liberty and pursuit of happiness thing they talk about in the Declaration of Independence…
There will never be an end to additional demands/fees/taxes/requirements/license endorsements/insurance so for the sake of affirmed constitutional rights not just no but go review your state’s laws compare it to West Virginia then compare crime data and “accidents” and tell me how anything your state requires makes sense. If you can do that well try NY as I can’t begin to explain the use of my state’s laws.
Not so, how about a 15 minute no fee test to prove you understand basic gun safety and can hit what you’re shooting at when you’re in the public square. No fee–No BS same standard for everyone who wants to carry in public.
“Not so, how about a 15 minute no fee test to prove you understand basic gun safety and can hit what you’re shooting at when you’re in the public square. ”
There is no data showing that what you fear is an actual threat (and if you are thinking, “If it saves only one”, then you will find little succor, here).
So, mandated training: Who decides what is included? If government is involved, an infringement on an enumerated right is in effect. One infringement is as valid as another; there is no end. If government is not involved, how are we reassured that training is useful at all?
If mandated training is permissible, then restrictions on which weapons you may train with are permissible.
If one infringement is permissible, then any and all infringements are legitimate; infringements are only the manifestation of voter approved opinions; majority rules.
On a related note, you do have an absolute right to defend your life, by whatever means available, or fashioned on the spot.
No we will take the whole damned cake back.
if you’ve never had ANY training you should probably get some…and training should include legal advice from a lawyer…that’s far more important than proficiency…..
Putting any sort of training requirements or licensing or fees on a human and civil right destroys that right. We do not have to ask permission to exercise our rights.
Over 50 years ago I also enlisted. One hitch and then out. But in swearing the oath I realized that I was putting some of my rights on hold during my time in service. But that time ended many decades ago and I insist that my rights be honored now.
“…any sort of training requirements or licensing or fees on a human and civil right destroys that right. We do not have to ask permission to exercise our rights.”
Correct, and the irony is that SCOTUS already ruled on this. See Shuttlesworth.
Not necessarily. Many people that have CCW permits in their state feel that the masses should not carry, they are special, they took an expensive class and all others should also be forced to do so.
While I agree that everyone who even wants to fire a gun, should have some instruction, the second amendment does not state so. Be smart and get educated.
Ok, that’s a reasonable comment. I am educated and do understand what the 1st and 2nd state, however, whether implied or not no right is absolute–never has been and never will be–think about it for a moment. You’re trained from day 1 what to say and what not to say. You simply cannot say what you want without consequence or am I missing the point because I’m not smart and educated as you mentioned? I’m now leaning towards a test to be required only for carry in public. A simple 15 minute test to prove you understand basic gun safety and can hit what you’re aiming at instead of me. I think that would go a long way towards helping reasonable people feel comfortable around guns since most folks will probably not be carrying anyway.
Oh it’s one of those accounts.
Why should any restrictions be tolerated if not by threat of force for what we recognize as rights?
@MDRW
“however, whether implied or not no right is absolute”
the strawman argument pretext of anti-gun arguments.
the second amendment is absolute. it says do with “shall not be infringed” and that is an absolute.
MDRW. you have slipped in comments and statements, and posed typical anti-gun arguments as assertions or questions as an attempt to corral the discussion into your strawman arguments.
its almost like you are following the script of that anti-gun comedian who claimed he defeated every argument against gun control.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVJ0SkahgQQ
.
Who pays for the “free” test? Nothing is free. Someone has to create the test. Someone has to buy the paper or build the website. Someone has to validate the test and score the test. Someone has to sign off that the results are accurate so the individual can apply for their permit.
So, who? Who gets to say what the safety questions/rules are? Who gets to set the standard for passing?
Any barrier is an infringement. Some infringements may be appropriate (carry by felons, as a possible example). But even a “free” test (were there such a thing as free) is an infringement with significant potential to deny the right.
I would argue that most people did not have a rifle/musket and/or a one shot handgun. Maybe most landowners, but the majority of the colonists were help for tradesmen/households/farms and plantations – some slaves, some indentured, others just free and working menial jobs. Just like very few people had their own horse, very few had firearms.
Firearms are still legacy items, they were very expensive, apprentices, helpers and even journeymen did not have them unless they travelled into hostile territory.
most people had at least one gun if they lived outside urban areas…
I think you need to read (for comprehension) the Bill of Rights. Find a tract that breaks them down in detail. In particular that second section. You’ll note then that you are totally full of it.
@MDRW
“Just to provide context. I’m not opposed to Constitutional Carry and 100% agree that folks should have the right to carry”
yes you are opposed to constitutional carry and do not agree agree that “folks should have the right to carry. In looking at the totality of your posts in this comment section it becomes obvious.
something else has also become obvious and that is… MDRW = Miner49er = Innocent Bystander.
you can change your name but your logic flow and style of writing and your method of juxtaposition of points gives you away.
OK, well that’s not true. I’ve read the Truth About Guns emails for years. This is the 1st time I’ve ever commented. You have no idea who or what you’re talking about.
I do believe in the right to carry–everywhere, I just happen to think you should have some training, or better yet be able to pass some sort of competency test before you do–that’s it. But, yet you say that I don’t agree with the right to carry.
Then why do you continue with your argument? It’s obvious no one here agrees with your mandates and requirements, yet you continue to argue your point, nobody cares, no one is going to change their minds because you make such a compelling argument (NOT) and you will only become more and more frustrated, I just hate to see you become a gun statistic because you failed to win hearts and influence people who for the most part are well trained and are long time gun owners/users who firmly believe in the absolute letter of the 2nd Amendment..
@MDRW
“I do believe in the right to carry–everywhere, I just happen to think you should have some training, or better yet be able to pass some sort of competency test before you do–that’s it. But, yet you say that I don’t agree with the right to carry.”
I say that because you don’t. you believe in the ‘control’ over a person exercising their constitutional right and removing that right for law abiding people.
You have repeatedly over the totality of your posts posited the very same anti-gun agenda points of gun control that are bought up again and again by anti-gun. you just do it in the form of questions then go on to elaborate on your own question to make a point that substantiated your own question. Then you have twisted meanings around and excluded to make strawman arguments all focused on control of exercise of the 2A. then you impose definitions and conditions on people in your discussion to keep the discussion in your context that was invented in the aspect of control. These are the same tactics anti-gun uses and the same tactics the other two use.
“OK, well that’s not true. I’ve read the Truth About Guns emails for years. This is the 1st time I’ve ever commented. You have no idea who or what you’re talking about.”
it is true. you have shown it to be true.
Lurking around reading doesn’t mean anything, anti-gun and even the White House read TTAG and lots of other pro-2A sites and routinely lurk.
MDRW = Miner49er = Innocent Bystander.
you have the same exact name logic flow and style of writing and method of juxtaposition of points as these. those are unique to a person when they write. its like a finger print almost, but yours are exactly the same as those other two. its pretty unlikely that unless you are transcribing directly from a script written by one of these other two that you are not one and the same anti-gun gun control advocate person.
You LARPers still don’t get why Florida CAN’T have open carry. TOURISTS, for Christ’s sake. Europeans, South Americans, Asians, all the hell over, have NEVER seen civilians openly carrying, and they aren’t even remotely comfortable with it. Florida would lose many tens or hundreds of millions in tourist dollars over open carry, plain and simple. Try thinking outside your own experiences for once in your damn lives.
You’re comfortable with suppressing human and civil rights because tourists?
Tourists are some of the most affected by crime. Coming from the airport with your special license plates on your rental car screems unarmed victims. Visitors can deal with it and if not GTFO. They are on our soil you jackass.
TOURISTS?
Tourists don’t hang out where I do, there will never be any type of carry in the “attractions” areas and nobody is going to open carry on the beaches… Tourists walking around the streets of Daytona and Miami have their heads so far up their asses most would never notice a little 9mm hanging on a belt with a t-shirt draped over it, and I’m pretty sure not that many Rambos would be running around with a tac holster down on his/her thigh or carrying “cowboy” with a quick draw holster… NOT a LARPer…
Years back the rental cars had stickers on them that had the rental companies name.
They got rid of that, too many tourists getting robbed or robbed and shot.
The tourists in Florida should be carrying, they still stick out.
“Be prohibited from carrying firearms in cars”
That might be one of the dumbest things that has ever been on this site.
red wolf
apparently you do not understand the concept of exercise of constitutional rights does not depend on if another is comfortable with it or not.
tourists from other countries visit Florida because they choose to do so. No one promised them the people of Florida would ‘clean up cause company is coming’. their visit does not impose a responsibility on the people of Florida to not continue exercise of their rights.
if they are offended or don’t feel comfortable with the exercise of a constitutional right they are free to leave and go home or to another state.
on an air boat in the ‘glades open carry makes sense…in downtown Miami, not so much…at least on the street…shopkeepers get a bye…just remember if someone actually sees you with a gun they may try to take it from you….
“just remember if someone actually sees you with a gun they may try to take it from you….”
That’s a good thing to remember, and despite the idea that it doesn’t happen it has happened. It’s happened to police officers. I had someone try to make a grab attempt for mine once, luckily I was using a level II active retention holster at the time so in the way he grabbed for it wasn’t able to get it. Had I been using a passive retention ‘friction retention’ (which despite the hype is not really a retention other than for keeping the gun from just falling out of the holster or to keep it from moving around) – the guy probably would have been able to get the gun from the way he was able to grab it.
Since that time when someone tried to make that grab for my gun, I have destroyed every one of the ‘friction retention’ holsters I had and stopped giving them away. Eventually over 100 of them I cut up into pieces, brand new and some slightly used top of the line brand name holsters. If I had been using one of those when that guy made his grab for my gun he would have been able to get the gun. But that’s just me, I wasn’t going to give them away because of that incident and they were never going to be used by me and I did not want to throw them away intact – so I cut them up into pieces so they could never be used again.
But realistically, overall its extremely rare that someone actually grabs for an open carry gun from someones holster. That does not mean there are not those who think about it and thinking about it does happen a lot. I had one gang tattooed guy staring at my gun so intently and trying to jockey for position so much it became obvious to me and a few other customers to the point where we just put our items down and left the store. There are people out there that think about it, maybe not so obviously but they are around. But still, actual grabs for open carry guns are extremely rare.
The argument goes “Well, that’s one reason why you carry concealed. If they can’t see it they don’t know you have it so don’t grab for it.” and there is merit and logic in that argument. I mostly carry concealed. Sometimes I open carry, for example, to and from the range or I’ll do it for a quick errand and sometimes just because I want to, but concealed ~90% of the time.
Open carry vs concealed carry, arguments for and against everywhere.
Its funny though, or can be, if you encounter an anti-gun person. I’ve seen it happen – two people talking and getting along fine, one rabidly spit spewing anti-gun and doesn’t know the other is carrying concealed and everything is fine but the next time they meet the previously carrying concealed person is open carrying and the rabidly spit spewing anti-gun person wants them to burn in hell and is not worried about the scene they are making claiming ‘he’s likely to kill us !” in their hysteria and others standing around staring at them wondering when the guys with the straight jacket are going to show up and take this anti-gun person away. Open carry guy not doing anything wrong, his only sin now was that he was open carrying. Its still the same constitutional right being expressed, no rivers of blood in the streets, none of the other what are in the overall falsely claimed things anti-gun claims will happen happened, but for some as of yet undefined and logic lacking reason if he does it in secret (as in concealed) its fine.
Non firearms people, anti-gun people, open carry/use objects/things every day that inflict more injury or death annually than all the guns owed by ordinary law abiding people put together have inflicted in any one decade by more then ~1,500 times. Just in one aspect alone: Look at the picture with this article of the Moms Demand Action protesting, most of those if not all drive a car openly, and their protest seems to be in or near an area where cars would be – a person is more than ~1,200 times more likely to be run into or over by a car (yes, even if driven by a Moms Demand Action person) than they are to be shot by a law abiding gun owner (excluding cases of self/home/other-defense).
Moms Demand Action people literally having a ‘thing’ (their cars), one of the more likely sources of injury or death and here they are protesting the least likely and more firmly controlled ‘thing’ (guns) that is literally one of the least likely sources of injury or death controlled by the law abiding gun owner carrying open or concealed (excluding cases of self/home/other-defense).
But, back to the “Just remember…”; so much more common by almost ~1.5 million times more likely than someone trying to grab a firearm from an open carry persons holster – this …
Just remember, if someone actually sees you with your car they may try to take it from you.
Just remember, if someone actually sees you with your money they may try to take it from you.
Just remember, if someone actually sees you with your family they may try to take them from you.
Just remember, if someone actually sees you with your purchases they may try to take them from you.
Just remember, if someone actually sees you they may try to take your life.
Just remember, its pretty likely any number of many violent criminal acts can happen at any time. If you are prepared to defend yourself/family/even if necessary others with a firearm you stand a much better chance of stopping the threat. When that moment comes, it does not matter if you are carrying open or concealed.
@ red wolf
“Florida would lose many tens or hundreds of millions in tourist dollars over open carry, plain and simple.”
Plain and simple? Really?
The false logic of anti-gun.
Nope, not plain and simple.
The other states where people can open carry haven’t suffered any such ‘financial’ fate ‘armageddon’ as you claim would be ‘plain and simple’ for Florida.
Here’s a pro gun counter for the democrat list, for their first amendment right:
* Obtain $100,000 worth of insurance if they “opt out” of the Phone-Carry program and carry a phone anyway.
* Be prohibited from possessing homemade signs.
* Be prohibited from carrying a phone in grocery stores, gas stations, music venues or any religious institution or use on the internet to express speech.
* Be prohibited from open carrying a phone at concert venues and polling places.
* Be prohibited from carrying phones in cars.
* Submit to background checks for private sales of phones or when a phone is loaned to family members for use.
* Take a phone safety class and pass a written exam.
* Provide a written statement from a Florida physician certifying they are mentally fit and free of drug abuse.
* Pass a mental health exam and drug screen.
* Take and pass a one-day phone use class that includes a live-phone use test.
* Establish secure storage for phones, which would be inspected by a law enforcement officer.
* Submit to fingerprinting and a background check.
* Be limited to carrying only one phone at a time.
* Be prohibited from carrying a phone if convicted of domestic violence.
Lets see how they like their first amendment rights infringed and subject to permission of the state and intrusion into their lives.
I like how they establish that rights can be intruded upon. Think what we can do to democrat voters with their own logic. Permits. Fees. The sky is the limit once you accept that rights aren’t.
Brandon said “NO civil right is absolute”, must be true if HE said it…
“Lets see how they like their first amendment rights infringed and subject to permission of the state and intrusion into their lives.
Very attractive set of limitations.
It would be awesome for someone to stand there and argue those points just to see the looks on those haridan’s faces.
Be prohibited from carrying a phone in grocery stores, gas stations, music venues or any religious institution or use on the internet to express speech.
and restaurants…
“Be prohibited from carrying a phone if convicted of domestic violence.”
You forgot the three day wait. Where they have to leave their phones in the hands of strangers for three days before they get to use them.
Passing Constitutional Carry in Florida Means a Constant Fight Against Gun Banners’ Lies and Distortions…
And that is different HOW??? Fl has been under assault by the “rivers of blood in the streets” gun-grabbers ever since they passed “shall issue” CW permits, why should that change? They’ve been trying to have scary black rifles banned since the 90s, I’d kind of miss their dumbassery if they suddenly gave up, besides they spend a lot of money in the state, helps keep the coffers full…
Are lattes that expensive? I guess if they get their nails and hair done there it might bring in some revenue but from the looks of them they slept in their cars.
They gotta eat, put gas in those cars, they run ads on local TV constantly… They’ve got Bloombergs millions they have to spend it somewhere…
You know who we need in this time of distress? A real patriot. Show us how it’s done, Cato…
Since we are all talk and no action, lay out your plan of attack to give us all our civil rights back. Especially in states like NY and CA. They could really use your infinite wisdom.
something something mess with the bull something something
Ah ha ha ha!!!! Thanks Montana! 😎
Easier than fishing in a stock pond 😉
As a rabid supporter for the open carry of long guns, and all ARMs, I find it astonishing that you cannot open carry after a hurricane is passed in Florida???
But I still would support these bills as they are written currently. This is not a debate about whether “the glass is half full or half empty”. Currently Millions of law-abiding residents of the State of Florida are being denied their civil rights. We can always come back for more later. And we most certainly should.
And this is a war of propaganda. It just drives the “slave masters” crazy that we can say that “half the country now is constitutional carry”. In the future when we can say that “MORE THAN HALF the country now is constitutional carry”, perhaps then the anti-civilrights people will sadly kill themselves.
Or they can just leave the country. As so many of them have promised to do so in the past. Then we can ban them from ever returning to this country.
“perhaps then the anti-civilrights people will sadly kill themselves.”
Looking for the sad part…
“And this is a war of propaganda. It just drives the “slave masters” crazy that we can say that “half the country now is constitutional carry”. In the future when we can say that “MORE THAN HALF the country now is constitutional carry” ”
Friends, neighbors, men, women, boys, girls (and them that ain’t too sure), please check your expectations. All, that is all, instances of states (not States) where “permitless” carry exists, the status is based on simple, majority rules, legislation; legislation that can be repealed at any point in the future. Obesrve: Bruen did not end gun control, only exposed the Medea that must be killed, one snake at a time.
Nice play on words Sam…Awesome!
“Nice play on words Sam…”
Da Nada. Swiped it from the Hollywood version of “Paint Your Wagon”.
You are correct. Laws can be repealed. That is why the fight for liberty is a never-ending one. Anyone who believes that tyrants will quit after you obtain your Liberty, are living in a Fool’s dream.
They will never give up the fight to make you their slaves.
The best long-term solution really is to ensure that children are taught their civil rights as early as possible. And this includes having shooting teams in the schools. They can use BB guns and air guns in the earlier grades.
And then they can start using real firearms, handguns and long guns, at the high school level. And this would show an elevation of required responsibility and maturity, as they progress in age and grade level.
That is why the gun grabbers, who have no children, want to tell you what your kids can learn and cannot learn in school.
But they do certainly want your children to learn about oral and @n@l sez.
“That is why the gun grabbers, who have no children, want to tell you what your kids can learn and cannot learn in school.”
Is that true? Can you point me to your source for that statistic?
to MDRW
1. “I think it’s immoral to have children, especially more than one (mostly because of climate change).”
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-28-year-old-from-spokane-who-thinks-having-kids-is-immoral/
2. Disney’s Wrong Target Market: Childless Liberals Over People With Kids
https://www.2ndvote.com/disneys-wrong-target-market-childless-liberals-over-people-with-kids/
3. The Political Fertility Gap
https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=2344929&page=1
Liberals would never have children because they would interfere with their consensual glory hole sez activities. Or their weekend consensual sez 0rgy activities. But they could include their children during the sez act shows at the dr@g q u e e n performances.
read somewhere that in Florida, at least…. some looters come armed…
stop Florida from becoming the 26th state to allow residents and visitors to carry concealed firearms..
Thought SC was the 26th, we’re already over half the states…
Not yet. It has to pass the state senate.
Is that Amanda Suffecool in the background of this photograph? Did she fly all the way in from Arizona, to speak on behalf of FL constitutional carry?
I wish this bill had open carry but like the gun grabbers say… this is an important first step…. Hopefully within the next 4 years the republicans in charge will have the cajones to let Floridians open carry if they want to.
you can exercise your constitutional right if you do it in secret.
🤣
I agree, 16 hours is a lot especially today. Everything happens in a nano-second.
I think that a better requirement might be that you need to prove you have what it takes with a 15 minute test that you could study for on your own time. Required for carrying in public, again when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?
Exercising my rights without a permission slip is not ‘stepping on someone’s rights’. Until I commit an actual crime I have stepped on nothing.
The constitution was written to protect the rights of the individual, not the group.
Open carry? Concealed carry? What’s the difference?
And gee whizz, I started open carrying because I was hoping I’d get some comments on my cool looking barbque gunm , but nope, around here I guess nobody gives a shit. One thing I do have to say about open carry is it seems to me to be a whole lot faster to get the gunm into action then when I was conceal carrying.
As for Floridians not wanting gunms, all those people should be taken out in a boat and dropped off in some swamp somewhere with nothing but one leaky rubber boot , nothing else. I’d bet come morning theyd damn sure wish theyd have had a gunm.
Moms Demand Action, well it’s not my fault the milkman dont come around anymore. Theres only so much Karen a man can stand.
Get rid of Disneyland too.
If Minnie Mouse is fking goofy is it Mickeys fault, or the dogs? Sleeping Beauty, no thank you apple, she’s fcking bananas too. Seven dwarfs, seven?
Prince Charming has a Pork Sword.
I typed less crap then dacian and got moderated,,,,why?
Trigger words, If it makes you feel any better I am also sitting in Moderation.
I looked for the trigger word twice, reposted and said screw it.
Since I’m moderated I added more known trigger words.
Maybe the trigger word I used was “one leaky rubber boot” ?
Could be, I think mine was pretty harmless. It was in “Passively Constructed Negligent Discharge Story of the Day: Louisville Cop Wounds 2”
I deleted my 1st post and reposted after I thought I found the trigger word.
I was wrong plus this site did not delete my first post so I am going to have a double post.
For spite I added some choice trigger words.
Bet it was the “Get rid of Disneyland” thing… Disneys grip runs deep, you gotta tread lightly around them…
Disney is making a bundle…why shouldn’t they pay taxes like everyone else?
It’s official. Governor DeSantis won. The Disney multi-billion dollar Corporation lost. Now they can start paying taxes just like everyone else.
“Disney LOST Reedy Creek to the State of Florida! DeSantis DEFEATED Disney?!”
Turn your volume down. Video 15 min long
Governor DeSantis is crushing the Walt Disney Corporation. He has been so successful that there is now a fight, at the Disney corporate boardroom to remove the current CEO.
They already replaced Chapek, brought Eisner out of retirement to fill in til they get a new one..
What are they going to do, find a CEO that’s willing to stand up to the crazy woke mob within Disney? Is the board really too stupid to figure out parents are sick of Disney’s “not so secret gay agenda?” Disney’s current woes stem from prioritizing political/social activism over youth and family entertainment.
Corporations have been used to getting away with this. Thank God DeSantis has shown there’s a way to finally counter that. Actually use your governing power for a change. It goes against the pervasive libertarian mindset within the GOP that we can’t mess with the corporations!
I think what most are looking for on this forum is an echo chamber.
Some, but not much logical and thoughtful discussion in an effort to move people over to your (our) side. I think that’s one of the problems with our culture now, I don’t remember so much division in earlier years. Not just this issue–all of them. People have just become polarized on almost every issue. It’s a shame and our country will not be the better for it. Your replies will confirm. That’s OK though, let freedom run it’s course 🙂
Thanks to Bruen it can and any level of disingenuous argument for restrictions can rightfully be ignored as irrelevant.
I get that, but I don’t think labeling any dissent as “Disengenuos Argument” is somewhat counter productive and doesn’t make sense for the long haul. Eventually, the people that disagree with you could possibly out number you and the end result will be worse. I get it that many gun grabbers if really pressed would advocate for the complete disarming of the American public and you would have what’s happening in Canada happening here. That’s the problem with restrictions–have you seen what’s happening in CT ? However, there are reasonable people on the other side of the Echo Chamber that could be swayed by reasonable discussion. For example, there’s numerous responses saying there should be no training…..nothing. The response is that people carrying in public have not created much of an issue. While that is true we’re in uncharted territory now. We do know that accidental discharges and other safety issues that have caused accidents and deaths happen in some number in the home and away from home. I live in a rural county in MD and the number of hunting accidents is noticeable. No you can’t regulate stupidity and the occasional accident, but there has to be some kind of reasonable shared ground for every policy. After thinking about it I’ve come to the point that I think a simple 15 minute firearm test would be reasonable. No cost, simple test to test a person’s ability to understand basic gun safety and the ability to fire the gun with some proficiency. That would be a great thing for the NRA to manage. I don’t think the same test should be required to defend your home but when a person moves into the public square that changes. That’s my thoughts so I don’t expect everyone to agree, but I’m right to hell with everyone else will only carry so far–especially when given the statistics on how Americans feel about guns.
“However, there are reasonable people on the other side of the Echo Chamber that could be swayed by reasonable discussion. ”
Afraid everyday life indicates quite the contrary. We are seeing the period 1850 – 1860 repeating.
Note: you would put (or would have put) 100,000,000 gun owners through training because of an insignificant set of firearm misuses. This is essentially the “If it saves only one” argument (which is, itself, illogical, and disingenuous.)
Since the number of defensive gun uses vastly outnumbers the number of ND, hunting accidents, and collateral injuries, the marginal improvement you seek comes at too great a cost to the overwhelming number of safe, legal gun owners.
Encouraging people to obtain training with firearms ownership is quite reasonable; govt mandates are not.
Lot of words for irrelevant aspects and yes you parrot many disingenuous arguments we have seen here and elsewhere.
ignorance of the law can get you into an awful lot of trouble…the legal aspect of actually using a gun can be life-changing…this is the most important part of any “training”….
You can’t “train” out stupidity… The cop in question in the article has undoubtedly been “trained” for more than 15 minutes but still had a lapse in common sense IF he actually possessed any in the first place… Stuff is going to happen, it’s called the law of averages, and NO amount of training is ever going to change that… Once you invite the Vampire (aka federal govt) inside it is free to do whatever it wants, your “required” training just opens that door and once they are in, they don’t know where to stop… In the 90s the feds passed a law forbidding truck drivers from keeping alcohol in their trucks, great idea, nobody wants an impaired driver pushing an 80,000 pound rig down the interstate at 70 mph, however, they didn’t stop with beer, wine and distilled spirits they even banned fuking mouthwash, you have to be REALLY desperate to chug a bottle of Listerine to catch a buzz, but THAT is govt “scorched earth” mentality at its finest… NO govt interference (mandates) is the only way to guarantee “Shall NOT be infringed”…
Thoughtful discussion? i have tried that with those who disagree and even with those who outright lie. Guess what, nothing thoughtful was returned.
When you come down to it, depravation of a person’s rights who has not committed a crime by mere possession of an object, is still deprivation no matter how thoughtful of a conversation that preceeded it.
Fellow Paratrooper, thanks for your stand on freedom. I served in 3/325th in both Alpha and Bravo Company. For the record, I never argued for the deprivation of a person’s right(s), I disagree that any reasonable requirements for safety meet that criteria although I can see how you might view it that way. We are not really talking about mere objects are we? We’re talking about weapons–that’s what I was trained to call them as yourself. They were never allowed to be referred to as guns. I happen to think along with a large percent of the population that there should be some discussion about public safety because you carry in public. For example, we are going to have public safety issues given the increase of pubic carry as it were. Again, defense of your home and property is one thing. There seems to be the idea that absolute means no regulation and that will never happen. If someone’s 1st Amendment threatened you or your family I’m pretty sure you would apply quick “Deprivation.” I don’t think any right is absolute in the purest sense and that thoughtful conversation is something that used to be the norm. Take Care
“We’re talking about weapons”
Firearm
Arrow
Hatchet
Hammer
Saw
Bayonet
And on and on.
All tools of self-defense.
Words are most certainly weapons at times.
The problem here is that you trust government to stay within its bounds. The founders knew different, thus the Second Amendment was drawn to severely discipline government that exceeds its authority (which it always does).
“Reasonable” is the most slippery of slopes.
No right is unlimited. That argument may sound reasonable, but it is false.
I do not have the moral right to slander someone, and if I do, I can be expected to be sued. I do have the right to speak the truth of someone’s character and actions.
I do not have the moral right to just shoot someone. I do have the right to self-defense and the defense of others.
Do I need special training or permits to state my opinion? Must I be required to have journalists’ credentials to offer an opinion to a newspaper? Should we both have taken a special course to do as we are doing now?
My counter argument to required training to carry a firearm, or a weapon, is that we should offer Militia training in the schools as an elective or as part of civic courses.
I’ve got my head head head stuck stuck stuck in a five five five gallon gallon gallon, steel steel steel gallon gallon gallon bucket bucket bucket.
I think what most are looking for on this forum is an echo chamber.
There is plenty of room for discourse, you stated your opinion there was disagreement, validate your point, is there sufficient evidence to prove that there has been a rash of untrained or careless individuals flooding the streets in those states that have already passed permit-less/open carry? If so post it, if not then you have posted your opinion and it has been responded to, however if you are going to hold up one of our resident trolls as the voice of reason and intellectual enlightenment you are in for a rough ride here… dacian is a cut and paste artist usually from the most obscure far left wing publications and most of the “data” it posts has been “selectively edited” and most often omits any references that are contrary to its agenda…
I don’t think there has to be a rash of permit less carry problems or deaths before we discuss safety does there? I can’t comment on the resident troll. I never held him up as the voice of reason but based on 99% of the comments I think the Echo Chamber observation is valid. I mean are you saying we need a rash of deaths and injuries to prove that gun safety is an issue? I’m not sure most people would agree with you as it relates to almost any issue.
I don’t think that logic holds up. One thing we do know is that there are enough safety related injuries and deaths from firearms that one might consider safety an issue that should at least be discussed–especially given the increased amount of guns in the public space. That’s relatively new I think. I’m just not in the camp that every American has the absolute right to carry concealed in public without restrictions. I believe the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few and for rest of America that I don’t agree with I’m willing to at least discuss safety. My willingness to reach a middle ground has it’s limits. If you’re in the absolute right crowd with no regulation or limits–that’s your right and I get that.
“there are enough safety related injuries and deaths from firearms that one might consider safety an issue that should at least be discussed”
Not actually. 100,000,000 legal gun owners; ~400,000,000 legally owned firearms. For how many incidents to you apply a solution across that number of firearms and owners? Take a look at the math (use any source for misuse of firearms). The threat is so low as to not even be statistical noise.
Now, look at the number of motor vehicle accidents, the number of alleged trips, the number of people killed and injured. How many of those drivers were trained in driving?
To be completely unkind, you are trying to justify the “If it saves only one (or two, or a dozen, or a hundred)….” mantra. That is not how you make policy for a population of 327,000,000 persons.
BTW, instituting mandated safety training from today, forward….how do you determine who among the current 100,000,000 legal gun owners has/has not been trained? Simply ignoring that however many, and coercing new gun owners into training is not a solution at all.
Training is good, and responsible. Mandated training is evil.
I don’t think there has to be a rash of permit less carry problems or deaths before we discuss safety does there?
Okay miner you’re busted… And yes, to convince me that a government mandated “requirement” IS necessary you MUST first show me the NEED for YOUR proposed requirement… Who will pay for your “free” 15 minute “proficiency” test? Can’t use taxpayer funds, so what, charge an extra tax on guns and ammo? that’s kind of unconstitutional, would you use a state or federal employee? Yes, there does need to be a rash of permit less problems, otherwise WHAT is the need. This isn’t Minority Report, you can’t force people to do something that you have no proof of a NEED for… You can’t keep saying require, require without some basis FOR the requirement. I have no problem with a voluntary program possibly with a minimal fee involved, but I’m sick to death of government regulation for more reasons than just the overreach on the 2nd amendment… Your limits for “middle-ground” seem pretty high, you’re stuck on mandated requirement, everyone else seems stuck on voluntary training and the only compromise you seem willing to accept is YOUR way…
@ MDRW
“…again when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?”
there’s that anti-gun crap we have become so used to seeing. that anti-gun thing trying to say its a ‘right’ of a person to not have others exercising their second amendment rights.
the answer is NO! there is no right for a person to expect another be ‘trained’ when they choose to exercise a constitutional right.
you leave me alone and not try to hurt my loved ones or me and I will leave you alone to continue to live despite you not having any training in exercising that constitutional right to life.
Ok, so you have that right to your own opinion, that’s cool I get it.
“you leave me alone and not try to hurt my loved ones or me and I will leave you alone to continue to live despite you not having any training in exercising that constitutional right to life.”
Hey guy, this comment makes you look, well I’ll let you fill in the blank.
Frankly, I think it’s folks like you that actually make it hard for everyone else to understand and agree with the right to carry. Let me simplify it for you–makes you seem a little unhinged.
there ya go again Miner49er (AKA MDRW …. AKA Innocent Bystander’) – giving your self away with out of context application of what someone said then trying to define it into your own little world of out of context. It served to draw you out to further expose who you are.
You said:
“…again when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?”
it is simply not true that state mandated training or requirement results in ‘proficient and safe’, and it is not true that its stepping on someone else’s rights to carry without that state mandated training or requirement.
For permitted, and no permit required constitutional carry; ~47 million ordinary law abiding citizens carry a firearm EDC (AKA Every Day Carry) (the vast majority now in constitutional carry states and carry without permit), ~16 million carry at least 3 times weekly. ~40% of American households have firearm access (by some manner, e.g. borrow, own, etc…) AND carry occasionally. Excluding EDC, and average of 30.3% of handgun owners carry monthly. According to various surveys ~70% of those do not have state mandated training.
No ones ‘rights’ are violated by them doing that. And if what you propose that these law abiding citizens are not somehow ‘proficient and safe’ without state mandated training then why are any occurrences of any adverse incidents (excluding that for the threat criminals when DGU is absolutely needed) involving these law abiding persons carry so extremely rare as to be statistically insignificant compared to the supposed ‘proficient and safe’ of police being trained?
For accidentally shot by police vs. ordinary law abiding armed citizens:
* Handguns: Less than a 0.0004% probability a person will be shot accidentally by an ordinary law abiding armed citizen, a little more than a 6% probability a person will be shot accidentally by law enforcement.
* Rifles: A 0.0005% probability a person will be shot accidentally by an ordinary law abiding armed citizen, a 4.7% probability a person will be shot accidentally by law enforcement.
When near misses (‘others’ not actually hit) and personal injury ‘negligent discharge’ types are factored in …
* Handgun: law enforcement slightly over 7% probability – ordinary law abiding armed citizen a little over 0.0004% probability.
* Rifle : law enforcement – 5.2% probability – ordinary law abiding armed citizen a little over 0.0003% probability.
Its like I’ve said, a key anti-gun point is saying that others have this ‘right’ to be free of someone exercising the 2A not under control of the states permissions.
And then the same anti-gun idea, which is invented and contrived for the emotional appeal, and has no basis in fact as a ‘right’ – if someone disagrees with it they are ‘unhinged’. Another key anti-gun polarizing tactic to appear ‘superior and common sense’ as opposed to those who disagree, to appeal to emotion and garner consensus of the child emotion confirmation bias.
You anti-gun trolls are all over the internet on various gun-blogs-forums. You come into these and start posting basically ‘control control control’ in one aspect or another. You load up the comments with these things on certain subjects that are targeted like you did on this one about constitutional carry. You do this so your control concepts appear to make sense on the emotional level which would appeal to the majority of those who use search engines to explore a subject – in reality though your claims and statements have no basis in fact and reality. In short, you use these comments sections to amplify your overall false and deceptive message.
MDRW = Miner49er = Innocent Bystander = anti-gun troll
I can’t comment on the resident troll. I never held him up as the voice of reason
Well, yes you kinda did-sort of: (you said) I agree in part with Dacian–sort of.
@MDRW
“…again when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?”
And there it is.
Took longer than expected, but finally flushed into the open.
MDRW – possessing an object steps on no one’s rights.
Over and out.
And again: What other persons rights are being violated…
yep, the proverbial wolf in sheeps clothing.
anti-gun simply can not resist giving their selves away because to them this type of false logic is real so sounds perfectly reasonable to them.
Sorry, what I was trying to point out was that if you shoot or injure another person because of lack of training and/or competency aren’t you stepping on their right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness? I would think so.
You guys for the most part are on the fringe in this respect which is partly why people who are in the middle are going to end up leaving you in a worse place in the future. Most people would not understand how you think it’s OK to allow folks to carry in public without any training or Competency.
Again, you were trained and expected to have competency regarding your 1st Amendment rights from the time you hit Kindergarten, that same competency keeps you free, out of jail, and helps you to not step on other’s rights.
was that if you shoot or injure another person: That one little word (IF) (what was that thing about frogs and wings and not bumping his ass every time he jumps, oh yeah IF he had wings etc…) sums up the whole matter, so let’s try this, What IF I DON’T shoot or injure another person regardless of my training status, do I have your permission to continue carrying my firearm? You are in the wrong place for your anti-gun bullshit, we’ve already got all the trolls we need, and YOU are accomplishing absolutely nothing with your line of “reasoning?”… Don’t go away mad, but…. well, you know.. Don’t really care where the “middle” leaves me, as long as it is alone, are you a professional pest or are you just in it for shits and giggles?
You said:
“…again when you carry in public without proper training aren’t you stepping on someone else’s rights?”
it is simply not true that state mandated training or requirement results in ‘proficient and safe’, and it is not true that its stepping on someone else’s rights to carry without that state mandated training or requirement.
For permitted, and no permit required constitutional carry; ~47 million ordinary law abiding citizens carry a firearm EDC (AKA Every Day Carry) (the vast majority now in constitutional carry states and carry without permit), ~16 million carry at least 3 times weekly. ~40% of American households have firearm access (by some manner, e.g. borrow, own, etc…) AND carry occasionally. Excluding EDC, and average of 30.3% of handgun owners carry monthly. According to various surveys ~70% of those do not have state mandated training.
No ones ‘rights’ are violated by them doing that. And if what you propose that these law abiding citizens are not somehow ‘proficient and safe’ without state mandated training then why are any occurrences of any adverse incidents (excluding that for the threat criminals when DGU is absolutely needed) involving these law abiding persons carry so extremely rare as to be statistically insignificant compared to the supposed ‘proficient and safe’ of police being trained?
For accidentally shot by police vs. ordinary law abiding armed citizens:
* Handguns: Less than a 0.0004% probability a person will be shot accidentally by an ordinary law abiding armed citizen, a little more than a 6% probability a person will be shot accidentally by law enforcement.
* Rifles: A 0.0005% probability a person will be shot accidentally by an ordinary law abiding armed citizen, a 4.7% probability a person will be shot accidentally by law enforcement.
When near misses (‘others’ not actually hit) and personal injury ‘negligent discharge’ types are factored in …
* Handgun: law enforcement slightly over 7% probability – ordinary law abiding armed citizen a little over 0.0004% probability.
* Rifle : law enforcement – 5.2% probability – ordinary law abiding armed citizen a little over 0.0003% probability.
Its like I’ve said, a key anti-gun point is saying that others have this ‘right’ to be free of someone exercising the 2A not under control of the states permissions.
And then the same anti-gun idea, which is invented and contrived for the emotional appeal, and has no basis in fact as a ‘right’ – if someone disagrees with it they are ‘unhinged’ or ‘fringe’ . Another key anti-gun polarizing tactic to appear ‘superior and common sense’ as opposed to those who disagree, to appeal to emotion and garner consensus of the child emotion confirmation bias.
You anti-gun trolls are all over the internet on various gun-blogs-forums. You come into these and start posting basically ‘control control control’ in one aspect or another. You load up the comments with these things on certain subjects that are targeted like you did on this one about constitutional carry. You do this so your control concepts appear to make sense on the emotional level which would appeal to the majority of those who use search engines to explore a subject – in reality though your claims and statements have no basis in fact and reality. In short, you use these comments sections to amplify your overall false and deceptive message.
MDRW = Miner49er = Innocent Bystander = anti-gun troll
LOL!
So, a vote against the bill can be seen as a vote against school safety.
Hey, look the slow kids we call “Republicans” finally figured out a PR trick that’s been on the front page of major papers since the 1970’s. It only took like 50 years of Democrats doing it to them.
Thank God the GOP is chock-full of the quickest cats around. Without such sharp minds at the forefront we’d certainly be lost.
I mean, think about it, at the extreme, the, like, totally super extreme fringe conspiracy theory level, but bear with me; You might have schools trying to mutilate kids behind parents’ backs and simultaneously normalize child SA as a totally normal “preference” if it weren’t for these savvy GOPers heading them off at the pass!
Or, on a lighter note, you might have two full years of complete and and utter evisceration of the Constitution and Rule of Law at the state and Federal levels! Imagine it! It could happen! It could have already happened if we weren’t so well defended!
Praise the Lord in high thanks for this GOP preemptively and proactively defending us with quick witted trickery that will certainly spend centuries as the unsurpassed pinnacle of political maneuvering!
Interesting the words that WP just *poofs* your comment for. No moderation option, just pretends it never happened.
That is why I always highlight and copy any post I make if it’s long.
That poof thing is very annoying but you have your comment copied.
Then go over for trigger words which can be something pretty innocent.
Repost and it seldom does poof into the abyss a second time.
The GOP is interested in lowering taxes, funding the military, and pretending to shrink the government. It’s tough to get them fired up about anything else. You do your duty of showing up to vote. Then you lose with dignity. That’s how they win in their minds. The dignity part means more to them than controlling the government. The GOP practically invented virtue signaling. They don’t understand fighting. That’s one of many reasons they hate Trump.
Since the Left is so concerned about gun safety with kids. The next legislative session they can come back and write laws instituting, mandatory weapons training and education in the public schools. To include use of Firearm long guns and handguns at the high school level. And they can use BB guns and air rifles for the younger grade levels.
And all the guns should be equipped with suppressors. After all we’re very concerned about the hearing of young developing children.
The ONLY permit “We the People” need to legally possess firearms is the second amendment to the constitution of the United States of America,unless omitted by a court of law. Lefttards HATE the Constitution of the United States of America, unless it suits them and their situation. It is time to lock up all of the repeat firearm offenders, instead of turning them loose to re-offend. Criminals won’t use a firearm in a crime if they know armed citizens will return fire. An armed society is a polite society.
Comments are closed.