STATES DOING AWAY WITH THE NEED FOR CCW PERMIT

[SturmRugerSR9]

Indiana next to do away with gun licenses:



https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/540021-indiana-house-approves-bill-that-would-eliminate-license-to-carry

[SturmRugerSR9]

Next comes Georgia:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/02/25/georgia-house-weighing-legislation-to-end-concealed-permit-requirement/#

[Radnor]

Other than reporting what other states are doing, what are YOU doing for OUR state?  Writing any elected officials?  Phone calls?

[Clarence]

Called and wrote my senator and representative about the wait times and to make sure they fight like heck the left gun agenda in Delaware.  I put out signs for both in November. 

[Radnor]

THANK YOU!!!

I've donated time (literature drops and stuffing envelopes) AND money to campaigns that were NOT in my district.
Plus, you see the letters I've written and replies.
Also, met with my guys and officials NOT in my voting district!!! And trained them.
And trips to Dover to make my comments heard in committees.
Bill and I attended the sportsman caucus meeting.

Know OGG has met with his.

Too many of us are sitting ou our A@@es EXPECTING change.

[SturmRugerSR9]

Eighteen states have abolished their concealed carry permit requirement. Those states are: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Iowa is on the move:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/03/02/iowa-bill-to-abolish-concealed-permit-requirement-on-the-move/

And Tenn:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/03/03/bill-to-end-concealed-permit-requirement-on-move-in-tn-senate/

This could conceivably bring the number to 20 states.

[Clarence]

If you look at the local news items in these states it is hilarious to read the “sky is falling” scenarios of the opposition even though none of this has happened in the states that have abolished this requirement.   Sad to say some of the opposition comes from our side especially those involved in the CCW training industry.   Just look at Vermont.  Never had such a law.  About the most peaceful state in the union.

[Radnor]

As you know, I offer the CCDW training.  I've never took a position on it either way.

If you've seen some of the people that wanted it, you might change your mind.

Such as.....  Cannot hit the target at 7yds.  Don't know about you, but I don't want to get hit by their stray bullet.

And at AP, COF was 3 shots standing, move right. 3 kneeling, CRAW behind cover right and 3 while on your side.
While crawling, one individual swept himself.

[Clarence]

Oh I agree in the value of training.   I have been shooting and owning guns for over 50 years.  When I got my training in 2013, I learned a lot.  I thought I knew it all.  I was wrong.

Some states that require licenses do not require training. Most do.  But my philosophy is that you are responsible for yourself. Absolutely folks should get training. 

Another thing.   Gun dealers should ( but NOT mandated by law) give at least a rudimentary training session to anyone who is a novice gun owner.  Like what you have seen from trainees, I have witnessed at gun shops over the years, totally befuddled individuals being sold a gun with not the slightest idea how to use it.   I was so disturbed by this some years ago that I followed the couple out to their car and gave them a 10 minute instruction including the safety basics and how to load and unload.  I went back in the shop and told the guy behind the counter and he basically said he did not have time for that and it wasn’t his problem.

[Radnor]

Today,  gun shops can't offer the training. With the lines and demand. Prior to the current climate yes.

I've been doing some noob instruction. 

[Packing_Nine]

Gun dealers should (but NOT mandated by law) give at least a rudimentary training session to anyone who is a novice gun owner.

This sounds great in principle, but in practice I don't believe it works. If a business with a product to sell (any business, not just firearms) is in a position where they "should" provide some service to complement the product they sold, who says whether or not the provided service is sufficient and necessary? Who provides compensation to the vendor for this service? What if the customer refuses the service, or believes they are not in need of it? What if the customer accepts said service, but miserably fails to absorb the knowledge? Is the seller now somehow responsible for the customer's lack of competency? How long will it be before various parties, not satisfied with the due diligence ensured by the honor system, begin to insist that the "should" become a "must"? And then it turns into a mandate by law, and all the bureaucracy that follows?

Honestly, I believe that firearms safety & basic proficiency must be taught either in the home, or in the schools.

[Radnor]

Yeah. As I was reading your post, I was thinking liability...

I'm not sure where it's at Sandyhook law suit. I can see it making it to the SCOTUS. If it goes will car mfgs be next for drunk drivers?  I'd like money from whoever made my spoons. (They made me fat)

[Just Bill]

Agree, training should be required.  At least what can happen when they do pull the firearm.  You may think you're right, but you can still get locked up.

[SturmRugerSR9]

Also agree. Anybody that buys a gun should have to have completed at least a basic firearms course.
You don't jump out of a boat without some training or lessons in swimming. The results could be deadly.
Same as giving someone a gun with no training. It's called common sense.

[SturmRugerSR9]

Missouri  to pass bill allowing concealed carry on public busses, and Kansas looking to lower age to carry to 18.