Email to LTC Instructors

[majormadmax]

When one person's rights affect another, then there has to be limitations. This is the reason businesses can post 30.06/30.07 signs...

 

[45tex]

When one person's rights affect another, then there has to be limitations. This is the reason businesses can post 30.06/30.07 signs...

And it's the reason those persons should be responsible for the safety of those persons having to give up rights to shop in their store.
Heavygunner8 seems to me to be a Camel. He's got his nose in a snit and cramed under the tent. Sometimes I think LTC holders want to be somebody special. Way back when, if a policeman was acting in this manner he was said to have a 'John Wayne' syndrome. Everybody got it, but the good ones go over themselves and grew into good officers. It was not more training that cured the guys, it was an attitude adjustment. The second amendment exists and Constitutional carry should be nationwide. Back in the 1980's it was said 80% of police fired rounds missed. Even though training taught us that then and now that we must be responsible for every bullet and where it ended up. Making everyone very aware of that is sobering training.

 

[majormadmax]

And it's the reason those persons should be responsible for the safety of those persons having to give up rights to shop in their store.
Heavygunner8 seems to me to be a Camel. He's got his nose in a snit and cramed under the tent. Sometimes I think LTC holders want to be somebody special. Way back when, if a policeman was acting in this manner he was said to have a 'John Wayne' syndrome. Everybody got it, but the good ones go over themselves and grew into good officers. It was not more training that cured the guys, it was an attitude adjustment. The second amendment exists and Constitutional carry should be nationwide. Back in the 1980's it was said 80% of police fired rounds missed. Even though training taught us that then and now that we must be responsible for every bullet and where it ended up. Making everyone very aware of that is sobering training.

At what point did safety become a right? If anything, that logic contradicts the Benjamin Franklin quote fishingsetx posted.

And once again, it's hypocritical for so many to be demanding their rights when they are denying Heavygunner8 his...

 

[kotetu]

I suppose this is the wrong place to talk sense into some of y'all. Regardless, I know which side I'm standing on regarding this bill.

That's pretty condescending. The people you are replying to don't need sense to be talked into them. They are quite rational and have pointed out several times over that the concerns you have voiced have not materialized in any of the states where con-carry has already been implemented.

You are free to think what you like, and fear what you like, but the facts simply do not support your fears. The rational thing for you to do is revise your concerns in light of the data.

FWIW, I am sure ALL of us believe that anyone who carries should be well trained, and should absolutely know the law. You will not get either of those in spades in a simple 4 hour course, which will give you surface familiarity at best. (With apologies to the instructors here, I know you try your best.)

So again, I suggest you review the facts and adjust your concerns to match them, and further that you do your very best to get regular training in carrying, handling, shooting, and the laws that govern these. In other words, as Gandhi said, be the change you wish to see.

 

[locke_n_load]

The problem with licensing, is that is a government run instrument - one where they can make the requirements as difficult as they want, basically make it impossible to obtain. Ask all the people in California or Hawaii how their "right to bear arms" is going over there. Same thing could happen here, over time (and I mean in our lifetimes). Remove the license requirement and get back to our roots.

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem" - "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery" - Thomas Jefferson
Once you understand this quote, and I mean really understand it, then you will see why licensing a right is not conducive to freedom.

And I am also an LTC instructor, and I do not agree with the licensing requirement.

 

[kotetu]

If you've bothered to read this long thread, I've already refered to why there is a lack of statistics. The chance of something like defending yourself with a firearm is already low enough, then narrow that down to the states that have CC, and you dont have an adequate sample size anymore. Common sense dictates a person should at least know the state's gun laws and show a basic ability to operate a firearm before allowing him/her to carry one in public in proximity to other law abiding citizens.

Again, your facts are simply wrong.

Arizona has had con-carry for 7 years this April. Population: 6.83 million (2015)
Top 5 cities by population:
Phoenix 1,445,632
Tucson 520,116
Mesa 439,041
Chandler 236,123
Glendale 226,721
Scottsdale 217,385
Gilbert 208,453
Tempe 161,719
Peoria 154,065
Surprise 117,517

So the sample size for Arizona is about 7 million, half of which are in the top 10 cities. Rather than continuing to argue an incorrect point to an entire forum of people, go collect some data and adjust your thinking.

 

[Younggun]

At what point did safety become a right? If anything, that logic contradicts the Benjamin Franklin quote fishingsetx posted.

And once again, it's hypocritical for so many to be demanding their rights when they are denying Heavygunner8 his...

How have HG8s rights been denied?


Serious question, maybe a missed a post somewhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Renegade]

Alright, I'm probably gonna get chewed out for this, but how is that email not accurate? I mean, do you really want random people to start carrying guns without at least having a basic knowledge of the laws regarding firearms and self defense? Or have a passable ability to shoot accurately?

Tell us how you KNOW folks do not have a basic knowledge of the laws regardiing firearms?

 

[Kar98]

Tell us how you KNOW folks do not have a basic knowledge of the laws regardiing firearms?

Honestly, not arguing for or against CC/LTC here, but I hear so much crap as to what one can do or not do, it's amazing. And come to think of it, I myself was actually unaware you're not allowed to bring a gun into a post office until I stumbled across it in a flyer. Particularly the section on when it is and when it isn't legal to shoot of the LTC class was very informative. Also, there are many google reviews on the place where I took the class, many said they didn't learn anything new, and even just the videos we were watching while the instructor took another relay to the range, I actually learned a lot, and I'm by no means new to shooting.

 

[majormadmax]

How have HG8s rights been denied?

Serious question, maybe a missed a post somewhere.

He has a right to his opinion, protected by the First Amendment, and he shouldn't be criticized for having one nor should others try to suppress it!

 

[Vaquero]

Tell us how you KNOW folks do not have a basic knowledge of the laws regardiing firearms?

No kidding!
Anyone who has been on this forum for a little while and has bothered to read a few "LTC" threads has more than a "basic" understanding of weapon carry laws.
Besides that, Google can guide you to the answers.

Most of us don't need teaching. We learn very well on our own, given the correct information.

 

[Jon Payne]

He has a right to his opinion, protected by the First Amendment, and he shouldn't be criticized for having one nor should others try to suppress it!

When you state your opinion on a forum it is open to responses. You know, other people's opinions. Technically this is a private forum and there's no more "free" speech here than in someone's home.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dawico]

He has a right to his opinion, protected by the First Amendment, and he shouldn't be criticized for having one nor should others try to suppress it!

It hurts me to see you fail so much in one post MMM.

 

[Hoji]

It hurts me to see you fail so much in one post MMM.

Snowflake alert!

 

[Dawico]

Snowflake alert!

Welcome to the list.

 

[Hoji]

Welcome to the list.

If I disappoint anyone here you are setting your your expectations too damned high.

 

[kotetu]

He has a right to his opinion, protected by the First Amendment, and he shouldn't be criticized for having one nor should others try to suppress it!

I can't tell if you're trolling, or just didn't read his first post in the thread. You know, the one where he ASKED three questions.

1. "how is that email not accurate?"
2. "do you really want random people to start carrying guns without at least having a basic knowledge of the laws regarding firearms and self defense?"
3. "Or have a passable ability to shoot accurately?"

Not to mention that his second and third questions are loaded - with all the condescending bullcrap typically found in anti-gun rags.

 

[majormadmax]

When you state your opinion on a forum it is open to responses. You know, other people's opinions. Technically this is a private forum and there's no more "free" speech here than in someone's home.

"Opinions" should be maturely stated with respect and without insult, which wasn't always the case in this thread.

And if someone disagrees with the masses, they are automatically wrong? Apparently so with this group.

Sad...

 

[majormadmax]

I can't tell if you're trolling, or just didn't read his first post in the thread. You know, the one where he ASKED three questions.

1. "how is that email not accurate?"
2. "do you really want random people to start carrying guns without at least having a basic knowledge of the laws regarding firearms and self defense?"
3. "Or have a passable ability to shoot accurately?"

Not to mention that his second and third questions are loaded - with all the condescending bullcrap typically found in anti-gun rags.

Thanks, I don't need help in reading comprehension or anyone to explain to me what he said. He simply disagreed with the consensus that Constitutional Carry without any training may not be the best alternative. I don't fully agree with that but I can see his point, unlike those who started to insult him because of it...

 

[kotetu]

My interpretation of the 2nd amendment is right to own guns, allowing any random, possibly unqualified person to carry one in public where my family and I might be isn't part of that. My opinions certainly are mine, and in this case, somebody else's different interpretation can put my and those around me's lives at risk. If it doesn't affect me, I don't give a rat's ass about it, but in case it certainly does.

Hopefully this will set your mind at ease - and I really mean that. I am not trying to be condescending at all.

Here we go. All of the millions and millions of concealed carriers out there do not affect you, except for the fear of God they put in the common criminal who is thinking twice, three times about whether or not to mug you, because he knows concealed carriers are out there.

You only perceive a risk to yourself - that's the crux of your entire argument, ok? Your perception. What several others have said, repeatedly, is that the facts, borne out by almost a decade of data across multiple states in both large and small cities, urban and rural, the facts do not support your perception. It's just a mental block you've put in front of yourself.