ProShooter wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:
ProShooter wrote:
Do people really still consider this a good idea? I know we've discussed this before.
....snip
Yes and discussed before that a Hunter Safety course and DD214 qualify too. That's the way laws and rules are written.
I understand your personal feelings but point out that OC requires no training, only
the exercise of a right. So our legislators have chosen to make a distinction between OC and CC, we do not have to further that divide.
Am I opposed to training, minimal and advanced? Very much to the contrary. I'm still learning - never enough for me.......personally.
Never had to take a minimum required course to exercise the 1st Amendment either.
Yata hey
The issue for me is not that the law requires a training course. It is what it is and if we want to change that, we know the legal path in which to take.
My issue is that a one hour online course is a weak substitute for a training course.
I disagree with you. A one-hour online course is completely different from a firearms shooting training course, and each serves a separate and distinct purpose.
While it is preferable that anyone who carries a firearm have
some training in the safe and accurate shooting of the weapon, there is
NO law currently on the books that mandates that they must, ought to, should, better have taken such a course before they either carry or shoot the firearm.
And as far as I am concerned, there
NEVER ought to be suh a law, and
NOBODY ought to act in any way to encourage the General Assembly to think about imposing such a requirement.
A person who does not seek out and obtain training in the manual of arms for their firearm must accept all liability for any harm they cause through misuse, just as they must accept liability for any violation of law they commit. Strangely, the same holds true for someone who has extensive training in both the manual of arms for their firearm and legal/moral training regarding the use of said firearm.
stay safe.
skidmark