These comments have nothing to do with training for the permit I don't want to open that argument...
What I am referring to is getting training so you can offer some proof in court that you know how to handle a firearm, know the laws, know self defense issues and show yourself as a responsible carrying citizen.
Many have argued for no-training to obtain a permit. That's fine. But, that should not be ones approach to carrying and to defending yourself in court.
I have provided expert testimony in hundreds of cases (not firearms related). One has to prove himself as an expert; someone who should be seen capable to provide information to the court. You are not presumed competent just because you think you know something, or have a license.
In a similar manner, we should be thinking how we want to represent ourselves to the court/jury if we have to sway them on the point that we really did now what we were doing when we pulled that trigger.
I would recommend people consider getting a documented basic pistol class and an advanced class, and private lessons if you can.
I would also like to see some lawyers offer classes covering the law, self defense, justification, lethal force, harming of innocents, how to conduct yourself when you are arrested after a shooting, etc.
I hear folks talk about have been around guns all their lives, or having military training. These do not prepare us to deal with legal consequences of a shooting incident.
So, this bill provides a minimum of requirement for the license. But, one should not be thinking of the "minimum" when considering training for a shooting incident or the aftermath of it.
What I am referring to is getting training so you can offer some proof in court that you know how to handle a firearm, know the laws, know self defense issues and show yourself as a responsible carrying citizen.
Many have argued for no-training to obtain a permit. That's fine. But, that should not be ones approach to carrying and to defending yourself in court.
I have provided expert testimony in hundreds of cases (not firearms related). One has to prove himself as an expert; someone who should be seen capable to provide information to the court. You are not presumed competent just because you think you know something, or have a license.
In a similar manner, we should be thinking how we want to represent ourselves to the court/jury if we have to sway them on the point that we really did now what we were doing when we pulled that trigger.
I would recommend people consider getting a documented basic pistol class and an advanced class, and private lessons if you can.
I would also like to see some lawyers offer classes covering the law, self defense, justification, lethal force, harming of innocents, how to conduct yourself when you are arrested after a shooting, etc.
I hear folks talk about have been around guns all their lives, or having military training. These do not prepare us to deal with legal consequences of a shooting incident.
So, this bill provides a minimum of requirement for the license. But, one should not be thinking of the "minimum" when considering training for a shooting incident or the aftermath of it.