Are mandatory training classes for OC overkill?

[eye95]

I wouldn't jest about a matter so grave as an untrained gun owner in harm's way using a firearm in defense of himself. Self defense is a basic human right. However, rights come with responsibilities and repercussions.

Civil liability should be attached if someone with no knowledge of firearms and tactics opens fire and ends up hitting a bystander. Your right to self defense ends at another person's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The totality of the circumstance should be weighed; we are in agreement here.

Training is an invaluable tool when it comes to firearms. Knowing some basic tactical training such as situational awareness, shooting in a stressful situation, knowing what lies behind the target, etc comes through training and experience.

Taking someone's life is the ultimate seizure under the 4th amendment. I have denied no one's right to self defense (castle doctrine, stand your ground, or make my day laws included). I am championing the innocent's bystander's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

So, any knowledge would relieve the shooter of civil responsibility for errant rounds? I am sure that is not what you meant. In that case, how much training is necessary before one is shielded from civil liability? Who makes that call?

Someone picks up a golf club to ward off a knife attack. He successfully wields the club to stop the attacker. In the process, on one of his back swings, he strikes someone else, injuring him. Should he be held civilly liable because he had not been trained in the use of golf clubs for self-defense? If he had taken a class, would he be absolved?

Once we are in a violent situation, we have the right to defend ourselves with the means at hand, whether we have been trained or not. As long as we act in good faith, any innocent casualties are the responsibility of the person who initiated the violence, necessitating the defensive response.

 

[Brass Magnet]

Palerider,
What if the person had a ton of training but just made a mistake? It happens every day even by the most trained. The proper way to deal with the outcome is already in place; due process of law. Opening up civil liabilities for those acting within the law could make anyone who defends their life lawfully lose everything they have. If, through due process, one is found negligent; training or no, the penalties should be the same. So once again, training or no training, it doesn't make a difference.

 

[Jon Bonavia]

Thank you for bringing this most salient of questions to the top of the consciousness here on Open Carry Dot Org.

No, mandatory training classes are NOT overkill, and neither is a mandatory permitting for carry unreasonable as various courts have held on many occasions. Consider the balance between responsible and irresponsible comments and rhetoric here as being similar to the responsibility of armed civilians.

I know that there are many that believe as I do, many here in Wisconsin and many in national gun control organizations. Thank you for raising the issue.

 

[eye95]

Thank you for bringing this most salient of questions to the top of the consciousness here on Open Carry Dot Org.

No, mandatory training classes are NOT overkill, and neither is a mandatory permitting for carry unreasonable as various courts have held on many occasions. Consider the balance between responsible and irresponsible comments and rhetoric here as being similar to the responsibility of armed civilians.

I know that there are many that believe as I do, many here in Wisconsin and many in national gun control organizations. Thank you for raising the issue.

So, I take it that you do not advocate open carry, that you are here to argue the point with us?

 

[SouthernBoy]

Thank you for bringing this most salient of questions to the top of the consciousness here on Open Carry Dot Org.

No, mandatory training classes are NOT overkill, and neither is a mandatory permitting for carry unreasonable as various courts have held on many occasions. Consider the balance between responsible and irresponsible comments and rhetoric here as being similar to the responsibility of armed civilians.

I know that there are many that believe as I do, many here in Wisconsin and many in national gun control organizations. Thank you for raising the issue.

Permit requirements for any sort of carry in most states is unconstitutional I suspect. I know it is in my state. The unfortunate thing is that over a number of generations, this most basic of freedoms has been diluted and in some cases, lost to the whims and controls of dictatorial employees of We the People. One only has to do a quick search to prove what I stated in my first sentence. So what does this mean? How do we confront this blatant disregard and outright illegal attempts to punish those who would have the audacity to exercise their God-given and protected rights? What must we do?

Nothing. Do we license or permit individual freedom of speech, or religion, or maybe some other protected and recognized fundamental right? Yes we do. And that is also unfortunate. Which is a sad statement upon the generations of Americans who have allowed this travesty to fester and grow. Generations of which we ourselves are a part.

Liberties lost are rarely regained. And those who would gladly rush into that abyss never deserved liberty at all as they are perfectly willing to see its demise.

 

[Brass Magnet]

Thank you for bringing this most salient of questions to the top of the consciousness here on Open Carry Dot Org.

No, mandatory training classes are NOT overkill, and neither is a mandatory permitting for carry unreasonable as various courts have held on many occasions. Consider the balance between responsible and irresponsible comments and rhetoric here as being similar to the responsibility of armed civilians.

I know that there are many that believe as I do, many here in Wisconsin and many in national gun control organizations. Thank you for raising the issue.

Many in wisconsin? I'm actually going out today while OC to deliver constitutional carry legislative initiative flyers. I've never taken any such mandatory training and I can legally carry. 1,000's of people open carry in Wisconsin every day and many of them have never taken mandatory classes, those that have were for CC permits for other states.

You are going to have to back up your opinion with some proof if you'd like it to be taken seriously around here. For instance; forgetting for a minute that it is an enumerated constitutional right, what proof is there that mandatory training even helps? Don't use the police as an example, they accidentally kill people all the time.....well, mostly accidentally.

 

[eye95]

Many in wisconsin? I'm actually going out today while OC to deliver constitutional carry legislative initiative flyers. I've never taken any such mandatory training and I can legally carry. 1,000's of people open carry in Wisconsin every day and many of them have never taken mandatory classes, those that have were for CC permits for other states.

You are going to have to back up your opinion with some proof if you'd like it to be taken seriously around here. For instance; forgetting for a minute that it is an enumerated constitutional right, what proof is there that mandatory training even helps? Don't use the police as an example, they accidentally kill people all the time.....well, mostly accidentally.

I don't think he will. He is not a regular here and is probably unaware that we routinely back up what we say. He is likely an anti who is smarter than we are, having come here to enlighten us. I have read all of his posts. Not only has he not said anything advocating OC or indicating that he ever OCs, all of his posts seem to reflect disdain for the love of Liberty that is fundamental to most of our desire to OC.

His behavior is only marginally above trolling, and he probably will not participate in a rational back-and-forth.

 

[wrightme]

Thank you for bringing this most salient of questions to the top of the consciousness here on Open Carry Dot Org.

No, mandatory training classes are NOT overkill, and neither is a mandatory permitting for carry unreasonable as various courts have held on many occasions. Consider the balance between responsible and irresponsible comments and rhetoric here as being similar to the responsibility of armed civilians.

I know that there are many that believe as I do, many here in Wisconsin and many in national gun control organizations. Thank you for raising the issue.

Wow.

 

[goforlow]

WAVE Executive Director Jeri Bonavia = Jon Bonavia

Please Mr/Mrs Bonavia - take your anti civil rights garbage and leave this site. No one wants you here.

***** to all those on OCDO, I recommend you remove anything you posted in a thread with "Jon Bonavia". This poster is WAVE, and they HATE US!! Anything you say or type WILL be used against us by WAVE!

 

[SouthernBoy]

WAVE Executive Director Jeri Bonavia = Jon Bonavia

Please Mr/Mrs Bonavia - take your anti civil rights garbage and leave this site. No one wants you here.

***** to all those on OCDO, I recommend you remove anything you posted in a thread with "Jon Bonavia". This poster is WAVE, and they HATE US!! Anything you say or type WILL be used against us by WAVE!

I just went on the WAVE of Wisconsin's website and saw a few things right away that caught my attention.

"A society that encourages its citizens to be armed is one that is choosing to shine a spotlight on the worst aspects of human nature - fear, distrust, hatred. That’s not the kind of society I want for myself, my family or my friends."

Gee, I wonder what they think of the Founders writings and their absolute determination to make sure Americans remain armed? I wonder how they view the Founders. Do you think they know better than the men who laid the cornerstone of this nation? And how on earth is wanting to be able to protect one's self equate to shining "a spotlight on the worst aspects of human nature"? How does that work?


"Tennessee is one of four states, along with Arizona, Georgia and Virginia, that recently enacted laws explicitly allowing loaded guns in bars."

Now this statement is blatantly false in regards to Virginia for several reasons. 1) We have always reserved our right to carry a loaded firearm into a.... oops, wait a minute. 2) Virginia has no bars. So this statement is a lie on two counts for Virginians. Do you think they made this error deliberately.... to further an agenda maybe?


Folks there can only be one reason why the anti-gun folks do what they do. They can cloak their message in all manner of sweet and good things, say "it's for the children", and imagine all will be well if we could only do as they wish. But the reality of the message is far more sinister than that. If we went along with registration, licensing, more strict controls, tighter restrictions of purchase and ownership, and bans on carrying outside of one's home and property, does anyone honestly believe that the evil elements of society will adhere to the same rules and crimes against person and property will decrease?

No, of course they won't. Quite the contrary, crimes will increase. And then the cycle will start anew. More restrictions, even tighter controls, bans, and criminal charges against good people. And crimes will increase even more. Eventually, confiscation will rear its head and that's when all hell will break out. The authorities will have more to contend with than criminals. They'll have the citizenry on their butts and they won't be holding flyswatters.

 

[Sonora Rebel]

'You want to take a combat firearms class.... ? Do it. 'Make it mandatory? Hell no. Bearing arms is a right. Of course it bears responsibility... and culpability. But self defense is an individual right that ecompasses all of that from the git-go. Nothing is 100%, nor should we expect it to be. Darwinism being what it is... that's to be expected too. People have bee carrying guns openly in several states for 100 years or more... including prior to statehood w/o much ado. This creeping nannnyism erodes free choice. It's intrusive and unnecessary.

 

[palerider116]

I am opposed to mandatory classes.

Rights come with responsibilities and repercussions. Every round fired has potential criminal and civil liabilities attached to it.

 

[Grapeshot]

Thank you for bringing this most salient of questions to the top of the consciousness here on Open Carry Dot Org.

No, mandatory training classes are NOT overkill, and neither is a mandatory permitting for carry unreasonable as various courts have held on many occasions. Consider the balance between responsible and irresponsible comments and rhetoric here as being similar to the responsibility of armed civilians.

I know that there are many that believe as I do, many here in Wisconsin and many in national gun control organizations. Thank you for raising the issue.

So, I take it that you do not advocate open carry, that you are here to argue the point with us?

Does this answer your question Eye?

About Jon Bonavia (see profile)

Biography: gun control activist

Interests: gun control


BTW - she and her's are losing big in Wisconsin as well as nationally.

 

[Citizen]

I am opposed to mandatory classes.

I agree.

However, I do not think the real issue has been squarely addressed: supporters of mandatory training have an unstated premise that government should have the power.

This is a false--and dangerous--premise. So much so that it should be squarely addressed as its own issue:

Government has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that it cannot be trusted with rights.

Thus, my opposition to mandatory training is actually opposition to conceding government the power to involve itself.

 

[Citizen]

SNIP May I respectfully point out, goforlow, that what you suggest is exactly what the Brady Campaign does on their websites?

+1

Besides, we can accomplish more by making meaningful accusations:


Anti-gunners, by working against decent folks being able to defend themselves, actively support rape, murder, and robbery.

New anti-gunners might not recognize this; but, Brady et al, can't possibly have been connected to this subject for any length of time without recognizing it. It is deliberate and calculated.

And, besides, it is howlingly, ROLFLMAO irrational. Police exist to protect. Do the anti-gunners really expect anyone to believe that a crime victim who wasn't worth allowing to protect themselves in the moment of the attack suddenly becomes worth more after the fact? Worth enough for criminal investigation and prosecution? Worth having a SWAT team ready to rescue a hostage? Worth...(just fill in the blank with a police or criminal justice system function)?

"Oh, police are only to generally deter, thereby protecting the next victim," one could say. Except, those "next victims" are, according to the anti-gunners, also sufficiently worthless to deny self-defense.

The bottom line is that anti-gunners necessarily consider no one worth enough to allow them to protect and defend themselves in the moment of attack. Yet, want government to have the power to defend these "worthless" people. And, presumably, themselves.

These anti-gunner ideas have the same contradictions that underly communism. Perhaps in some cases the same evil.

 

[Citizen]

I just went on the WAVE of Wisconsin's website and saw a few things right away that caught my attention.

"A society that encourages its citizens to be armed is one that is choosing to shine a spotlight on the worst aspects of human nature - fear, distrust, hatred. That’s not the kind of society I want for myself, my family or my friends.

Bwahahhahahahahahaaaa!!

She completely missed that freedom is a part of the decent, warm, wholesome aspects of our society.

I think she inadvertently confessed she really does want the nasty side of life.

 

[eye95]

Does this answer your question Eye?

About Jon Bonavia (see profile)

Biography: gun control activist

Interests: gun control


BTW - she and her's are losing big in Wisconsin as well as nationally.

Hmmm...I didn't see that when I first checked [his/her/its?] profile. Anyway, unless such a person is trying to provoke trouble, you'd think [he/she/it] would stick to rational advocacy of [his/her/its] position, listening to the opposing POV that the folks here would (we hope) post rationally. Instead [he/she/it] drives by a wide variety of threads, taking pot shots at posts, and not getting into any actual discussions and not responding to those who post to [him/her/it].

So far, the activity smells of troll. I hope I am wrong. Rational discussion with those who have opposing POVs is healthy and informative, but I see no evidence that such is [his/her/its] intent.

I think we have seen enough that this poster bears watching.

 

[Grapeshot]

Hmmm...I didn't see that when I first checked [his/her/its?] profile. Anyway, unless such a person is trying to provoke trouble, you'd think [he/she/it] would stick to rational advocacy of [his/her/its] position, listening to the opposing POV that the folks here would (we hope) post rationally. Instead [he/she/it] drives by a wide variety of threads, taking pot shots at posts, and not getting into any actual discussions and not responding to those who post to [him/her/it].

So far, the activity smells of troll. I hope I am wrong. Rational discussion with those who have opposing POVs is healthy and informative, but I see no evidence that such is [his/her/its] intent.

I think we have seen enough that this poster bears watching.

Suspect that the primary and secondary radar/sonar screens are locked on.

BTW - I like the rhythm of your nominative, 2nd person, singular pronouns. :lol:

 

[palerider116]

Legislation is always a slippery slope. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Freedom and liberty is always in the state of maintenance. You can't live in a country with zero laws, but laws should serve the citizens, not the other way around.

Mandatory training is a slippery slope. Do I think its responsible to head out with a firearm strapped to your hip with no legal knowledge and zero firearm training? No. Can you legislate responsibility though? NO.

Carrying a firearm is a right and a weighty responsibility.

 

[Kloutier]

A friend and I took our CC classes today and After words he wanted more info I think he would love more classes. He has never really done much with weapons before and this is a new experience. People who have been doing this for a while perhaps feel that its an insult however please think about the noobs. Allow them to have extra training if they feel they need it.

Mandatory No.