Where are my Gun Owners?

[Kaizer]

Maybe that judge has a mac11 velcroed to the underside of his desk.

[mac5155]

or a mac5155

[tifosi77]

There.

What you did.......... I see it.

[DelPen]

I'm curious to see what the 16 hours of training in IL entails. I'm an instructor for several NRA disciplines and CWP in SC. Each NRA class runs at least 8 hours and for SC we need to also have at least 8 total as well. 8 hours isn't nearly enough time to get in everything new shooters should need and want to know before carrying a gun in public.

[tifosi77]

That's pretty much how I feel about it. The minimum level of training you need for CCW is absurdly low, and in no cases (that I'm aware of) does that training ever entail the supervised carrying of the weapon in public. Honestly not sure how you could accomplish that bit, but it seems odd to me that concealed carry training never includes any practical real-world concealed carry. That's like a basic marksmanship class that only allows dry fire drills.

There's a big school out in the high desert north of L.A. called International Tactical Training Seminars, run by a 20-year LAPD SWAT guy. I'd love to give them my money, but their CCW class - here in super libby CA - is 10 hours. That's not even worth the drive out of the city. (Altho it is interesting that they require you to bring 500 rounds of factory ammo, while their basic Handgun I class only requires you to bring 150-250 rounds.)

[DelPen]

We are required to cover the basics like maintenace, operation and handling, go over the SC laws and then do a ridiculously easy shooting test which unless you are using a gun that's simply too big for you, like a first time shooter using her husbands 44 magnum revolver, everyone passes. But it's about safety, not proficenecy.

I teach a protection inside and outside the home class which does do the real world situations, taking both of those along with the basic pistol puts you at around 30-36 hours of training.

[dodint]

Our instructor made us leave our weapons in the car and we did the tess with Ruger .22s. We all passed.

[tifosi77]

I teach a protection inside and outside the home class which does do the real world situations, taking both of those along with the basic pistol puts you at around 30-36 hours of training.

See, I think that should be the minimum for CCW, and I think it makes sense as a baseline level just for ownership as well. I'm not necessarily saying that a full week's worth of instruction should be mandatory for gun owners, but I personally wouldn't feel comfortable not doing that of my own volition. But for CCW, yeah, it should be required.

It's an incredible responsibility, owning a gun, even if it only ever leaves your nightstand or safe for range time. Never mind if you wear it on your hip when you go to the mall. I've said in other discussions that while I'm happy to go to the range and rent pistols to kill paper for half an hour on my lunch break, the mere fact that I can do this with only a drivers license is somewhat alarming. I've seen such knuckleheadedry at the local indoor range.... I'm surprised I haven't been hit in the face with a chunk of someone's thumb yet.

[ffemtreed]

I teach a protection inside and outside the home class which does do the real world situations, taking both of those along with the basic pistol puts you at around 30-36 hours of training.

See, I think that should be the minimum for CCW, and I think it makes sense as a baseline level just for ownership as well. I'm not necessarily saying that a full week's worth of instruction should be mandatory for gun owners, but I personally wouldn't feel comfortable not doing that of my own volition. But for CCW, yeah, it should be required.

It's an incredible responsibility, owning a gun, even if it only ever leaves your nightstand or safe for range time. Never mind if you wear it on your hip when you go to the mall. I've said in other discussions that while I'm happy to go to the range and rent pistols to kill paper for half an hour on my lunch break, the mere fact that I can do this with only a drivers license is somewhat alarming. I've seen such knuckleheadedry at the local indoor range.... I'm surprised I haven't been hit in the face with a chunk of someone's thumb yet.

So how much training and education should someone have before they are allowed to vote or exercise their right to free speech? While your idea may seem noble, your trying to create a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Gun accidents are extremely rare, esp considering how many guns there are out there. More training isn't really going to alleviate that, stupid is, as stupid does. I forget who did the study, but it was a major university that showed that police officers are more prone to negligent discharges than gun owners (as a percentage). Look at all the training police officers go through and qualification every year on the range. Even if you don't agree with the study, its still a fact that even with all the training police officers still do dumb things with their guns and have accidents. But when you put those low % numbers of guns that have accidents, is it worth it to infringe on an unalienable right? Now how are you going to pay for all this oversight and legislation?

If you want to do something about saving children's lives start with the things that are most likely to kill or injure a child (hint, firearms are way down on the list). Maybe we need to start with swimming pools in the backyards, why does anyone need to go swimming in a pool without a certified lifeguard on duty? If we get rid of all those backyard pools, we can save lives.......Is having those pool worth just one kids life? Yes I am being sarcastic in case you couldn't tell over the internets.

I have an idea, a mandatory class in H.S. that teaches everyone basic gun safety and marksmanship skills? and making the Eddie eagle program mandatory for all elementary students each year. (that was not sarcastic)

[tifosi77]

I forget who did the study, but it was a major university that showed that police officers are more prone to negligent discharges than gun owners (as a percentage). Look at all the training police officers go through and qualification every year on the range. Even if you don't agree with the study, its still a fact that even with all the training police officers still do dumb things with their guns and have accidents.

This is where the 2A crowd consistently loses me as a supporter, the notion that any regulation is an infringement.

My father-in-law imparted some wise words the first time we went to the range, and it's something I've read in many publications on the topic; the more familiar you are with guns, the more you handle them, the more dangerous you become. Bad habits creep in as familiarity with the weapon makes it boring. How many YouTube videos are there of police officers shooting themselves in the leg during firearms safety classes in front of schoolchildren?

This isn't a case of wanting to impinge anyone's rights, or an attempt to address a perceived problem about an imperiled populace. Look at my posting history and how I have consistently decried the gun control measures in NY, IL, my home state of CA, etc as useless knee-jerk namby pambyism. And while I'm generally reluctant to charge down the slippery slope of legislating how Constitutional rights may be exercised, this also is not in any way shape or form analogous to the exercise of voting rights. The issue of training and education necessary to vote has been dealt with: you cannot vote in this country unless you are 18 years of age, by which time you've had about 11-12 years of training schooling under your belt. Are there exceptions to that? Of course. But that's generally the run of play.

If I carry a gun in public, that's a different kettle of fish. And I think it's wise that there be a covenant with the public that the people that are permitted to do so aren't jumpy nitwits with the stress decision making capabilities of a panicked mongoose. Laws passed by incompetents elected by an ignorant body politic can be repealed. The incompetent legislators can be voted out of office. (They never are, but they can be) Bullets cannot be recalled from the gun once loosed. I'd like to know the person making the decision to break has had a at least some opportunity to do so in a controlled environment.

[mac5155]

So I was cleaning my hunting rifle today and can't figure out what I did wrong but the action is so stiff now. When I pull the trigger it takes even more force to lift the bolt up. Any ideas?

[ffemtreed]

I forget who did the study, but it was a major university that showed that police officers are more prone to negligent discharges than gun owners (as a percentage). Look at all the training police officers go through and qualification every year on the range. Even if you don't agree with the study, its still a fact that even with all the training police officers still do dumb things with their guns and have accidents.

This is where the 2A crowd consistently loses me as a supporter, the notion that any regulation is an infringement.

My father-in-law imparted some wise words the first time we went to the range, and it's something I've read in many publications on the topic; the more familiar you are with guns, the more you handle them, the more dangerous you become. Bad habits creep in as familiarity with the weapon makes it boring. How many YouTube videos are there of police officers shooting themselves in the leg during firearms safety classes in front of schoolchildren?

This isn't a case of wanting to impinge anyone's rights, or an attempt to address a perceived problem about an imperiled populace. Look at my posting history and how I have consistently decried the gun control measures in NY, IL, my home state of CA, etc as useless knee-jerk namby pambyism. And while I'm generally reluctant to charge down the slippery slope of legislating how Constitutional rights may be exercised, this also is not in any way shape or form analogous to the exercise of voting rights. The issue of training and education necessary to vote has been dealt with: you cannot vote in this country unless you are 18 years of age, by which time you've had about 11-12 years of training schooling under your belt. Are there exceptions to that? Of course. But that's generally the run of play.

If I carry a gun in public, that's a different kettle of fish. And I think it's wise that there be a covenant with the public that the people that are permitted to do so aren't jumpy nitwits with the stress decision making capabilities of a panicked mongoose. Laws passed by incompetents elected by an ignorant body politic can be repealed. The incompetent legislators can be voted out of office. (They never are, but they can be) Bullets cannot be recalled from the gun once loosed. I'd like to know the person making the decision to break has had a at least some opportunity to do so in a controlled environment.

In this day and age any regulation does eventually turn into infringement. Its all part of the playbook of the anti gun utopian society. Get a what seems like reasonable regulation passed and then take it to the max once its passed. Think about the training you want passed, first its an 8 hour class one time, two years later its a 16 hour class (and double the cost), then after that its renewal every three years and triple the cost. I have lived in some very anti states (MD) and seen how these laws get tighter and tighter every year, but solve zero problems. Look at the magazine restriction rules, in MD it started at 20 now its less than 10, in NY it was 20 then 10 and now 7. They just keep eroding away what is there hoping enough people will just say its not worth the hassle anymore. To buy a handgun In MD it started with an instant federal background check and free 45 min safety video, then the state stepped in and said we want to do a more thorough check so you had to wait 7 days for the state to do the check, now you got to take a class, get fingerprinted and photographed and wait 30 days and the price for all this???? (125 for the HQL course, 40 bucks for the fingerprinting, 10 bucks for the photograph). There are some handguns out there that doesn't even cost that much to buy. How much do you want to bet within the next couple of years they make you renew your HQL course?)

You also missed my main point about the training requirements as well. IF there was a problem that could be solved by training requirements, I would be all for it. BUT again look at the statistics of the number of citizens who carry guns every single day in all places, accidents are almost statistically insignificant (.0024%) last time I looked. Also the jumpy nitwits scenario you pointed out doesn't exist as a real problem either, how often do you hear of a legally carrying CCW (or open) accidentally shooting someone who isn't their intended target? And if you think some 8 or 16 hour course is going to help overcome a stress factor in shooting, you are sadly mistaken.

Until there is a defined problem, coming up with training rules and other restrictions are just feel good laws that do very little to solve real problems.

[ffemtreed]

So I was cleaning my hunting rifle today and can't figure out what I did wrong but the action is so stiff now. When I pull the trigger it takes even more force to lift the bolt up. Any ideas?

What kind of rifle and what did you do to clean it? Full disassemble or just remove and clean the bolt and swab the barrel?

[mac5155]

So I was cleaning my hunting rifle today and can't figure out what I did wrong but the action is so stiff now. When I pull the trigger it takes even more force to lift the bolt up. Any ideas?

What kind of rifle and what did you do to clean it? Full disassemble or just remove and clean the bolt and swab the barrel?

Savage 110 .308

Just removed the bolt and swabbed the barrel.

[tifosi77]

And if you think some 8 or 16 hour course is going to help overcome a stress factor in shooting, you are sadly mistaken.

I don't mean this as a direct equivalency, so please understand I offer these examples up as nothing more than that; examples.

In the 60s and 70s, the Navy and Air Force were getting punked over the skies of Vietnam. The Navy went to the woodshed and came up with TOPGUN, while the AF waited until after the war to come up with Red Flag. Part of the reason those programs programs exit is to introduce fighter pilots to an environment where adrenaline-fueled decision making can be refined. This is particularly true with Red Flag; the AF learned that a pilot's chances of surviving a full 100-mission combat tour skyrocketed once they got past their first ten missions, so Red Flag was set up to replicate (as close as is practical in a peacetime training environment) the confusion and stresses of those first ten missions. The idea being that the pilots can get their mistake making out of the way when there are no bullets or missiles flying back up at them. TOPGUN is more about refining skill sets and creating a 'PhD' program for fighter pilots.

I frankly don't have a problem with making the 30-36 hours DelPen talks about in the classes he teaches the baseline minimum for obtaining a CCW. Again, I'm not looking to solve any problems (with gun owners), nor do I dispute your statistics about CCW incidents; I've cited them myself when talking about how rare it is when legal gun owners use their legally purchased and owned firearms in crimes to illustrate the folly of most gun control legislation. Part of the idea behind what I propose is to help remove the perception that gun owners in this country are irresponsible, stupid hillbillies. Is there a slippery slope danger to that? Of course. But I think by and large the general position that most non-gun owners take with regard to gun owners (or at least gun culture) is that they are reckless, wanton in their attitudes and broadly dismissive of concepts like safety and prudence. That's how you get to the idea that gun control can prevent gun crime in the first place. (Never understood this; more laws to prevent law breakers from breaking the law..... *headsmack*) Seeing mouth-breathers like Ted Nugent on TV out in the hill country shooting hundreds of rounds of full auto into various fruits and vegetables and soda bottles full of red Kool Aid while shouting "'Murica!!" only reinforces this stereotype.

I'm not at all unsympathetic to the concerns, but, again, this is where I feel the 2A crowd is often its own worst enemy. Molon Labe, indeed.

[ffemtreed]

I frankly don't have a problem with making the 30-36 hours DelPen talks about in the classes he teaches the baseline minimum for obtaining a CCW.

The devil will be in the details of this training, who can teach it? where is it going to be offered? How frequent are the classes held? how much will it cost? How do you track it? Who provides the infrastructure to track this? How is it enforced? Who pays for the enforcement? How often do you need to take it/refresh? How do you keep politicians from abusing the training requirement?

I can think of a few states that would hold the training once a year in the state capital, charge 1000 dollars and make it an hour a night for 36 straight days, miss one session and you start over.

For me personally, 5 or six years ago this would have been infringing on my right. I worked two full time jobs to get by for about 5 years. Mon - Fri I worked an 8:00 to 5:00 job doing IT support and 7:00pm till Sunday 7:00am I worked on the ambulance/firetruck. There was really NO way I would have been able to take a 36 hour course without missing significant time from work. now couple that with the fact I was struggling financially and needed two jobs, would a 200 dollar training course really be feasible for me at that time?

I really think that once you come up with all the answers for those questions and put the time and effort into it that you could solve a lot of other real problems that exist before trying to tackle this. I sincerely think that firearm safety courses at elementary and High school levels would be a great start to set the correct attitude and actually teach something. I am sure you know that the NRA has a great course designed for young children (Eddie Eagle) that would be perfect for elementary students, but the politicians would never utilized the NRA and give them credible standing to be able to implement this course everywhere.

[ffemtreed]

So I was cleaning my hunting rifle today and can't figure out what I did wrong but the action is so stiff now. When I pull the trigger it takes even more force to lift the bolt up. Any ideas?

What kind of rifle and what did you do to clean it? Full disassemble or just remove and clean the bolt and swab the barrel?

Savage 110 .308

Just removed the bolt and swabbed the barrel.

I would pull it apart again and make sure everything looks good, is lightly lubed and put back together correctly. I am not too familiar with that rifle to give you any specific advice.

[DelPen]

Rights and responsibilities. Unfortunately this country as a whole has deaprted from the idea of being responsible for anything. I had my CWP for over year before I started carrying publicly. Everyone who carries any weapon should be well trained but it's my right to defend myself and the 2A bars the government from infringing on that right.

[Shyster]

So I was cleaning my hunting rifle today and can't figure out what I did wrong but the action is so stiff now. When I pull the trigger it takes even more force to lift the bolt up. Any ideas?

According to Google, Savage rifles cock the striker/firing pin from the force you use to pull the bolt handle up when you open the bolt (some guns like Mausers are the opposite and cock on closing the bolt). If it’s suddenly become harder to pull up the bolt handle, and especially after dry firing, then my guess is that something is interfering with the movement of the firing pin inside the bolt. There could be some corrosion or crud in there, or maybe something broke. I’d look for instructions or a YouTube video on how to disassemble the bolt, and then open it up and see if anything is broken or gunked up.

[mac5155]

I watched a video today and it does seem that might be the case. I'm going to fully disassemble the bolt and clean it.

[Shyster]

I frankly don't have a problem with making the 30-36 hours DelPen talks about in the classes he teaches the baseline minimum for obtaining a CCW.

The devil will be in the details of this training, who can teach it? where is it going to be offered? How frequent are the classes held? how much will it cost? How do you track it? Who provides the infrastructure to track this? How is it enforced? Who pays for the enforcement? How often do you need to take it/refresh? How do you keep politicians from abusing the training requirement?

I couldn’t have stated my views it better than ffemtreed did here. Is training a good idea for people who want CCW permits? Absolutely! The more the better. But that requirement also opens up a great opportunity for government to impair and harass those who want to get those permits. I simply do not trust the government to set training requirements that are reasonable and not intended to screw over gun owners.

Take the City of Chicago, for example. At first the City simply banned guns. They were sued and lost at the United States Supreme Court. So the City passed ordinances that required prospective gun owners to get at least five hours of training—including one hour of live-fire training at a shooting range—but the same ordinance outlawed “shooting galleries, firearm ranges or any other place where firearms are discharged.” They were sued and lost, with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals holding that the City could not simultaneously mandate and prohibit training. Judge Rovner noted in her concurrence that “The ordinance admittedly was designed to make gun ownership as difficult as possible.” It was no secret what those ordinances were really designed to do: make gun ownership as difficult as possible.

So the City also decided to ban the private sale or transfer of guns and also ban gun stores. You couldn’t buy a gun from a store, and you couldn’t buy a gun from anywhere other than a store, which together means you couldn’t buy a gun anywhere. Once again, the City was sued and lost. In his opinion, Judge Chang (an Obama appointee) quoted a number of passages from the City’s brief in the case. Among others, the City argued that it had to ban gun store because they are part of “a chronically-diseased [federal] regime that is fundamentally broken,” represented “caches just waiting to be raided,” and that gun stores “are dangerous in themselves and cannot be safely regulated.” To the City of Chicago, there is no such thing as a lawful gun shop.

Taken all of that history, would you trust the politicians running the City of Chicago to set CCW training requirements that would not have the explicit purpose of making it impossible (or nearly so) to ever get a CCW? That is why I oppose training requirements for gun ownership.

[tifosi77]

I am going to say something here that will probably come as a massive surprise to some, but....... I'm inclined to let the NRA make the regulations. (I mean, they kinda do anyway) Take the clutch of classes that DelPen teaches, or similar classes. Call it Basic Handgun I, Defensive Shooting I & II (in-home and outside) and a CCW class. I'm guessing that's perhaps 40 hours of instruction and practical experience.

Now, for an exercise, I'd like to hear the shooting reasons for not having this level of instruction for CCW. I'm all-too familiar with the Constitutional-based rationales for not mandating it.... let's hear the practical ones for not doing this.

Also, we're not really talking much real-world possibility here. I'm merely saying what I think should be the way of things. I know that level of qualification is a pipedream.

[yubb]

Constitutional rationales trump any "real-world" rationales.

That said, the shift in our country has moved away from personal responsibility. Instead of people growing up responsible we now point the finger at someone else when something goes wrong. Gone are they days of "that was my fault." Now it's always someone else's fault.

A training course requirement is a band-aid for an overall bigger problem. Since the onus has shifted off of the individual (legally and socially) we then default to more rules and regulations to spell out exactly what is legal and illegal, moral and immoral.

While it's not a practical rationale for not implementing mandatory training courses for CCW, it's an idealistic one: to fix the bigger problem we need not band-aid every issue we come against, but step back as a whole and put responsibility back on the individual.

[ffemtreed]

I am going to say something here that will probably come as a massive surprise to some, but....... I'm inclined to let the NRA make the regulations. (I mean, they kinda do anyway) Take the clutch of classes that DelPen teaches, or similar classes. Call it Basic Handgun I, Defensive Shooting I & II (in-home and outside) and a CCW class. I'm guessing that's perhaps 40 hours of instruction and practical experience.

Now, for an exercise, I'd like to hear the shooting reasons for not having this level of instruction for CCW. I'm all-too familiar with the Constitutional-based rationales for not mandating it.... let's hear the practical ones for not doing this.

Also, we're not really talking much real-world possibility here. I'm merely saying what I think should be the way of things. I know that level of qualification is a pipedream.

Its simple to me, unless you can show that training would significantly reduce gun accidents that are now extremely rare, why burden the people with having to do this? Training should be a personal responsibility. How about instead of a training you have to qualify in a shoot house under stress? Not everyone needs a 40 hour course to be proficient.

Think about the people who need firearms the most, elderly. Think about a 80 y/o in a wheelchair with bad arthritis. does he/she need to attend a 40 hour course and fire hundreds of rounds for the live fire exercise? NO he just needs a revolver that he can fire 1 to 2 times at a target less than 5 yards away. That 40 hour course would be a huge burden on him both in physicality and financially.

[tifosi77]

Is that really who is carrying?

And, honestly, I don't think citing a wheelchair-bound old person with arthritis is a very compelling argument. (Altho I'm sure the wheelie-bound octogenarian would disagree) In fact, I'd say rather the opposite; it's akin to how drivers licenses are handled in that the elderly should maybe have a higher level of scrutiny. (Before I commit to that position I would prefer seeing the statistics on the number of accidental shootings involving an elderly shooter, as my opinion at this stage is well and truly biased based on personal experience of having lived with elderly partly handicapped people.)

As regards the safety aspect, the data that I have seen (from CDC) were that there are usually around ~105,000 total shooting incidents every year in the U.S., roughly split 30-70 - between fatal and non-fatal. And about 15% of that total are accidental shootings, so ~15,000 per year. Very few of these are hunting accidents (fewer than 100 nationwide), and only 500-600 usually result in death. But that's still a 15% error rate in the employment of deadly force, be it accidental discharge, deliberate use against a mis-identified target, or some other friendly fire. That seems high.