Well said 74novaman.74novaman wrote:Yes, this is why Arizona, Alaska, Vermont and Montana are awash in blood, chaos in the streets and rampant negligent discharges from people who don't know what they're doing.gdanaher wrote:In practice, a system in which no permit is required, i.e., no training required, no demonstration of a minimal competency, is unacceptable. Even to get a driver's license you must prove to someone that you are capable of driving and abiding the laws. I would be very uncomfortable if I knew that anyone could go to the emporium, purchase a handgun, and never fire it but merely load and carry. Training and some experience with the weapon is mandatory if for no other reason than to protect the person carrying from placing themselves in a situation where they might spend time in criminal or civil court. Now, the state of Texas sees the CHL as a cash cow. It need not be. The fees we pay for the license should cover the actual costs and nothing more, and the license should signify to the LEOs that we have been previously vetted. Yes, the BG doesn't care about a permit because he doesn't care who the bullet hits. The CHL must pause at times, look beyond the target, and consider the consequences. Minimal training would aid that goal.
Search found 1 match
Return to “12 States Considering Permitless Carry Laws”
- Thu Mar 08, 2012 6:30 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: 12 States Considering Permitless Carry Laws
- Replies: 33
- Views: 4594