I've drunk the kool-aid

[blume357]

I always used that term to put down someone who doesn't believe like I do.... now I think I'm going to have to use it on myself.

I've always been a staunch believer in the 2nd amendment with out restrictions... or at least most that we have now... I guess I could be convinced that a person convicted of 3 violent crimes might aught to own a gun.... but that is a separate discussion.

About a year or so ago someone, can't remember who, in some discussion about possibly handguns and carrying said: " If you are going to carry then you should be trained and you should be retrained often." For some reason that did not just go through one ear and out the other... but stuck in my head somewhere in the back and would come up on occasion. Then along comes the opportunity to take a 4 day defensive handgun class with some friends at front sight out in Nevada.... pretty big bucks but I had saved up just enough and so bit the bullet and went.... absolutely no regrets and it seems I was hooked because I said I would do it again this year. Well, I get invited to attend a business conference in New Hampshire and on top of that travel and lodging will be free and so of course I'm going... I've thinking about buying a Sig pistol and in my research see that not only does Sig manufacture pistols in New Hampshire... they have an Academy there with classes... so I look up the address... Holly cow! 4 miles from where I'm to be. Seems the only class available is one on Sunday.... "Active Shooter Response for the Concerned Citizen, Force on Force".... Once again I've found out ... you don't know what you didn't know until you know it. Totally top of the line... professional ... outstanding unbelievably real.... students are not supposed to divulge what goes on in the class (there is actually a good reason for this) but just let me say.. no paper targets... no paint guns... real guns and real people (bad guys and good guys) Totally safe.... The instructor is Todd Rassa and he is just top notch and his assistant Mickey is just as good.

So, my point is I'm now dedicated to training at least once a year and possibly more.... I firmly believe anyone who carries should.

 

[Pat-inCO]

 

[cyborgt800]

While I agree that everyone SHOULD seek and maintain training, the issue I have is that many will determine that people MUSTY do so. I don't want any conditions put on a RIGHT.

As much as I hate seeing all the grammatical errors and misspelling in posts I do not believe that everyone should have to have a Masters degree in writing to be allowed to do so.

It's a tricky slope...and the libs will jump on it if they can...anything to curtail gun rights.

 

[Don Lovel]

Two times a year minimum, I go to NRA Whittington Center, shoot rifles at distance and set up a handgun course to run with my 1911.
Last time I ran 1911 drill, was the best I have ever done. Felt so much more fluid and balanced, able to keep my gun reloaded and on target very smooth, did better than my past struggles with clearing a jam on the 1911 efficiently.
cleared targets off a rail 8 for 8 rapid fire at 15yds for the first time.

 

[Hellraiser]

edit...

 

[Bob Wright]

I'm opposed to placing conditions on gun ownership and/or carry.

Good example now is the proposition of possibly placing restrictions on ownership of "assault rifles." What is an assault rifle? Who defines that? Magazine capacity? Function? Suppose a "harmless" law is passed. Then that law can easily be amended in the future, possibly extending the restriction to a hunting rifle that is either a semi-automatic or has a magazine capacity that suddenly becomes excessive.

What most members of the congress/legal establishment seem to fail to grasp is that the laws should be directed to getting the offender out of the public realm. And keeping him out. Prisons should not be "schools" for those who decide to live outside of the established norm of working for a living, and co-existing with society.

Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) has never advocated restricting the manufacture or sale of the automobile in an attempt to get drunks off the road, nor have they protested against the production of liquor. They simply have tried to get the drunk driver off the road.

Bob Wright

 

[volshooter]

We train to be proficient and learn. Just a group of folks that want to be better. We meet every other month. We are blessed that some are current/ex law enforcement, military or great shooters that do teach advanced shooting. I get to shoot several times a week and am familiar with every weapon I have.
I know way to many folks that shoot less than 50 rounds a year that have carry permits. We are trying to improve this. I'm glad they are carrying but everyone needs practice.

Shooting is second nature for me. I can not ever remember taking any safety off or putting it back on after. Kinda like a pump shot gun hunting, safety off, shot, new round in and safety back on without thinking.
Muscle memory? Still I think any gun owner should take advantage of any training offered.

 

[blume357]

A part of me agrees with y'all. Then another part knows that for me when something stressfull hits me I don't ever react the way I want.... I presume that if the event occurs that I would need to use my carry weapon this will be the most stressful event I've ever experience in my life. I personally want to be as prepared as possible and hope this helps. What I can say about this last class I took is there is a big difference when folks are yelling and screaming and running in all directions and some of them with guns shooting at you and others than walking or running though a shooting range and deciding which paper targets to shoot at..... in the first event the bad guy was yelling something (I can divulge what it was) but I can honestly say I could not understand what it was.... when the video was reviewed it was as plan and can be what it was. I actually experienced 'muffled reduced hearing and tunnel vision'.... the good part was I reacted and drew and fired faster than the bad guy could.

Oh and one important part of this class was to try and train you NOT to react. That just because you have a tool of death does not mean you use it or even 'present' it.

Here's one item to think about.... and practice.... drawing and firing FAST.... don't draw your weapon until the last possible moment and then once all visible danger is gone re-holster just as fast.... why? because some guy (you) waving a gun around is a target for others with a gun both the bad and good guys.

Also, if you hear or see the police... hit the ground face down with arms spread.

 

[Ka6otm]

I'm all for training, as long as it's voluntary.

I'd really like to know why they don't want you to divulge, though. Can you at least tell us that?

 

[stevemb]

I would think that with life and limb on the possible line, it would be easier to interest people to seek training. The 2-day course here for CCW opened my eyes and I searched out cutting edge training. I've a stack of course completed certificates here. A blade course and first-aid classes should be considered too. Stay safe folks.

 

[contender]

First, Kudos for you attending a class, & learning new skills & even a change in your mindset.

In a perfect world, anybody & everybody who chooses to use any potentially dangerous or deadly equipment would voluntarily get proper safety training & then follow those lessons.
It wouldn't matter if it's an automobile, a chainsaw, a skil saw, a baseball bat, a knife, a firearm or anything.
Sadly, it's not a perfect world, nor will it ever be.

People fail to learn about their potentially dangerous stuff, or when they do, they choose to ignore the safety lessons & negligence occurs. "I can make that red light",,,, "I'm just gonna cut that limb, I don't need gloves",,,, "No,,, those 3 beers didn't affect me, I can do xxxxxxxxxxxx",,,,,!

We've all heard it, or even done it.

But, as firearm owners we should know as much as we can about our guns, and how to react if ever put in a place to have to use one for self defense.
Combat soldiers were all scared & inexperienced in their first few engagements,,, but they learned. They may have been scared everytime,,, but their training & experience made them better soldiers.

Active gun owners are more prepared than the casual gun owner. Good training helps make you a better person when you choose to carry for self defense. Practicing what you learn makes you even better.

The hardest part is the mental aspects of it all.

If training with professionals allows you to become more prepared both mentally & physically, then by all means, do so. And if you take those same lessons & apply them daily, you will become a better person.

But making it mandatory for everyone will not make it better, nor safer. Just comparing gun owners to automobile owners can prove that. All it will do is add mores restrictions, licensing, higher costs, insurance etc. And owning a firearm is a Right,,,, where driving is a privilege. That's the big difference.

 

[PriseDeFer]

I could swallow some of that KoolAid if the trainers could cut the multisyllabic bureaucratese and leave off the endless and minutely detailed instruction on each newly invented variation of every common action. When to shoot, when not to shoot, how to hit quick up close.

 

[ronto]

There is absolutely no excuse for putting restrictions and requirements on a Constitutional right without due process. If you don't know what to do in a stressful situation, it's your individual responsibility to find out or suffer the consequences.

 

[CGDustDevil]

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The 1st four words describe the 'thing', which is the militia. The reason for the existence of the Militia being 'the security of a free State' is described in the next phrase. Everyone knows the rest. (Although there are many today who want to isolate the 1st 13 words from the 14 words thereafter. But that's another discussion!)

The fact is that the founders relied upon 'well regulated militias' before, during and after the revolution. Those militias were to be well outfitted with arms equal to those of those who might threaten them, and the intent was that the militia be well trained! Hence the stipulation in the 2nd Amendment "A well regulated" militia. Proof of this intent is found in several founding documents. It's simply undeniable if anyone is to apply common reasoning and dictionaries of the times.

Indeed, the Constitution itself references "...the Militia of the several states..." as a fundamental part of our Constitutional contract. The Militia were supposed to have been part of the structure of '...the several states...'. And everyone who (once again) applies any level of honest logic also understands from the founding documents that "we, the people" (excluding certain federal personnel) were to BE the "well regulated Militia...". After all, the Declaration of Independence called for life and liberty as unalienable rights granted to us not by any government, but by our Creator! By virtue of the unalienable right to life, we have an unalienable right to self defense. (Therein lies the separation of the coveted 'individual right' to keep and bear arms from the 2nd Amendment (which grants no power, but DOES limit government).

So Constitutionally the argument could (and perhaps should) be made that training with arms should be required for everyone.

Sadly, the history of statutory (pre-revolution) and Constitutional (post-ratification) Militias has not been good. Not unlike modern 'unorganized militias' set forth in the 1903 "Militia Efficiency Act, aka 'Dick Act', Constitutional state Militias were pretty much parties and 'man time' disguised as Constitutional compliance. The horrendous war of the 1860's certainly illustrated with devastating clarity the shabby condition of the 'militia of the several states'. Bless their hearts - They came and fought when called upon, but they weren't even REMOTELY prepared to go up against standing armies. Militia after militia were wiped out to a man.

A mere 38 years after re-unification, the Dick Act attempted to correct this serious defensive deficiency when Congress passed the legislation that absorbed the 'well regulated militia' into the National Guard, which thus became the 'organized militia'. The citizens became 'the unorganized militia' so as to not have to go through a very complicated Constitutional amendment process to gut the 2nd Amendment itself from the Bill of Rights, and remove those pesky references to the 'Militia of the several states' from the Constitution. Take it to the bank that if they thought they could have gotten away with it, they would have!

So while we have SOME authority to keep arms, and not a lot of authority to actually bear them, we do have something of 'individual rights' to keep & bear. But the unorganized militia today carries absolutely no legal weight whatsoever, and the National Guard is an adjunct of the Federal Armed Forces. In other words, we are totally outside of the intent and the letter of the Constitution because of a lack of training!

The point relating to the OP being this: Had our Constitutional '...well regulated Militia of the several states...' actually BEEN 'well regulated' as the Founders intended, we would most likely NOT have today the Unconstitutional 'well regulated Militia of the United States' today. As such, I can imagine a much different recent heritage, and a much different United States in the year 2016.

So we may find the notion of training to be an infringement - Let me suggest that we have indeed, infringed ourselves already.

 

[volshooter]

On a side note the professionally taught told me that active hunters were much better shooters with quicker responses. I was asked where I got my training, I said I have none. Instructor said you must be a hunter.
I was commended by these folks for my form, speed and accuracy. Only 2 better shooters there one a daily avid competive shooter , the other a DOD employee.
One had speed but less groups than I, the other had perfect groups but speed was not present.
Practice.......... 8)

 

[BlkHawk73]

Personally, I'd rather see more training as a requirement. Having seen just way too many "experts" that were simply very clueless is not a comforting thing. I want my pilot very well trained. I want my surgeon very well trained. I want the waltzing around gun toters to have more than the minimal class the vast majority take. There's a LOT of difference between the far too basic and the well taught, deeper structure courses.

 

[blume357]

Actually, the answer to 'mandatory or required' training is simple at least for the future. I think firearm safety and training should be mandatory in schools, say grade 6-12. We teach our children about government and even how to use knives and saws... I learned electricity and wiring in middle school and really wish the private high school I went to had had a shop class. Why not teach this in school?

now one other response, specifically to CGDustDevil's post about the 'regulated militia': this was a very well written post but I have to disagree on one major point, at least from my belief and view. The 2nd Amendment was not written so that we would have an armed militia.... it was written so that the people could protect themselves from the militia if needed. If you believe it was written for a militia then you have fallen into the ditch dug by a number of politicians that don't want us to be armed.... the militia when this country was formed was the Army.