National Standard? - Kimber Forum

Kimber


Go Back   Kimber Forum > Kimber Forum Discussions > Kimber Concealed Carry

Like Tree94Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-10-2016, 08:44 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,265
National Standard?

With all the recent talk about carrying a firearm being a right or not...
What are your thoughts about developing a "National Standard" or license to address the issue. Being PROACTIVE on the issue could be the best hope? In a nut shell, a protocol that would establish an individual has the knowledge, understanding and is capable of safe operation of a handgun as well as a background that checks out. Truth is, I think there should be a higher standard than exists in most places anyways. Once your checked out you get your license/permitt and are set. If something like this were developed by the NRA voluntarily now it could be a better option than having "libtards" in Washington decide what's best? Within a few years it would be clear that those who've established their credentials weren't a problem and much of the debate would cease.
What do you think...
NurseAdam likes this.
cousinmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Remove Ads
Old 06-10-2016, 08:50 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
NurseAdam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 130
In my opinion you should have to take a course before you are allowed to conceal carry any firearm. There are WAY to many people out there buying handguns for protection that have never even held a firearm let alone shot one. That is not safe for them or anyone near them if they ever have to use it.
NurseAdam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 09:10 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Gmountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,178
Absolutely not.

First, I do not need anyone's permission to exercise a Constitutional right.

Second, what the government gives (as in a license), the government takes away.

Third, it's no one else's business.

Fourth, who the hell are we to decide what standard someoen else should meet.

Fifth, I do not need anyone's permission, least of all the government, to exercise a right.

We do not need more federal laws regarding firearms. We need to get rid of the ones we have.

Remember......Shall Not Be Infringed.

Last edited by Gmountain; 06-10-2016 at 09:13 AM.
Gmountain is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Old 06-10-2016, 09:37 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,265
Originally Posted by Gmountain View Post
Absolutely not.

First, I do not need anyone's permission to exercise a Constitutional right.

Second, what the government gives (as in a license), the government takes away.

Third, it's no one else's business.

Fourth, who the hell are we to decide what standard someoen else should meet.

Fifth, I do not need anyone's permission, least of all the government, to exercise a right.

We do not need more federal laws regarding firearms. We need to get rid of the ones we have.

Remember......Shall Not Be Infringed.
I get what you're saying Gmountain, the thought is to go on the offense with this before it's too late. In states that are controlled by the liberals things are so far gone it's beyond the point of turning back! If we've got federal circuit courts yielding decisions rather than state courts we're headed in the wrong direction...
cousinmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 09:42 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Gmountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,178
Originally Posted by cousinmark View Post
I get what you're saying Gmountain, the thought is to go on the offense with this before it's too late. In states that are controlled by the liberals things are so far gone it's beyond the point of turning back! If we've got federal circuit courts yielding decisions rather than state courts we're headed in the wrong direction...
Going on the offense does not mean giving them what they want. There is no such thing as compromise here. We've compromised our rights away.

Going on the offense means getting rid of the infringements that exist now.
Gmountain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 09:43 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Gmountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,178
Originally Posted by cousinmark View Post
I get what you're saying Gmountain, the thought is to go on the offense with this before it's too late. In states that are controlled by the liberals things are so far gone it's beyond the point of turning back! If we've got federal circuit courts yielding decisions rather than state courts we're headed in the wrong direction...
FWIW, federal courts rule on federal issues, and when the suit is about the US Constitution, jurisdiction lies with federal courts.
Gmountain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 10:04 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,265
If I had to choose between being "certified" to carry or basically losing the option entirely I'd go for the "certified" option. If I could have some input as to the requirements for certification as opposed to it being determined by a bureaucrat, I'd opt for having the input. Two other federal circuit courts have ruled in line with the 9ths already. The question IS headed to the Supreme Court and as it stands we're one vote away from a major national change. In my opinion :-)
cousinmark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 10:26 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
NurseAdam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 130
Originally Posted by Gmountain View Post
Absolutely not.

First, I do not need anyone's permission to exercise a Constitutional right.

Second, what the government gives (as in a license), the government takes away.

Third, it's no one else's business.

Fourth, who the hell are we to decide what standard someoen else should meet.

Fifth, I do not need anyone's permission, least of all the government, to exercise a right.

We do not need more federal laws regarding firearms. We need to get rid of the ones we have.

Remember......Shall Not Be Infringed.
I understand what you are saying and I agree.. All I am saying is that in order to carry and be safe about it we need to have some type of class or course for people to take before they can conceal carry. If you want to go out and buy a gun just to go shoot or for home defense go right ahead because you are not putting other people in danger by possibly not being fully trained on how to use the firearm where as you would be putting other people in danger if you did not know how to use the firearm and God forbid had to actually use it in a public place when any stray bullet can go down the block and kill someone.
NurseAdam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 12:56 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
RustyIron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: La Habra, California
Posts: 2,788
What we have where I live is a little excessive, but the basic idea is sound. The CCW applicant needs to attend a class that goes over the law. Then you have to qualify with the guns you'll be carrying.

This isn't unreasonable, and gives the sheriff the opportunity to put the brakes on real crackpots. It also prevents them from carrying around AR pistols and other weapons that aren't suitable for concealed carry.
Markie, Trex, cousinmark and 1 others like this.
RustyIron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 01:41 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Gmountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,178
I have to say I'm surprised at what I'm reading- that you guys think it's ok to infringe on our rights. That it's "'ok" for the sheriff to decide whether we get to protect ourselves. That it's "ok" to have to take a class to exercise a right.

Are you all ok with having to take a class to exercise your religion? Maybe have the sheriff determine whether it's ok for you to exercise free speech?

Accepting infringements like this just makes it easier to accept the next round of infringements. We are supposed to be free men.

I haven't heard of any problems in states with Constitutional carry. No permits have been required in Vermont in at least 37 years that I know of, and blood isn't running in the streets.

This is what they mean when they refer to the frog in the hot water. Death by a thousand cuts. none of them are acceptable. None of them are reasonable.

Last edited by Gmountain; 06-10-2016 at 01:46 PM.
Gmountain is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On