Kimber Talk Forums banner
61 - 80 of 105 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
You likely sign a release before you're allowed to enter the range area. You are taking a chance and acknowledge that prior to entering. I like to go early and look over whose shooting before I go in. On the same note if someone comes in and I don't like what's happening I leave. Ever notice all the holes in the walls and ceilings of indoor ranges :oops:
Honestly no. I never signed a release. I just pay for a yearly membership for $250 shoot as much as you want. Usually I go on weekdays when most people r working. So I have the range rooms to myself Which also makes it quieter, already have some hearing loss & tinnitus. After about 150 rounds I’m tired from standing in one spot. So an hour or so & I'm good. I go @ least once a week to stay in shape.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
I believe it is wise for those who choose to own and carry guns to also pursue training. However, government mandatory training required to exercise a constitutionally protect right is an entirely different matter. No.
This is the way.
👍
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
I often think about going to the range & a newbie accidentally shooting someone. In my opinion there should @ least be some requirements by the range owners. Who’s on the hook if you accidentally get shot on the range?
Private owned ranges that are open to the public probably have to carry insurance, but the general answer would be the negligent party is liable.

There is always a risk involved in shooting at a public range.
Situational awareness is key in life.
This is one reason why I avoid public shooting ranges.


Passing laws to apease the lowest common denominator makes us all idiots.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,987 Posts
There is mandatory training/qualifying associated with getting a CCW license in many states. Whether any of us like it or not "them's the breaks".
Perhaps we can cut through the clutter of banter with a simple question.

If constitutional carry (no mandatory training or licensing for gun carry) came up for a vote in Georgia, how would want your representative to vote, yea or nay?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
Perhaps we can cut through the clutter of banter with a simple question. If constitutional carry (no mandatory training or licensing for gun carry) came up for a vote in Georgia, how would want your representative to vote, yea or nay?
No brainer.
Yes to constitutional carry.

It would reassure voters that their representatives are litterate and can actually read and comprehend the founding documents.

An armed society is a polite society.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
Perhaps we can cut through the clutter of banter with a simple question.

If constitutional carry (no mandatory training or licensing for gun carry) came up for a vote in Georgia, how would want your representative to vote, yea or nay?
I believe it is a constitutional right for all citizens to own and or carry a firearm.

That being said, as a firearms CPL instructor I see an awful lot of people that are incompetent on the safe handling and use of a firearm. I believe an instructional class should be mandatory for those who choose to carry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
I believe it is a constitutional right for all citizens to own and or carry a firearm.

That being said, as a firearms CPL instructor I see an awful lot of people that are incompetent on the safe handling and use of a firearm. I believe an instructional class should be mandatory for those who choose to carry.
Offer..yes. Training is good.
Mandate government permission for excercising a right?
Hell no.

Mandating a "class" to excercise a constitutionally protected right is something I cant agree with, as a free American.

Apply that "logic" to any other constitutional right, and you'll see why.

Free speech?
Voting?

And thats before you consider that the most untrustworthy, corrupt institution in America (Government) would be in charge of said "classes".

Yeah....Thats a hard no.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Private owned ranges that are open to the public probably have to carry insurance, but the general answer would be the negligent party is liable.

There is always a risk involved in shooting at a public range.
Situational awareness is key in life.
This is one reason why I avoid public shooting ranges.


Passing laws to apease the lowest common denominator makes us all idiots.
Unfortunately I don’t have that luxury @ least in palm beach county where I live.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
Unfortunately I don’t have that luxury @ least in palm beach county where I live.
Yeah PB county is right in the thick of it.
I lived in Pinellas Co. for many years, so I get it.

Maybe talk to some range officers and find out when the slow days are and schedule you.range time.when it is slow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
Offer..yes. Training is good.
Mandate government permission for excercising a right?
Hell no.

Mandating a "class" to excercise a constitutionally protected right is something I cant agree with, as a free American.

Apply that "logic" to any other constitutional right, and you'll see why.

Free speech?
Voting?

And thats before you consider that the most untrustworthy, corrupt institution in America (Government) would be in charge of said "classes".

Yeah....Thats a hard no.
There is no training required to own a firearm... and your assessment is correct that it should not be mandated for someone to carry a loaded firearm on their person. What would you recommend for someone who chooses to carry without any training? One who is incompetent in the safe handling and use of a firearm? Would you want that person in the vicinity of you or your family members when the shit hits the fan and weapons are brandished?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,156 Posts
Perhaps we can cut through the clutter of banter with a simple question.

If constitutional carry (no mandatory training or licensing for gun carry) came up for a vote in Georgia, how would want your representative to vote, yea or nay?
Like I've stated over the years I'm a proponent of legitimate competency testing/qualifying being required for those wishing to carry in public settings. Seems like a good idea? No new news here.
I honestly believe most of the "founding fathers" would have factored in and considered the performance aspects of modern firearms? They were intelligent we can all agree on that so presuming they'd be able to see the differences between the arms of 1787 and 2021 isn't a stretch. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess they'd also reconsider the 3/5ths compromise and maybe let women vote too??? As we can't ask anyone whose been dead for over 200 years that's obviously just speculation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
When you think about it, society mandates training before we let someone behind the wheel of an automobile. But we get our hackles up when the same is suggested for using a firearm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
There is no training required to own a firearm... and your assessment is correct that it should not be mandated for someone to carry a loaded firearm on their person. What would you recommend for someone who chooses to carry without any training? One who is incompetent in the safe handling and use of a firearm? Would you want that person in the vicinity of you or your family members when the shit hits the fan and weapons are brandished?
I would suggest they choose a quality gun safety/training program.

A simple hunter safety course is usually free and available through a local agency, and is a great introduction to safe firearm handling

Shit, I think even seasoned gun owners could benefit from regular training and instruction from a professional.

I am all for gun training and instruction.


The only issue I have is with the government requiring part.
Gun ownership is a cornerstone of our nation and is a god given right, prptected by the constitution.
I don't agree with compromising my rights, especially to a government that openly admits it it trying to remove them.

Jaw Ear Gesture Finger Thumb
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
Yeah PB county is right in the thick of it.
I lived in Pinellas Co. for many years, so I get it.

Maybe talk to some range officers and find out when the slow days are and schedule you.range time.when it is slow.
Usually go weekdays most people are working so I’m pretty much by myself. That’s one good thing about retired my time is so flexible, go when it’s slow
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
When you think about it, society mandates training before we let someone behind the wheel of an automobile. But we get our hackles up when the same is suggested for using a firearm.
Which amendment protects your right to drive a car?

Driving is a privilege.
Gun ownership is a right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulR

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,987 Posts
Like I've stated over the years I'm a proponent of legitimate competency testing/qualifying being required for those wishing to carry in public settings. Seems like a good idea? No new news here.
I honestly believe most of the "founding fathers" would have factored in and considered the performance aspects of modern firearms? They were intelligent we can all agree on that so presuming they'd be able to see the differences between the arms of 1787 and 2021 isn't a stretch. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess they'd also reconsider the 3/5ths compromise and maybe let women vote too??? As we can't ask anyone whose been dead for over 200 years that's obviously just speculation.
A simple yea or nay was all that was asked for.

Once again: If constitutional carry (no mandatory training or licensing for gun carry) came up for a vote in Georgia, how would want your representative to vote, yea or nay?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
I would suggest they choose a quality gun safety/training program.

A simple hunter safety course is usually free and available through a local agency, and is a great introduction to safe firearm handling

Shit, I think even seasoned gun owners could benefit from regular training and instruction from a professional.

I am all for gun training and instruction.


The only issue I have is with the government requiring part.
Gun ownership is a cornerstone of our nation and is a god given right, prptected by the constitution.
I don't agree with compromising my rights, especially to a government that openly admits it it trying to remove them.

View attachment 126842
The same could be said about a covered wagon or now an automobile. Training is required before you can drive one on the road. You can own one, but cannot legally use it on public roads without training. We don't bat an eye at that requirement. Why is it different for firearms?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
555 Posts
Which amendment protects your right to drive a car?

Driving is a privilege.
Gun ownership is a right.
Let's see if I got this right.

Owning a car is a right.
Owning a gun is a right.

Operating a car is a privilege after required training.
Operating a gun is a right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
The same could be said about a covered wagon or now an automobile. Training is required before you can drive one on the road. You can own one, but cannot legally use it on public roads without training. We don't bat an eye at that requirement. Why is it different for firearms?

Rights vs privilege.
You already know this.


In England, firearms ownership and use is a priviledge, not a right.

We have the right to bear arms, to prevent our loss of god given rights to a tyrannical government.

When a right becomes a priviledge, overseen by the government, you have lost that right.


Do you really trust the government to protect your rights?
How has that worked out so far?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,822 Posts
Let's see if I got this right.

Owning a car is a right.
Owning a gun is a right.

Operating a car is a privilege after required training.
Operating a gun is a right.

No.
You do not have the right to own or operate a car.
 
61 - 80 of 105 Posts
Top