Concealed Carry
-
justincredible
Who seems anxious to shoot someone? I haven't got that vibe from anyone. I certainly never want a situation that would force me to draw my weapon to occur. But I'd rather be prepared for it than not.queencitybuckeye;1548273 wrote:Do the couple of people on this thread that seem anxious to shoot someone scare you more than the "bad guys"? -
Me?
I don't see who is anxious either.
And LJ, I disagree with your last point entirely. I was the only one in my class who aced the test and the one dude in there with me is an extremely capable shooter. The other 8 would not have passed the test before taking the class. But I'm not going to argue with you anymore, it's pointless. -
queencitybuckeyeI've gotten that vibe strongly from a couple of participants.
-
LJ
Yeah sureMe?;1548280 wrote:I don't see who is anxious either.
And LJ, I disagree with your last point entirely. I was the only one in my class who aced the test and the one dude in there with me is an extremely capable shooter. The other 8 would not have passed the test before taking the class. But I'm not going to argue with you anymore, it's pointless. -
Me?
Based on?
-
Me?
No one failed...
-
Glory Days
just because you can put all your rounds into the bulls eye doesn't mean you are responsible CCW holder. your shooting proficiency has nothing to do with knowing when to shoot and all the legal stuff involved.Me?;1548280 wrote:I don't see who is anxious either.
And LJ, I disagree with your last point entirely. I was the only one in my class who aced the test and the one dude in there with me is an extremely capable shooter. The other 8 would not have passed the test before taking the class. But I'm not going to argue with you anymore, it's pointless.
sure military and police spend time at the range, but they also spend time learning the use of force continuum. -
O-Trap
This seems relatively static, and it doesn't strike me as something that needs continual studying, sans an update to it.Glory Days;1548656 wrote:... the use of force continuum ...
However, I agree that marksmanship isn't the only thing relevant to being a responsible CCW holder. -
Glory Days
you would think so, but unfortunately its not as uniform as it should be from department to department and ultimately judge to judge.O-Trap;1548659 wrote:This seems relatively static, and it doesn't strike me as something that needs continual studying, sans an update to it.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/mexico-officer-van-shooting-fired-21130722 -
Me?
Did I ever claim that shooting proficiency was the only thing required to be a responsible CCW holder? Did I say that we did no classroom work? I'll help you out, the answer to both questions is no.
-
TedSheckler
Ohio GOP introduces “constitutional carry” bill
http://bearingarms.com/ohio-gop-introduces-constitutional-carry-bill/ -
Belly35
I’m all for the 2nd Amendment Right and the right to ownership and carry weapons. If you are legal US citizen, no felony charges record, age required and mentally competent.
As a one time military weapon/explosive specialist, modern weapons are more advanced and proper training is required for proficiency and safety. In general the owners of weapons needs to be taught the laws, restriction and rules. Instruction of the weapon function and operation aspect of their weapon are vital to the safety of those around them and others. Today weapon owner many not use or shot on a regular bases and this is a problem. IMO any CCW holder should be required by law to visit a shooting range twice a year and the Range be required to send in conformation of attendance.
The law to obtain a CCW is not the problem but limiting and restriction of Citizen Right to choose and purchase a weapon they want or to limit the types of weapons, number or mag rounds available to the public is a problem. Note: Explosive, LAWS, grenades, claymores and others devises as such should required a Special Level Security Application. Belly would qualify is that scary… mofo 
Just to grant Ohio citizen of age to carry a weapon in today social environment is politician grasping for voter approval …. common senses is what is lacking in today politicians.
Those two Republican are clueless … and out of touch….. when it comes to knowing anything about weapons.. -
O-Trap
Good for freedom to protect oneself, but heck, open carry is already legal. All this legislation does is make it legal to hide it. The "carry" part is already legal.TedSheckler;1552851 wrote:Ohio GOP introduces “constitutional carry” bill
http://bearingarms.com/ohio-gop-introduces-constitutional-carry-bill/
Should be called the "Constitutional conceal" bill. -
WebFire
That's a good point. You don't need a license or any required training to open carry, so why do you to conceal?O-Trap;1552900 wrote:Good for freedom to protect oneself, but heck, open carry is already legal. -
TedSheckler
If you open carry and you get in your car, you are automatically concealing. You can not have a gun loaded in your vehicle legally without a CHL.WebFire;1552901 wrote:That's a good point. You don't need a license or any required training to open carry, so why do you to conceal? -
O-Trap
My own reason would be two-fold:WebFire;1552901 wrote:That's a good point. You don't need a license or any required training to open carry, so why do you to conceal?
A) I live in a particularly bad neighborhood, and I'd rather not invite trouble.
B) The cops around here are either largely ignorant of this being legal, or they don't care. I have a friend who was bringing his gun to my home who was stopped and harassed by police. He had just bought it, and I wanted to see it. He only lives a block away, so he was just walking over. It wasn't even loaded.
I can see a reason for wanting to. -
O-Trap
Also a very good point.TedSheckler;1552906 wrote:If you open carry and you get in your car, you are automatically concealing. You can not have a gun loaded in your vehicle legally without a CHL. -
I Wear Pants
We agree for the most part on this issue it seems. I have a hard time understanding why anyone would be upset at a reasonable requirement for ongoing training to have a CCW.Belly35;1552880 wrote:I’m all for the 2nd Amendment Right and the right to ownership and carry weapons. If you are legal US citizen, no felony charges record, age required and mentally competent.
As a one time military weapon/explosive specialist, modern weapons are more advanced and proper training is required for proficiency and safety. In general the owners of weapons needs to be taught the laws, restriction and rules. Instruction of the weapon function and operation aspect of their weapon are vital to the safety of those around them and others. Today weapon owner many not use or shot on a regular bases and this is a problem. IMO any CCW holder should be required by law to visit a shooting range twice a year and the Range be required to send in conformation of attendance.
The law to obtain a CCW is not the problem but limiting and restriction of Citizen Right to choose and purchase a weapon they want or to limit the types of weapons, number or mag rounds available to the public is a problem. Note: Explosive, LAWS, grenades, claymores and others devises as such should required a Special Level Security Application. Belly would qualify is that scary… mofo 
Just to grant Ohio citizen of age to carry a weapon in today social environment is politician grasping for voter approval …. common senses is what is lacking in today politicians.
Those two Republican are clueless … and out of touch….. when it comes to knowing anything about weapons.. -
Devils Advocate
kind of like this
-
WebFire
That's not at all what I was asking. Neither of those address why you can do one without a license, but can't the other.O-Trap;1552908 wrote:My own reason would be two-fold:
A) I live in a particularly bad neighborhood, and I'd rather not invite trouble.
B) The cops around here are either largely ignorant of this being legal, or they don't care. I have a friend who was bringing his gun to my home who was stopped and harassed by police. He had just bought it, and I wanted to see it. He only lives a block away, so he was just walking over. It wasn't even loaded.
I can see a reason for wanting to. -
WebFire
That still doesn't address my question.TedSheckler;1552906 wrote:If you open carry and you get in your car, you are automatically concealing. You can not have a gun loaded in your vehicle legally without a CHL. -
Me?
Commerce clause.Devils Advocate;1552958 wrote:kind of like this
-
LJ
Huh?Me?;1552969 wrote:Commerce clause.
Something like 18 states require special licensing for RVs and/or large trailers that are solely for personal use. You will see a lot of large trailers with Maine license plates because no matter what state you are in you can register anything with very little paperwork or regulation. -
Me?
Because of the 10th amendment, states can have their own requirements. But a CDL is required by federal law because of commerce. There can be no special federal license requirement to drive an RV for personal use. That doesn't mean state's can't have more stringent STATE laws that can cover RV's.LJ;1552975 wrote:Huh?
Something like 18 states require special licensing for RVs and/or large trailers that are solely for personal use. You will see a lot of large trailers with Maine license plates because no matter what state you are in you can register anything with very little paperwork or regulation. -
LJ
There is no federal requirement on tow trucks of the size posted, which is what confused me. There are many large commercial vehicles that dont require a CDL federally.Me?;1552984 wrote:Because of the 10th amendment, states can have their own requirements. But a CDL is required by federal law because of commerce. There can be no special federal license requirement to drive an RV for personal use. That doesn't mean state's can't have more stringent STATE laws that can cover RV's.