NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Newsworthy => Topic started by: Dan W on April 29, 2010, 09:47:45 PM
-
(http://www.omaha.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=OW&Date=20100429&Category=NEWS01&ArtNo=704299833&Ref=AR&maxw=490&maxh=275)
Mark Bohaty, a firearms instructor, watches qualification shooting in Bruno Neb., in 2007.
Should gun permits be easier?
By Paul Hammel
WORLD-HERALD BUREAU
? Metro/Region
LINCOLN - A citizen's fatal shooting of a would-be robber in Omaha has sparked a debate over whether Nebraska should join three other states and do away with training and permit requirements to carry concealed handguns.
Harry J. McCullough III, a 32-year-old drugstore customer, shot one robber who was holding a sawed-off shotgun and apprehended another.
McCullough did not possess a state permit to carry a concealed handgun. He probably would be ineligible for such a permit because of his 1997 misdemeanor conviction for carrying a concealed weapon.
Many credit the actions of the former security guard with preventing the robbery and injury to others Monday night in a Walgreens store in the Benson neighborhood. McCullough drew his .40-caliber pistol and fired eight shots. Four struck the robber.
?This is a perfect example of why the good guys should have guns and the bad guys shouldn't,? said attorney James Martin Davis, who is representing McCullough.
State Sen. Mark Christensen of Imperial said Wednesday that he would favor Nebraska's joining Arizona, Vermont and Alaska in waiving all requirements except the criminal background check to carry concealed weapons.
That way, more people would carry concealed guns, the rural lawmaker said.
?Why give criminals the edge?? Christensen said. ?Police do a great job, but we can't afford enough to have them everywhere.?
Sen. Scott Lautenbaugh of Omaha said he would be open to looking at a law change. Two other Omaha lawmakers said public safety would be jeopardized by eliminating the state-required gun safety course.
Sen. Brenda Council, whose north Omaha district is plagued by gun crime, said doing away with the training requirements would only increase the danger to the general public.
?I'm always concerned about citizens acting as law enforcement,? Council said. ?People who carry weapons like that are more inclined to place a lot of people in danger.?
It is essential that citizens be well-trained before being allowed to carry concealed guns, said Sen. Brad Ashford of Omaha.
?You don't want to create a firefight in a situation when people are shooting each other and they don't know what they're doing,? Ashford said.
McCullough had received some training in carrying a handgun because he had obtained a City of Omaha permit to openly carry a loaded firearm.
Such ?open-carry? permits, which cost $105, are sought mostly by security guards who need the permits for their jobs, said a spokeswoman with the National Safety Council of Greater Omaha, which offers the gun-training courses.
The city ordinance has been around for at least 15 years. Eight hours of classroom instruction, followed by two hours at a gun range, are required. The training requirements are the same for obtaining a state concealed weapons permit.
The Safety Council spokeswoman was unable to say when McCullough was trained because she could not access the council's entire computer database, but McCullough renewed his permit it requires a criminal background check in 2006 and in 2009.
?He knew what he was doing,? said Davis, McCullough's attorney.
A person who has been convicted of misdemeanor charge of illegal possession of a concealed weapon as McCullough was in 1997 would be ineligible for a concealed weapons permit, said Deb Collins, a spokeswoman for the Nebraska State Patrol.
Council, the state senator, opposes letting citizens carrying concealed weapons, pointing to a recent incident at an Omaha restaurant in which several people were injured by shrapnel when a handgun, pulled out by a trained permit holder, went off accidentally.
Omaha City Prosecutor Marty Conboy said it might be a week or longer before his office decides whether to formally charge McCullough for failing to have a concealed weapons permit.
Conboy said witnesses would be required to prove that McCullough ?completely concealed? his gun. The city attorney said his office also must decide whether to prosecute, given the outcome of the incident.
Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine has said that McCullough was justified in using deadly force and that he would not prosecute him for the fatal shooting of Marquail Thomas, 18, who was holding a sawed-off shotgun that, it turned out, wasn't loaded.
Davis plans to fight McCullough's misdemeanor ticket.
?You can't punish a guy for doing what he did,? Davis said. ?He averted a robbery and prevented people from getting wounded and killed.?
Ashford, who heads the Legislature's Judiciary Committee, said state laws concerning citizens' rights to defend themselves with guns need to be clarified. That issue will be explored by the committee this summer and fall.
Ashford said he wants to expand the study to include gang-related shootings in Omaha.
?We're living in an incredibly violent time,? he said. ?I think public policy is behind in dealing with it.?
Christensen, the lawmaker from Imperial, introduced a bill in the past legislative session to clarify citizens' gun rights. It included a clause that would have barred people like McCullough from facing civil lawsuits for taking lawful actions to defend themselves from threats of death or violence.
The bill was killed in the Judiciary Committee but led to a planned interim study of the issue.
An official of the National Rifle Association, which backed the Christensen proposal, said the organization is hoping to persuade other states to follow the lead of Arizona, which passed a law this spring to do away with the training and permit needed to carry concealed weapons.
Arizonans would still have to pass a federal criminal background check to buy guns, said Scott Stevens, a legislative aide with the NRA.
?It definitely makes it a lot easier for law-abiding citizens to just buy a gun and not worry about the permit process,? Stevens said.
Christensen said ?common sense? would dictate that people obtaining handguns to carry would obtain or have the proper safety training.
Contact the writer:
402-473-9584, paul.hammel@owh.com
-
I kinda on the fence with this, while I would like to think buy and carry would be great, I have seen many folks that still have no regard for safety when handling firearms. And folks like a co-worker of mine who has neve owned a firearm before, just bought a .40 for home defense. Was asking me many questions because he had never shot before. I do believe that some formal training is essential to educate the good guys and if for nothing else to weed out the idiots.
My $.02
Edit: Maybe lowering the cost of training and the application fee would help get the numbers of those carrying up. I know for me I had to work extra to cover the costs (well worth it)
-
Even idiots have a right to self defense. But I recognize that there is a high level of responsibility necessary while doing so.
-
Owning and Carrying guns is a RIGHT. That is why I have a problem with the permit and any law banning concealed or open carry. Why should we have to ask for permission to exercise a RIGHT? If we have to ask the state for permission that means this RIGHT has now become a PRIVILEDGE in practice. Yes training is definitely needed, but you can learn how to use a gun safely from a friend, coworker etc. The state should not be allowed to mandate a permit nor training. A permit costs money which they take from you using fees. This means the state can raise those fees anytime to any amount they please. This limits the 2nd Amendment to only those that can afford the price that the state puts on it. This is discrminiation against the lower middle class and the poor. If the state really cares so much about training then why don't they pay for it?! Or a better idea would be to train people in the proper and safe use of firearms in junior and senior years of high school. All the idiot liberals were going on and on about how healthcare should be a right which it is not. And now the Obamacare law has passed. Arms are a constitutional right and yet they are treating it like a priviledge.
If they want people to have some formal training in firearms then why don't they allow the hunter safety course to be sufficient for carrying concealed? The hunter safety course is a free course and the instructor and materials are paid for by taxes on hunting gear and firearms.
-
As, I see this matter that the greatest down fall of this matter is not so much training and affirmative carry action but the process of going through getting one I do believe the gentleman and all have a right to protect themselves but....It would be the fingerprinting and the formality of such nothing much is said about to the degree of getting the permit you are taken throught the most extensive background check which in its selve is a consitutional wrong to be fingerprinted to such that if you were to apply for one and you did have a past of vistation of the police house for free room and board, they already have your print and that alone should be sufficent and not require the mass detail of prints neccessary to fulfill there need for prints. We as firearm owners know the cost in todays world and yes it would be great if the cost were lower, but it would be the process and the and feeling the Nebr State Patrol personell gives you like you don't need the right to defend yourself. There is much to this topic to improve and look forward to discuss this matter further.
A-FIXER
-
Dan you just touched on a good idea. The hunter safety course is paid for by taxes on hunting gear and firearms. Why not have a handgun/concealed safety course paid for the same way?
-
Dan you just touched on a good idea. The hunter safety course is paid for by taxes on hunting gear and firearms. Why not have a handgun/concealed safety course paid for the same way?
Exactly. This would be a fairer solution.
-
Never Thought There'd Be the Day!!!!!!!
When Two Upstanding NFOA Members would agree that they want a FREE government program.
Hunter Education ain't free.
It's paid for--among other sources--by the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937, which levies a 10 Per Cent Manufacturer's Excise Tax on ALL FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION. And an 11 Per Cent Excise Tax on ARCHERY EQUIPMENT.
So--Youse guys are paying for it, and it's a hidden tax, like a value added tax.
And----all the Pittman-Robertson money pays for is the state home office administration. All the Hunter Ed instructors are Pure Volunteers.
Like Me. [Not Pure; Just a Volunteer.]
So--Boys--for your penance, go to the range and shoot until you bust 24/25. Or qualify IDPA/Expert.
Free Government Program, Indeed!!!! And on the NFOA!!
sfg
-
Never Thought There'd Be the Day!!!!!!!
When Two Upstanding NFOA Members would agree that they want a FREE government program.
Hunter Education ain't free.
It's paid for--among other sources--by the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937, which levies a 10 Per Cent Manufacturer's Excise Tax on ALL FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION. And an 11 Per Cent Excise Tax on ARCHERY EQUIPMENT.
So--Youse guys are paying for it, and it's a hidden tax, like a value added tax.
And----all the Pittman-Robertson money pays for is the state home office administration. All the Hunter Ed instructors are Pure Volunteers.
Like Me. [Not Pure; Just a Volunteer.]
So--Boys--for your penance, go to the range and shoot until you bust 24/25. Or qualify IDPA/Expert.
Free Government Program, Indeed!!!! And on the NFOA!!
sfg
Exactly and that is why every state should recognize a hunter safety course as sufficient training to obtain a permit to carry a gun.....if they insist on requiring a permit that is. I say do away with the permit and let everyone who is not a felon carry a handgun if they so please. It is a RIGHT.
-
Dan C:
Here's a Wild Thought:
Switzerland has [or did have] Universal Military Training.
And then Everybody who went through UMT HAD to have a [military] firearm stashed behind the door at home in case the neighbors [Italy, Germany, etc.] decided to come rumbling through on their way to conquest.
Last I heard, Swiss crime was Zilch. Same story, gun accidents.
I wunder if Swiss Banks ever get robbed.
Now, with all that speculation, I gotta go Google it up.
Anyhow, if we had UMT, then everyone who participated could CCW.
Just Exactly Like Iowa's New CCW Law: Show DD214; get Shall-Issue CCW.
Looks like the Iowegians got sumthin' right.
sfg
-
"well regulated Militia..." Sounds like the Founding Fathers thought some training should be in order too. I cant imagine they believed that a gun in the hands of an ignorant fool was a good idea.
Mandatory Military sevice sounds like the best idea yet.
- Shawn
-
Never Thought There'd Be the Day!!!!!!!
When Two Upstanding NFOA Members would agree that they want a FREE government program.
Hunter Education ain't free.
It's paid for--among other sources--by the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937, which levies a 10 Per Cent Manufacturer's Excise Tax on ALL FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION. And an 11 Per Cent Excise Tax on ARCHERY EQUIPMENT.
So--Youse guys are paying for it, and it's a hidden tax, like a value added tax.
And----all the Pittman-Robertson money pays for is the state home office administration. All the Hunter Ed instructors are Pure Volunteers.
Like Me. [Not Pure; Just a Volunteer.]
So--Boys--for your penance, go to the range and shoot until you bust 24/25. Or qualify IDPA/Expert.
Free Government Program, Indeed!!!! And on the NFOA!!
sfg
Ok we knew at least part was paid by taxes but I will still serve my time at the range.Sure wish my wife would give me a sentence like that when shes mad at me.
-
"well regulated Militia..." Sounds like the Founding Fathers thought some training should be in order too. I cant imagine they believed that a gun in the hands of an ignorant fool was a good idea.
Mandatory Military sevice sounds like the best idea yet.
- Shawn
Whoa whoa whoa. Lets slow down here. It says "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."
This means that only regulation happens when a militia is formed for purposes of warfare. So training would be a part of wanting to become a member of the militia. However the People are not militia members. And their right to keep and BEAR Arms, shall not be infringed".
The militia also "being necessary to the security of a FREE State". AKA, to fight off tyrants from within or to fight off foreign threats to the liberty of the state.
-
"well regulated Militia..." Sounds like the Founding Fathers thought some training should be in order too. I cant imagine they believed that a gun in the hands of an ignorant fool was a good idea.
Mandatory Military sevice sounds like the best idea yet.
- Shawn
So, since I didn't serve in the military, and have absolutely NO formal firearms training(outside of a CCW class), I'm not worthy of exercising my 2nd Amendment rights?
Really? Thanks for letting me know.
-
Geez, I though we were simply exchanging ideas/opinions on whether gun permits should be easier to get. No reason to take it personally.
I think Ne. CCW training requirements are fair, except for the cost, it should be less expensive.
Having worked at a public range for more than 13 years I have seen first hand the consequenses of a gun in untrained hands. Injuries ranging from minor to nearly fatal. Good people can debate how best to give/recieve that training, or not.
I think it is in all of our best interests to set our personal standards high. So push the keyboards back, get enrolled in an advanced class somewhere. I gurantee you will learn something of value, and you might even have a good time doing it.
I`ll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Henk Iverson, "Be as good as you Think you are"
- Shawn (taking my ball and going home...)
-
Shawn - No need to "go home". I like a spirited debate and meant no disrespect.
Not everyone has the ability to enter the military. Not everyone can afford the time and cost for training. Not everyone can go shooting on a regular basis.
Yes, that would be ideal if everyone could, but does that make one person less worthy of the right of self-defense than someone else who can do those things?
I may not know all the fancy moves and tactical drills that some highly-trained operators know, but I WILL do what I can to protect myself and my family, if and when necessary. Would I like to learn those things? Sure, that would be great. Do I see a possibility for that in my future? Doubtful.
It is my opinion that there should be no permit necessary for me to carry any weapon I wish, in any manner I wish for any lawful purpose as stated in the Nebraska Constitution. A permit of some kind is not the deciding factor of whether I do good or bad things with any weapon I may carry on my person. My morals and values are the deciding factor, not some silly card.
The states of Alaska, Vermont, and Arizona seem to trust their residents to do the right thing when carrying a weapon, I see no reason that Nebraska could not do the same. If it weren't for the cities of Omaha and Lincoln, we might have that ability already.
-
I do beleive that a responsible person would like some kind of training when they first get into guns. But, it should not be required. I don't think anyone should have to fill out any forms to practice their rights. I still can't find where it is in the 2nd that we have to have formal training first. If someone elects to get trained, that is their right.
-
I think Ne. CCW training requirements are fair, except for the cost, it should be less expensive.
Oh sure now you decide the training should be cheaper. Just my luck after taking the class the instructor decides the cost should be less.
Just kidin ya Shawn. You did a great job and taught me alot. Thanks.
-
Though I really like him, I just couldn't disagree with Sen. Christensen more on this one. Do we really want a large number of CHP holders out there in our future with little or no knowledge and a serious lack of training. Some of the students that we see are down right un-safe when they first come to us. Seldom do they have a clear understanding of the laws in general much less know when lethal force is justified and when it is not. Rarely do they have a clear understanding of the level of responsibility required when carrying in public etc etc etc.... Carrying a firearm in public and all if its ramifications has little to do hunters safety training.
Application Form
List your firearms experience:
"I've been around guns all my life" (translated.... 2500 hours playing Grand Theft Auto or watching gun fights on tv growing up)
"
"Hunters Safety when I was a kid"
"I'm an avid duck hunter"
CCW training maybe the only training most of us ever get. It's designed to protect a new CHP holder from his/her own ignorance. I hate to be the bearer of bad news for some but some bad guys have had training. How will the new CHP know what it is they don't know? How can we be sure the new guy knows how to interact with law enforcement both in a regular trafic stop or in a life changing critical incident and so on?
A lack of knowledge and preparation for carrying a concealed firearm may get the new CHP holder, a family member or an innocent bystander injured or killed. I'm the last person that would want to prevent some one from having the ability to defend themselves. But what good is it if you don't know what you are doing and you end up unintentionally hurting someone innocent or yourself. Yes we have our 2nd ammendment rights but we also have a right to a one way trip to prison and financial ruin if we make a mistake. It would be interesting to hear Mr. Massad Ayoob's take on our discussion here.
I think its more a matter of priorities. For example some firearm owners will buy a fairly expensive firearm but dont think spending money on a simple safe to keep it out of the hands of children or unauthorized adults is a priority.
We have a responsibility to ourselves, our loved ones and the general public when it comes to building and maintaining our skills and knowledge of the use of firearms for self-defense. These skills are perishable, we should take every opportunity we can to train and continually strive to improve on our knowledge and skills. We would be foolish to think that our rite to carry concealed firearms could not be seriously diminished or lost if enough of us screw up out there and give the antis and the media what they want.
Our credibility as permit holders is important! Good training often requires time and money. Do we really think we are doing anyone a favor leaving it up to everyone to just figure it out? Will they train if they are not required to? Christensen said ?common sense? would dictate that people obtaining handguns to carry would obtain or have the proper safety training. Many come through our CCW courses with little or no prior training or experience. As is the case now, quite a few permit holders will not even bother to practice once in awhile at the range.
I wonder if new permit holders having less invested in training, certification, etc. would have the same respect for our still fairly new rite to carry in Nebraska? Would they have any idea or even care what it took to get it past. If it required little effort or expense, would they care that much if they did something to loose their permit. What they do out there in the public's eye will reflect on all of us as permit holders. We've been fortunate so far.
These courses are often what cultivates interest in further learning. They get a taste of what opportunities are out there for further training, sport shooting, NFOA assocation etc.
-
This will look real impressive on the back of our no guns no money cards...
As a Nebraska
Concealed Weapon Permit Holder:
? I have passed state and federal background checks for violent crimes and mental illness.
? I am at least 21 years of age
What do you know about your other customers?
-
I think Ne. CCW training requirements are fair, except for the cost, it should be less expensive.
Oh sure now you decide the training should be cheaper. Just my luck after taking the class the instructor decides the cost should be less.
Just kidin ya Shawn. You did a great job and taught me alot. Thanks.
I meant the State fees were way too high, the Instructor fees are not nearly enough. ;)
- Shawn
-
Though I really like him, I just couldn't disagree with Sen. Christensen more on this one. Do we really want a large number of CHP holders out there in our future with little or no knowledge and a serious lack of training. Some of the students that we see are down right un-safe when they first come to us. Seldom do they have a clear understanding of the laws in general much less know when lethal force is justified and when it is not. Rarely do they have a clear understanding of the level of responsibility required when carrying in public etc etc etc.... Carrying a firearm in public and all if its ramifications has little to do hunters safety training.
Application Form
List your firearms experience:
"I've been around guns all my life" (translated.... 2500 hours playing Grand Theft Auto or watching gun fights on tv growing up)
"
"Hunters Safety when I was a kid"
"I'm an avid duck hunter"
CCW training maybe the only training most of us ever get. It's designed to protect a new CHP holder from his/her own ignorance. I hate to be the bearer of bad news for some but some bad guys have had training. How will the new CHP know what it is they don't know? How can we be sure the new guy knows how to interact with law enforcement both in a regular trafic stop or in a life changing critical incident and so on?
A lack of knowledge and preparation for carrying a concealed firearm may get the new CHP holder, a family member or an innocent bystander injured or killed. I'm the last person that would want to prevent some one from having the ability to defend themselves. But what good is it if you don't know what you are doing and you end up unintentionally hurting someone innocent or yourself. Yes we have our 2nd ammendment rights but we also have a right to a one way trip to prison and financial ruin if we make a mistake. It would be interesting to hear Mr. Massad Ayoob's take on our discussion here.
I think its more a matter of priorities. For example some firearm owners will buy a fairly expensive firearm but dont think spending money on a simple safe to keep it out of the hands of children or unauthorized adults is a priority.
We have a responsibility to ourselves, our loved ones and the general public when it comes to building and maintaining our skills and knowledge of the use of firearms for self-defense. These skills are perishable, we should take every opportunity we can to train and continually strive to improve on our knowledge and skills. We would be foolish to think that our rite to carry concealed firearms could not be seriously diminished or lost if enough of us screw up out there and give the antis and the media what they want.
Our credibility as permit holders is important! Good training often requires time and money. Do we really think we are doing anyone a favor leaving it up to everyone to just figure it out? Will they train if they are not required to? Christensen said ?common sense? would dictate that people obtaining handguns to carry would obtain or have the proper safety training. Many come through our CCW courses with little or no prior training or experience. As is the case now, quite a few permit holders will not even bother to practice once in awhile at the range.
I wonder if new permit holders having less invested in training, certification, etc. would have the same respect for our still fairly new rite to carry in Nebraska? Would they have any idea or even care what it took to get it past. If it required little effort or expense, would they care that much if they did something to loose their permit. What they do out there in the public's eye will reflect on all of us as permit holders. We've been fortunate so far.
These courses are often what cultivates interest in further learning. They get a taste of what opportunities are out there for further training, sport shooting, NFOA assocation etc.
It sounds like the 2nd ammendment doesn't apply then. Nowhere does the right to bear arms require training. Actually, gun permits should not be required.
I think everyone should want to have some training, just that it should not be the law. Maybe training should be required in high school, then everyone would have some training.
-
I wonder if new permit holders having less invested in training, certification, etc. would have the same respect for our still fairly new rite to carry in Nebraska?
Right here you are telling me that the "Right to Carry in Nebraska" is a newly created right. As if the 2nd Amendment never applied. We have always had the right to carry arms. The 2007 Concealed Handgun Permit law never introduced a new right to carry. It only undid some wrong that the state was doing by banning concealed weapons. In my view the state is still violating the 2nd Amendment by discriminating who can carry a gun based on $, training, certain misdeameanor crimes, and so forth. It is absolutely unconstitutional. There should be no state mandated permit of any sort to carry a weapon of any kind. We should not have to ask for permission to exercise our God given rights. Training is good and needed but it is not the Government's business to dictate that if you don't pay $100 to them and force you to take a $80-$175 class you can't exercise your God given right of self defense and carry a concealed weapon. Like I said before. If we care so much about people having no experience than firearm safety classes should be made mandatory in high school. That way everyone has received training.
-
reposted from CCWNE....
lindh
Just my humble opin, but I think quixnet is right, particularly when it comes to understanding the implications of a shoot and a detailed understanding of present law. Even in a "good shoot", with a bystander injured or killed and - there goes the ball game. There are not just a few cops who found this out the hard way.
I'm a firm believer in 2ndA, but I say - what ever it takes to preserve what we've fought for and won...
When you think about it, we've come a long long ways in the last 4 years.
Scooby Doo
I still think it stinks that the poorest people living in the crappiest neighborhoods, the people that need it the most, can't afford to be legal. So, do any of you trainers offer discounts for the poor? Just how dedicated are you at increasing the numbers of CHP holders?
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Point well taken Scoob. I am aware of other instructors that do. Speaking for myself, absolutely! Look, Scoob has hit on something very near and dear here (for lack of a better term). This is something we have done and will continue to do. It's really the kind of stuff that makes it all worth while. If you know someone, put them in touch with us. Even if they just need some help with the basics and don't plan on getting a permit or more advanced training down the road.
Last summer I worked down at the city's old Magorian Range part-time here in Lincoln. I was paid but volunteered a lot of time as well. It's not unusual to take someone that maybe doesn't like being around guns in general and with a little help and some guidance... they're hooked! You can change someones whole attitude with respect to firearms.
I would like to tell you all a story about a young mother I met recently. She certainly doesn't have much. She has a very horrific past that may very well come back to visit her in the next 5-10 years. Law enforcement is aware of it, she has documented threats on her life. She has gone to some great lengths to hide herself and her children's whereabouts. I won't get specific or some on here will no doubt know who I'm referring to. All I'll say is yes, I'm with Scoob on this. I will be there when I can and I think can safely speak for my partner and for the majority of us that choose to teach others.
One thing I would like to mention. Our CCW course is very thorough. If a student struggles, we will work with them. That being said we will not certify anyone who deminstrates poor character, a lack of good judgement or is just plain not safe!
-
DanClrk51
"In my view the state is still violating the 2nd Amendment by discriminating who can carry a gun based on $, training, certain misdeameanor crimes, and so forth. It is absolutely unconstitutional."
DaveB
"Actually, gun permits should not be required."
_____________________________________________________________________________
"certain misdeameanor crimes, and so forth" Ok... seriously? So this is next?
"There should be no state mandated permit of any sort to carry a weapon of any kind"
It appears the courts disagree. They have sided the with the federal and state governments ruling our 2nd amendment rights are not without some reasonable limits.
So after we get this training stuff flushed next we need to do away with that pesky back ground check/mental illness crapola. Hmm... well thats one opinion... I guess if thats were we are going for next.
"One thing I would like to mention. Our courses are very thorough. If a student struggles, we will work with them. That being said we will not certify anyone who deminstrates poor character, a lack of good judgement or is just plain not safe!"
I thought I would save someone the time here and quote myself... I know... who are we to judge? I would simply say... someone needs to. I'm sure that remark won't be well received either. Good luck guys!
P.S.
DanClrk51
"Right here you are telling me that the "Right to Carry in Nebraska" is a newly created right. As if the 2nd Amendment never applied. We have always had the right to carry arms"
_______________________________________________________________
No wouldn't say that, I agree with you Dan but that was the law here in Nebraska. We could loose it again! We need to be responsible and smart about this thereby protecting the gains we've made as we move forward.
-
FarmerRick
A permit of some kind is not the deciding factor of whether I do good or bad things with any weapon I may carry on my person. My morals and values are the deciding factor, not some silly card.
I WILL do what I can to protect myself and my family, if and when necessary. Would I like to learn those things? Sure, that would be great. Do I see a possibility for that in my future? Doubtful.
________________________________________________________________________________
Look, I'm sure you are a great person with impeccable morals and values. I agree that a permit of some kind is not the deciding factor of whether you do good or bad things with a gun. That being said you are saying to the public in this day and age to "trust me (and everyone else in the state)".
It's like saying I've never been a bad guy and even if I was once, I promise I won't do it again. I have a whole gang of friends that will attest to my good character...
Yes, it would be ideal if everyone including myself could train more. No, it doesn't make any person less worthy of the right of self-defense. But this does not negate the responsibility we have to continue to practice, improve and continue to learn. What will happen if you or I need to defend ourselves or our your families and the bad guy is 10 times better then we are?
Maybe you are a crack shot. Maybe you will naturally do all the right things? What about the others? Will they miss and hit some child down the street, your child, your wife? I'll bet that would go over well in the news.
What if I missed and hit my daughter while trying to protect her? That would be it for me...
This is nothing to screw with and frankly I can't believe what I'm hearing. Someone shoots my daughter, they won't be surprised at how fast and accurate I can be, they won't know what hit them.
Please... make the time. You need to be able to stop it before it happens but, you are responsable for every round you fire. Once it has left your barrel... it can't be recalled.
-
Both sides are correct on this. We should not need to have permits, we have the right to keep and bare arms. But with rights go responsibilities, amongst those are the responsibility to know what you are doing. I would also challenge everyone that we also have the responsibility to teach. Through teaching the next generationand even those who may be from our generation to be resposible firearm owners we accomplish many things.
The problem we have is to few firearm owners take the time to teach someone to be a responsible firearm owner, and that causes the unsafe, inexperianced people the instructors speak of to be out there on the streets. Just like we have irrsponsible hunters ect. we have the same with firearm owners.
All of use weither instructor or weekend plinker need to take the time to teach someone else to safetly handle and use firearms. If we meet someone on the range that appears to be strugleing take the time to help ect.
Once the public see's that firearm owners are responsible for their actions and their message the ability to step back and say we don't need training or permits becomes a valid point. Until then we need a way to be sure that those who CCW understand their responsibilities.
-
Well said. We all have the responsibility to teach others about safe and responsible firearms use. Not just our kids, but friends, relatives, coworkers, etc.
-
We, as citizens, also have the responsibility to regain the freedoms we have lost, restore liberty and preserve it for the future.
Resigning ourselves to infringement of the right to defend ones life does none of those things.
We have come to this point, debating the worthiness of some people to defend their lives with firearms, because of the liberties we gave away in the quest for security, or had taken from us, by our government, with it's never ending hunger for more power
The demonization of firearms, and the people who own them, has resulted in several generations of citizens that fear the defense of life with a firearm more than their own death.
Even in the midst of a man choosing to save his own life and the lives of many others during a robbery, we, his supposed supporters, argue about the piece of paper he had in his wallet.
With the right piece of paper he is a hero, and with the wrong one, a criminal...
I say, paper, or no paper, training, or no training, that man had a right to act in a way that makes all this irrelevant.
A right that did not come from a piece of paper...but one that comes from God, that predates the United States and it's constitution. That overrules the State of Nebraska.
One that does not need our permission to exist. A basic right of Natural Law
-
Well said Dan W.!
Quixnet:
Well I disagree with the courts then about their "reasonable restrictions" because that can mean anything to anyone including a complete firearms ban.
No court, state, or individual has the right to judge who can bare arms and who can't. Everyone has a God given right to self defense. The act of owning and bearing arms in itself hurts no one because it is a passive, neutral and defensive action. What hurts people is when one misuses a weapon by using it offensively or negligently.
That is why no permit should be required or mandated by the state or anyone. Instead why don't we just punish the guilty rather than punish the innocent along with the guilty.
If someone uses a gun to rob, rape, and murder then we need to hold them accountable for the robbery, the rape, and the murder not for carrying a gun. If someone is a "good guy" and carries for protection and is faced with a threat and shoots at a "bad guy" even though there was a crowd of people behind the bad guy and the good guy knew this and a bullet hits a bystander, he should be held accountable. But this should also be done within reason. One must take into account the possibilities of what could have happened if he had done nothing.
Lets hold people accountable for the actions that actually cause others harm and not punish people for victimless crimes such as "carrying a concealed weapon".
-
Training should be an option; it should not be a requirement. Most trainers tell how they are doing this to assist the gun owners and protect their rights when in the reality it is all about the money. The thing that turns a lot of people off is the cost of training. Get 20 people in for a day at a couple hundred apiece; it's a good day for the trainer, regardless whether anyone actually learns anything or not. Instructors need to be compensated for their time, but if it is truly to protect our rights, they should be reasonable with the charges. I was brought up with guns, did a lot of training in the Army too. That does not mean I know anything and would not like some more training, but I refuse to and can not afford to pay the prices for it. But still, the last thing anyone wants to do is to try and deny me my rights.
If a lot of training was required in the 40's we'd all be speaking German now and not worrying about it!
-
Training should be an option; it should not be a requirement. Most trainers tell how they are doing this to assist the gun owners and protect their rights when in the reality it is all about the money. The thing that turns a lot of people off is the cost of training. Get 20 people in for a day at a couple hundred apiece; it's a good day for the trainer, regardless whether anyone actually learns anything or not. Instructors need to be compensated for their time, but if it is truly to protect our rights, they should be reasonable with the charges. I was brought up with guns, did a lot of training in the Army too. That does not mean I know anything and would not like some more training, but I refuse to and can not afford to pay the prices for it. But still, the last thing anyone wants to do is to try and deny me my rights.
You have the option to carry a concealed handgun in Nebraska without going through the training, and getting a CHP. It is under NE Revised Statute 28-1202 section 1b. http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=28-1202
As to the cost of the training, I will weigh in on that since I am a trainer.... When I first started teaching these classes I charged $100 per person. I got into because I have a great passion for handguns and concealed carry. I didn't get into this business to feed my family. My initial estimates of expenses showed that I would make a decent amount for my time after paying all of the expenses as long as I had a decent sized group of folks. I do it because I love this issue and am passionate about it, and yes I make money doing it.
After a couple of months of actually doing the training, and realizing how much work and all of the expenses I was incurring, I had to raise my rate to $125...... At $100 it was not worth what I was having to go through to spend all the time required on these classes. (Keep in mind, it isn't just an 9 hour class... I spend many hours a week, answering emails, phone calls, and all the related paperwork that comes along with this).
After a daylong CHP class, I feel like I have been bulldozed. It is ALOT of work, not only the classroom portion, but spending a couple hours out on the range in the afternoon. I have to deal with people of varying experience levels. Some are experienced and this class is cake walk, some need lots of extra attention. I have dealt with people that are plain and simple unsafe with their firearms...... And it is my job in these classes to teach them how to change their poor handling habits. I have had dropped guns, loaded guns pointed at me, been swept, you name it.
I charge $125 for a quality training class. $150 to add Utah training certification on (which is extra classroom work, extra handouts and paperwork, and requires me to go to Utah every couple years and re-certify). My students have the option of doing just the NE, or completing the UT and NE in the same day.
Some Instructors charge $125 to $175 and they teach an old stale, boring, dry NRA Basic pistol class, and hand out a copy of NE laws at the end of class. I would be ****ed if I paid that much for a class and got the NRA outdated, dry, stale materials. I have a custom developed curriculum, book and multimedia presentations that are a compilation of years of my own training and research.
There was one Instructor who started out as "Mr Do-Good" with good intentions of helping gun owners. He charged about $35 to take the class... This paid for the NRA basic pistol book, certificates, handouts, etc, etc... He did not have to pay rent on a range or classroom (those were given to him for free). I don't know if he had insurance or not....... He started teaching classes and quickly realized that it was much more work than he imagined. Then he had the state patrol come in and audit him a couple of times because of complaints on the poor quality of his class....... All this time he ran around bad mouthing me and my partner for "gouging" people. Guess what? Mr Do-Good no longer teaches, because he realized he couldn't teach a quality class and charge nothing for it.
A lot of the money I make from teaching classes gets invested right back in to my program so I can provide an even better class. I put this money towards getting more training myself so I can improve my classes even more, I spend a lot on different holsters, props, guns, etc.... so I have actual examples to see in my class.
If you want quality training, do your research.... Figure out who is teaching you, what they are teaching you, what their experience or qualifications are.... And then decide if it is worth it for you.
And if you don't feel you need training..... Then don't pursue it. Carry under the statute I quoted above and take your chances. Either way stay safe out there.
-
Great discussion with excellent posts. Of course we all have a God given right to defend our lives. Living in America we have the right to bear arms. Also by living in a free society we cant and shouldnt legislate responsibility. It falls on our shoulders as individuals to do all we can to be safe and resposible gun owners. My hope is that more of us will seek out quality training.
Sometimes I forget that for most people shooting is a hobby, with self defense a secondary consideration. Statisticly speaking the vast majority of us will never be a victim of a violent crime, so why worry about extra training?
For me this is a lifestyle. A Warrior lifestyle. I just spent 8 hours yesterday training knife combatives with a roomfull of Law Enforcement and Civillian Warriors. And, like everyone else in the class, Ive got the sore back, joints and bruises to prove it.
So whats that worth DaveB ? I put in the time, the blood and sweat (literally) And you expect me to just give that away to you. Sorry, my time and effort is worth something. Devin Crinklaw taught yesterdays class (which was excellent BTW), tuition was around $100, I charge $110 for a seven hour Advanced Pistol Class. You want to tell me that is out of line ? If I were to fill every class I schedule now untill I retire I wont get back what I have put in. Want to know what a good day for me is ? Its when I get someone like you in class and I demonstrate a technique or explain a concept and I see the lightbulb switch on in the students eyes. And I know that I just taught that person something that may save their life. Ater I pay the Range, take out Uncle Sams bit, most people would think what I was doing was a waste of time.
Here are some facts about gunfighting.
- If you see the bad guy coming a mile away, have time to formulate a plan then simply execute that plan from a position of cover . You will most likely be sucessfull with little to no training.
- If you happen to be caught in the middle of a violent robbery and the bad guy or guys arent commited to murder or show up with an unloaded gun. You will most likely be sucessfull with some basic training or a competition background.
- But if you are confronted at close range by an evil psycopath bent on murder, someone who isnt afraid of being shot, stabbed or hit. Without advanced training you will most likely fail. Your only hope will be to die before you see what he is going to do to your family. This is the guy I train for and what motivates me to work very hard, and who I teach my students to fight.
You are certainly free to play the odds. Its all about personal choices. Me, Im heading to the gym. Regards.
- Shawn
-
I had been shooting pistol for 30 yrs. I did all the internet reading on CCW for 2 months before I took my class. I had to save for 6 pay periods to have the money. Do I begrudge the instructor his due? Absolutely NOT! I learn a boatload, remembered things I had forgot and thank the instructor for his time that may some day save my life or someone I love.
I agree we have,and always had, the right to own and carry arms, but in this world you have to abide by laws. If the law is bad it will sooner or later change,work for it!
I want more training, it will come as I can save the money,do I want it for free? NO something worked for just means more and is remembered and learned better.
JMHO
-
All we are saying is that its not the States business. If the State has that power then the State has the power to take it away. Also it doesn't take a genius or well trained person to aim a loaded gun at someone and pull the trigger....the criminals do it all the time. 60 years ago little kids were running around with guns and hunting animals for food by them selves such as Mr. McDonald in the pending US Supreme Court case. Nobody gave a damn then, and nobody should give a damn now. I also bet there were accidents. The difference back then was, parents cared about their kids and took the time to teach them about guns and to respect guns...of course it also was a necessity then. But the biggest reason why people fear and abhor guns today so much is the lies of the media. The media has driven this irrational fear into peoples minds which has caused people to change their thinking and put restrictions on guns. The problem is most of what the media spouts are lies and if you tell a lie long enough it becomes the truth. At least to the people that let themselves be brainwashed because they have not educated themselves by researching the issue and discovering the truth.
-
$25 trainers are going to be the same as $25 FFL transfer dealers, they just don't last.
-
$25 trainers are going to be the same as $25 FFL transfer dealers, they just don't last.
Very true, but $75.00 trainers are going to make more money than $200.00 trainers. All I'm saying is that making it more affordable will get more people in the door. There is a good chance my wife and I would be two of them. We have to watch our money too.
-
I'll attest to Chris Zeeb's class. He takes some very dry information and makes it interesting and informative. The class moves right along, and its not boring! He is an expert when it comes to the laws in NE as well. I am very glad that I am fortunate enough to know Chris and was able to take my class from him! Sure, there are probably cheaper classes, but Chris' is well worth the cash!!
-
Generally, in life, you get what you pay for.
In Chris Zeeb's classes, you get More than you pay for.
sfg
-
I honestly enjoyed Chris's class. Yes, the $$$ was hard to part with, and add to it the additional costs of the permit(s), ammo, and practice, and it?s an expensive undertaking. But in that class I learned a great deal about the Nebraska laws and how they apply to me as a CCW holder. I could have learned all that by reading I suppose, all except how it actually applies to daily life.
I don?t begrudge the costs, not even for the permit. As with most of the folks here I have life long experience with firearms, military training (USAF Security Police), and of course just the fun of going out and running a few drills for the heck of it. Don?t get me wrong, I?d love to have done all that without the cost, but life is just not like that. One must balance the cost with the benefits from their own perspective. Personally I feel it was money well spent, even if my wife does not agree. ;D
Ron
-
I have taken classes offered by both Chris and Shawn. Yes, they were expensive but I came away with some new skills that may just save my life if I am ever in a situation where I need to use deadly force. You can't get these skills by reading a book. Was it worth it? I think so.
-
Thank you all for the nice comments!
-
Regarding Costs of Firearms Training:
The following comments are written in sincere respect for all comments on this posting. To add further perspective:
By way of comparison, consider the cost of industrial training. That is, assume that you're attending a course in Quality Control, Workplace Safety, OSHA Administration, Project Management, or some such similar course.
The daily rate generally runs from about $800/day to upwards of $1500/day. Depending on variables such as timeliness of topic, reputation of the presenter, amount and quality of handouts and course materials, type of training facilities, etc., etc.
True, the company or employing organization most often pays for the entire course. But----the cost is there. Someone pays it.
And more often than not, the course doesn't deal with the heavy issues of life, death, or bodily safety. Or potential incarceration.
The points made here are that (a) training can be expensive and (b) that most training is more expensive than firearms training. Far more expensive.
Then, there's the high cost of attending Harvard Law School................. [You might have to become President.]
sfg