Just a little curious? If my State is similar to yours..

I'm in the minority in that I think people should be required to take training or show competency before being issued a carry license.

However, there should be no cost. The state should pay for the courses if organizations such as local clubs or NRA can't provide the training for free.

I know I'm competent with my weapon handling, but I don't know if some other guy in the grocery store is. I'd like us to all be trained a bit better, but for it to be something to add to our skills, not something made into a burden or hurdle.

Flame on.
 
I just walked into the sheriff office and asked...although I do know the sheriff personally ( so do a bunch of other people)

Cost me 20 bucks ...but oh well
Click to expand...

I live in Alabama too. I don't know the sheriff, but I walk into his office, they run a quick background check, I pay them $15, and I walk out with my permit.
 
In Washington state the fee is about $60. You can pay an extra $3 to have your license laminated.

WA is Open Carry, so you only need the Concealed Pistol License (CPL) if you're going to conceal (which I highly recommend in this state).

I walked into the Snohomish County Sheriffs office in Everett, WA. I filled out the form and they put my name on a list. I sat down and waited 5 minutes. They called my name, I went back to a window where someone looked over my form, and took my money. A deputy came out and walked me over to an electronic fingerprint machine and took my prints. Total time in the office was less than 20 minutes. I got my license in the mail within a week. No training required.
 
WA the fee is $55.25, I walked in on a Thursday, filled out forms, got fingerprinted, walk out, took 15 minutes, license in my mail box that next Monday.

BTW: Unlicensed OC is just fine...did unlicensed OC for almost 35 years before I broke down and got my CPL a few years ago....so now I don't have to make two trips off the mountain when I purchased a new pistol. With a CPL you don't have the stupid wait period, I can just put down my pennies and pick up the pistol and go home.

I still OC, that didn't change. Laws are such that OC or CC, local governments can't make their laws different than the state's law, not that it ever bothered me as we live 20 miles out of town anyway. I very much disagree that OC is a problem here in WA. In over 40 years OC in WA I have had one word with a Deputy Sheriff...litteraly...His one word was "hunting?" my one word "Yep" (yes, I have OCd on the wet side)

Oh yes, to answer the agreements between states. Some our unilateral...the "any state" states, some are bilateral, only with an agreement, WA is if you meet these conditions, we will recognize your license, and bilateral agreement...the terms that catch most states that WA will not recognize are "will not issue to anyone under 21" (I know this is why we do niot recognize ID) and the mental health check. then some states, like OR and NY, will recognize no-ones license but their own. It's a state law thing. With NM their big cramp is training...if you do not have what NM thinks is enough training, they will not recognize your states permit.
 
Last edited:
checkmyswag said:
I'm in the minority in that I think people should be required to take training or show competency before being issued a carry license.

...

Flame on.
Click to expand...
Okay, got your Nomex zipped up?

Unless it has been revised within the past 30 days, the 2nd Amendment does not say, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the People (with whom checkmyswag feels comfortable) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Certainly training is good, and more training is better. But, to be constitutional, it has to be voluntary. Once any state makes training a mandatory prerequisite to being allowed to carry a firearm, it is an infringement.

Of course, the requirement to have a license or permit is also an infringement unless some form of carry is allowed without a license (such as Ohio, Arizona and Pennsylvania, where unlicensed open carry is legal).
 
No, it doesn't have to be voluntary to be constitutional. The concept of the militia at the time the 2nd amendment was written was anything but voluntary. There were even public laws both earlier and later that stated exactly what it involved. You had to be free, white and over a certain age as well as under a certain age (which probably most of us are over now--I certainly am). None made no mention of carrying concealed weapons or of women. Naturally, we now prefer a different intpretation of such archaic notions.
 
No, it doesn't have to be voluntary to be constitutional. The concept of the militia at the time the 2nd amendment was written was anything but voluntary. There were even public laws both earlier and later that stated exactly what it involved. You had to be free, white and over a certain age as well as under a certain age (which probably most of us are over now--I certainly am). None made no mention of carrying concealed weapons or of women. Naturally, we now prefer a different intpretation of such archaic notions.
Click to expand...

What does the definition of who comprises the militia and what the militia may or may not be allowed to use as weapons, or the manner of that use, have to do with the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms?
 
first, to answer the original question, FL requires a class, unless you are priory/current military or LEO. Then you can opt out of taking the class.

Second, as for requirments, the fact that they require you to have a permit would already make it unconstitutional. the constitution does not say a well regulated militia with proper permits. So, if they required a class, how is that any worse? There are way too many idiots with guns out there and all that does is hurt US. the people who responsibly own a firearm, so in order to help keep our rights in place, I would be more than happy to take a 4 or 6 hour class. Hell, might even learn something.
 
Just re-read the second amendment again. If it isn't obvious, then I'll never convince you otherwise. It's written in pretty plain language. Maybe it's too short and has too much room between the lines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top