Concealed Carry on The Course

[ditchparrot19]

They offer a CCW class, and has nothing to do with how to shoot, but the other important things. It is 16 hours on the legal aspects of owning a gun, how to care for and store a gun safely, and moral implications on using a gun in self defense.

This is spot-on. No CCW course I'm familiar with deals much with basic shooting instruction – they simply make you prove that you're proficient with your gun before you pass. The classes deal almost entirely with the legal ramifications and pound it into your skull that it's a last-resort deal, and that even brandishing in a second-to-last-resort situation can get you in big trouble. You have to perceive an immediate threat, and that threat may have to be deemed reasonable by a jury.

[Mr. Desmond]

Regardless your fear or trepidation, the numbers are the numbers. CCL holders do not engage in unjustified shootings often, almost to a minuscule degree so your fears are unwarranted. Indeed, they rarely engage in justified shootings so I think it's fair to assume they are a reasonably educated lot both in terms of gun skills as well as people skills, to use your words.

NYTimes/December 26, 2011

lan Simons was enjoying a Sunday morning bicycle ride with his family in Asheville, N.C., two years ago when a man in a sport utility vehicle suddenly pulled alongside him and started berating him for riding on the highway.

Multimedia

Graphic

Easing Restrictions on Gun Permits

Related

• Felons Finding It Easy to Regain Gun Rights (November 14, 2011)

• Some With Histories of Mental Illness Petition to Get Their Gun Rights Back (July 3, 2011)

Enlarge This Image

Ashville Police Department

The bullet passed through Mr. Simons's helmet.

Ashville Police Department

Charles Diez

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

• Read All Comments (505) »

Mr. Simons, his 4-year-old son strapped in behind him, slowed to a halt. The driver, Charles Diez, an Asheville firefighter, stopped as well. When Mr. Simons walked over, he found himself staring down the barrel of a gun.

“Go ahead, I’ll shoot you,” Mr. Diez said, according to Mr. Simons. “I’ll kill you.”

Mr. Simons turned to leave but heard a deafening bang. A bullet had passed through his bike helmet just above his left ear, barely missing him.

Mr. Diez, as it turned out, was one of more than 240,000 people in North Carolina with a permit to carry a concealed handgun. If not for that gun, Mr. Simons is convinced, the confrontation would have ended harmlessly. “I bet it would have been a bunch of mouthing,” he said.

Mr. Diez, then 42, eventually pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill.

______

The bedrock argument for this movement is that permit holders are law-abiding citizens who should be able to carry guns in public to protect themselves. “These are people who have proven themselves to be among the most responsible and safe members of our community,” the federal legislation’s author, Representative Cliff Stearns, Republican of Florida, said on the House floor.

To assess that claim, The New York Times examined the permit program in North Carolina, one of a dwindling number of states where the identities of permit holders remain public. The review, encompassing the last five years, offers a rare, detailed look at how a liberalized concealed weapons law has played out in one state. And while it does not provide answers, it does raise questions.

More than 2,400 permit holders were convicted of felonies or misdemeanors, excluding traffic-related crimes, over the five-year period, The Times found when it compared databases of recent criminal court cases and licensees. While the figure represents a small percentage of those with permits, more than 200 were convicted of felonies, including at least 10 who committed murder or manslaughter. All but two of the killers used a gun.

Among them was Bobby Ray Bordeaux Jr., who had a concealed handgun permit despite a history of alcoholism, major depression and suicide attempts. In 2008, he shot two men with a .22-caliber revolver, killing one of them, during a fight outside a bar.

More than 200 permit holders were also convicted of gun- or weapon-related felonies or misdemeanors, including roughly 60 who committed weapon-related assaults.

In addition, nearly 900 permit holders were convicted of drunken driving, a potentially volatile circumstance given the link between drinking and violence.

____

Ricky Wills, 59, kept his permit after recently spending several months behind bars for terrorizing his estranged wife and their daughter with a pair of guns and then shooting at their house while they, along with a sheriff’s deputy who had responded to a 911 call, were inside. “That’s crazy, absolutely crazy,” his wife, Debra Wills, said in an interview when told that her husband could most likely still buy a gun at any store in the state.

Mr. Wills’s permit was revoked this month, after The Times informed the local sheriff’s office.

[jusanothajoe]

I'm convinced that proposed gun laws are not necessarily to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. My guess is they would only lower the percentage by a small amount. They are to keep us normal law abiding people from killing each other and to keep the crazies away from guns ... what about smart guns?

Wow. Really.

Liberals? Seriously?

This is a group of golfers who are fairly conservative.

Haven't seen "hateful" or ... "violent." I have gleamed a bit too much testosterone for my taste from the OP and others. These are tough decisions and hard consequences that must be viewed in a sober and rational manner before you begin carrying a gun, imho.

Before you pull that gun out, think of the consequences of your actions beforehand, and the laws of your State. Take a course that deals with these issues. There is a lot at stake ...

Let's make all gun owners take a course. But lets turn 16 year olds loose in 3000 lb vehicles with no training what so ever. Wonder why no one ever talks about the evil cars ?

[Gunther]

Very nice, obviously it's happened but again, it's a minuscule pctg of the CCL population and an even smaller pctg of all shootings. There's a lunatic fringe in every demographic. I'm all for strong enforcement of gun laws.

[jusanothajoe]

I have had a pistol in my bedside drawer for over 30 years. Hasn't shot a single person yet. Hasn't fired a shot by itself yet.

There will always be stupid/crazy people, these people can use any weapon they choose to do wrong. Drunk drivers kill more people every year than guns do in 50 years in the US. Let's ban alcohol and SUV's

[David in FL]

I have had a pistol in my bedside drawer for over 30 years. Hasn't shot a single person yet. Hasn't fired a shot by itself yet.

There will always be stupid/crazy people, these people can use any weapon they choose to do wrong. Drunk drivers kill more people every year than guns do in 50 years in the US. Let's ban alcohol and SUV's

Or we could just hold EVERYONE accountable for their actions and the crimes they commit, regardless of the objects that they may use.....

[ditchparrot19]

NYTimes/December 26, 2011

Come on, man! You're going to take an article from a virulently anti-gun publication that possesses an incredible amount of resources to promote its own political agenda and hold that up as evidence that a previous post stating that gun incidents involving CCW holders are extremely rare? The article itself even makes it clear that they're infrequent. There are always going to be exceptions to the norm.

Why don't you dig through the NY Times archives and try to find a piece about how the use of a firearms by a civilian protected innocent lives? In the real world, that's a far more frequent occurrence than any incident resembling the guy on the bike thing, but the paper won't touch that. It doesn't fit its agenda.

[golf-noob-bruce]

I don't think that's true. A quick google search seems to back me up. What are your sources?

[Mr. Desmond]

Come on, man! You're going to take an article from a virulently anti-gun publication that possesses an incredible amount of resources to promote its own political agenda and hold that up as evidence that a previous post stating that gun incidents involving CCW holders are extremely rare? The article itself even makes it clear that they're infrequent. There are always going to be exceptions to the norm.

Why don't you dig through the NY Times archives and try to find a piece about how the use of a firearms by a civilian protected innocent lives? In the real world, that's a far more frequent occurrence than any incident resembling the guy on the bike thing, but the paper won't touch that. It doesn't fit its agenda.

Look at the quote above the article that was posted. Nothing really needed to be said, but the shooter, if he was fairly educated, didn't seem to take to his training.

The NY Times is widely acknowledged as the Best Newspaper in the World .... World.

Facts is facts.

The piece cited facts.

You have your outrage ... that doesn't count for much.

[ditchparrot19]

I don't think that's true. A quick google search seems to back me up. What are your sources?

He should've qualified it by saying "guns owned by responsible citizens."

The vast majority of gun deaths are gang-related -- criminal on criminal. And, of course, that will never change, as criminals pay no heed to gun laws, no matter how stringent.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

And yet most police officers have never drawn a weapon on the job, let alone fired it, yet you (and most proponents) seem to suggest it as being your best line of defense when a threat is perceived, whether real or imagined.

Yeah.  This is the part that frightens me.  These permit holders who have taken an 8 hour class in HOW to shoot, but have spent little or no time learning WHEN it would be proper or acceptable to do so.  Or when it would even be proper to draw a gun.  It takes four half day class sessions, plus 4 open water dives over multiple days just to get a scuba certification so that you can buy air for a dive - all to ensure that you aren't a threat to yourself.  Yet an 8 hour class is all that's required to allow someone run around with a loaded, concealed firearm, potentially a threat to anyone who gives him a dirty look.

I'm far less concerned with a permit holder's gun skills than I am with his people skills - I'm uncertain that the average guy has the judgement to know when his firearm skills should properly be employed, and when to use reason instead of force.  Having lived in the wild west (Montana and Colorado) since 1964, I know my way around firearms, short and long, but I'd be less certain of my ability to handle a seriously threatening situation correctly.  I have little training in such scenarios (aside from a few hours in basic training 49 years ago), and no 8 hour class focused mostly on gun safety is going to significantly improve my skills along those lines.  Unlike what someone said above, just carrying a weapon doesn't bestow upon the user an instant sense of reason and good judgement.  It may actually, in some cases, make a person less likely to try and avoid a potential confrontation because it falsely gives him the confidence that he is able to handle any situation.

Regardless your fear or trepidation, the numbers are the numbers. CCL holders do not engage in unjustified shootings often, almost to a minuscule degree so your fears are unwarranted. Indeed, they rarely engage in justified shootings so I think it's fair to assume they are a reasonably educated lot both in terms of gun skills as well as people skills, to use your words.

Which leads me to even question the necessity for it.  If the incidents are that rare, then why would you want to encumber yourself with a gun, and with the responsibility for knowing where and when to use it properly and safely?

[Mr. Desmond]

Let's make all gun owners take a course. But lets turn 16 year olds loose in 3000 lb vehicles with no training what so ever. Wonder why no one ever talks about the evil cars ?

Your State does not license people or require training?

But I agree with you. Part of the licensing process should include anger management and road rage with the objective to get to your destination safely, and not endangering others. We've seen the "films" about crashes. But why not include talks by victims of road rage and drunk driving, and those who have recovered from such behavior.

[Gunther]

To protect family, life, limb, and property.

[BZCDR]

Me? I think it's a personal choice. It's much the same as if you asked if others carried a condom. Personally, and since you are inquiring, I think it is whack. Don't know how the law works but if somebody came at you with a club and you shot them, it seems possibly extreme. Excessive force. But then you are in Texas so who knows. Are violent encounters common on golf courses? That being said, 'nuff said. Not going o follow this thread. I want golf to take me away from problems.

[newtogolf]

And yet most police officers have never drawn a weapon on the job, let alone fired it, yet you (and most proponents) seem to suggest it as being your best line of defense when a threat is perceived, whether real or imagined.

I think this is a pretty big generalization.  I'd bet most have drawn their weapon here in NY.

[saevel25]

Which leads me to even question the necessity for it.  If the incidents are that rare, then why would you want to encumber yourself with a gun, and with the responsibility for knowing where and when to use it properly and safely?

To me it isn't that difficult to understand when and where to use a gun. If your life is being threatened, then you have a right to defend yourself. It isn't that hard of a choice. Knowing what you can or can not do isn't tough. Actually acting in a situation like that is tough. Even if the incidents are rare, it is a matter of control. Do you want the ability to protect yourself from harm. Do you want to have some choice in the matter, if not then don't own a gun.

[RonTheSavage]

I have had a pistol in my bedside drawer for over 30 years. Hasn't shot a single person yet. Hasn't fired a shot by itself yet. There will always be stupid/crazy people, these people can use any weapon they choose to do wrong. Drunk drivers kill more people every year than guns do in 50 years in the US. Let's ban alcohol and SUV's

I used to be anti guns, UNTIL I had kids. If you keep a gun at home to protect you and your family I say bravo. My uncle was home in the evening with his family and someone tried to kick his door in we're assuming home invasion stye. The only thing my uncle could grab was his bat, which is great UNLESS the bad guys had guns. That got me to thinking about my own family and the possibility of keeping a weapon at home safely locked away somewhere ofcourse. You will not catch me at Starbucks or Chipotle with a gun or a golf course for that matter. I've made it 38 years with pretty good size and a very effective scowl.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

In addition, nearly 900 permit holders were convicted of drunken driving, a potentially volatile circumstance given the link between drinking and violence.

Colorado CCW laws prohibit carrying while under the influence of alcohol....... of course the laws also prohibit driving under the influence and that's regularly ignored, so who's going to believe that permit holders will take the CCW law any more seriously?