New law allows online course for conceal carry permit

[The Legion]

https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2019/06/25/new-law-allows-online-course-conceal-carry-permit/

ASHVILLE, Tenn. (WSMV) - Shane Kerwin just retired from the military.

As a fire arms instructor at Royal Range, he's a big fan of people having guns.

"Yeay, I would say I'm pro second amendment, absolutely," said Kerwin.

Hes not, however, a fan of Tennessee's newest gun law.

Backed by the NRA, the new law allows people to get their conceal carry permits online, meaning they could get their permit with out ever having shot a gun.

All they have to do is take a 90 minute online course instead of taking the previously required eight hour in person, hands on course.

"I think, probably, our biggest concern is that people will just take the online class and then not seek out any additional training and think that, 'well, I've done that so now I'm actually qualified to do this,'" said Kerwin.

Representative Andy Holt sponsored the bill and said it's about saving people money and time.

"You know, if we're talking about having to take a class that requires eight hours of classroom instruction, then that means I'm going to have to be away from my family, away for an entire day," said Holt.

Holt also said he wants to see guns in the hands of as many law abiding citizens as possible.

"In my opinion, more guns does actually create less crime," said Holt.

The law passed. It goes into effect January 1st.

So instructors like Kerwin said all they can do now is hope people act responsibly and seek out hands on training instead of relying soley on the online video.

“There’s a lot more to it than that. Having professional instruction by somebody that is qualified and knows what they’re doing goes a very long way to teaching you what you need to do, but also what not to do and what could be dangerous and unsafe,” said Kerwin.

[chances R]

what a shame......a whole 8 hrs away from their family.  So a mistake, accident, negligence and you take away a life.  That's permanent and a lot longer than 8 hrs.  And taking additional training ?  Yeah, right.  Most don't even shoot once a month, let alone take additional training.

[gary_boom]

Has anyone ever failed the 8 hour class ? The class I attended set the bar pretty low.

[DaveTN]

Quote

"You know, if we're talking about having to take a class that requires eight hours of classroom instruction, then that means I'm going to have to be away from my family, away for an entire day," said Holt.

Ha, ha, ha… people can say the most ignorant stuff and try to pass it off as serious. Having a job must be a real burden on some. 

But I have no problem with this. The cost made it prohibitive for some folks. This easies that a little bit. The legislature isn’t concerned with them being trained. If they were; they would have found a way to do it and reduce the cost.

Its obviously pro gun legislation. Even though some of the pro-gun folks are going to throw a fit.

The guy interviewed in that story was a firearms instructor. If I was a firearms instructor I’m sure my opinion would be different.

Edited June 25, 2019 by DaveTN

[Sidecarist]

This makes me think about the situation in Oneida county NY that has been in the news lately. That man inherited a revolver and couldn't afford to come into compliance with state laws. Now he's charged with a regulatory felony after legally defending himself...

Regardless of NY law being ridiculous this is an example how lowering the regulatory bar to gun ownership is generally a good idea.

Training is important but it shouldn't be a requirement to gun ownership, just like its not for owning knives, bats, cars, etc.

I like Col. Coopers thought...

Given that there are more good guys than bad guys. What would happen if ALL the good guys and ALL the bad guys had guns?

 

[Capbyrd]

12 hours ago, The Legion said:

https://www.wmcactionnews5.com/2019/06/25/new-law-allows-online-course-conceal-carry-permit/

ASHVILLE, Tenn. (WSMV) - Shane Kerwin just retired from the military.

As a fire arms instructor at Royal Range, he's a big fan of people having guns.

"Yeay, I would say I'm pro second amendment, absolutely," said Kerwin.

Hes not, however, a fan of Tennessee's newest gun law.

"I think, probably, our biggest concern is that people will just take the online class and then not seek out any additional training and think that, 'well, I've done that so now I'm actually qualified to do this,'" said Kerwin.

 

 

 

 

Oh boo hoo.   You're just mad your numbers are gonna drop.   Wah. 

 

[E4 No More]

8 minutes ago, Capbyrd said:

 

 

 

Oh boo hoo.   You're just mad your numbers are gonna drop.   Wah. 

 

Apparently he thinks there's a training requirement in the 2A.

[hipower]

Lots of pros and cons to this debate. People on all sides seem to love and hate it at the same time.

While I do believe that the right to own/possess a firearm should not be a legislative issue, that point will probably never be resolved.

I personally don't agree with the online course, if we are required to have some sort of regulation, shouldn't be the end. Say take the course, get a statement/certificate of participation. Then have a physical test for at least basic competence with the firearm.

After all, we are required to test ourselves for a CC permit at a physical location/class. Why should this be any different?

Just because a person can go to a "class" and "Pass" doesn't mean they should be considered competent.

All that being said, it's just a money grab on both sides of this particular coin.

Edited June 25, 2019 by hipower

[Omega]

 

Quote

 

"You know, if we're talking about having to take a class that requires eight hours of classroom instruction, then that means I'm going to have to be away from my family, away for an entire day," said Holt.

Holt also said he wants to see guns in the hands of as many law abiding citizens as possible.

 

This could have been easily accomplished by passing constitutional carry.  I personally am not for this new change, it is just pandering to the pro-gun folks that don't seem to realize that it doesn't do much for them since most pro-gun folks already have their "not really enhanced" CCW permit.  I think it is a personal responsibility to make sure you know how to handle a gun, but it should not be legislated. 

[E4 No More]

1 hour ago, hipower said:

Lots of pros and cons to this debate. People on all sides seem to love and hate it at the same time.

While I do believe that the right to own/possess a firearm should not be a legislative issue, that point will probably never be resolved.

I personally don't agree with the online course, if we are required to have some sort of regulation, shouldn't be the end. Say take the course, get a statement/certificate of participation. Then have a physical test for at least basic competence with the firearm.

After all, we are required to test ourselves for a CC permit at a physical location/class. Why should this be any different?

Just because a person can go to a "class" and "Pass" doesn't mean they should be considered competent.

All that being said, it's just a money grab on both sides of this particular coin.

Well, there are people such as I who have a background in not only the Marine Corps but also as a LEO. Do you think the 8 hour class with a qualification requirement did anything for me that an online course couldn't?

[E4 No More]

Since the law holds people to a legal standard in both self-defense and negligence situations I think it should be up to the individual to decide what training they need.

[xtriggerman]

Ha Ha... here we go again. I like constitutional carry also and let the bodies fall were they may! As a person quite familiar with non country raised folks, It will be interesting to see if the negligent discharges surge with those citizens that want criminals to fear them because they have a gun. Beyond that desire..... they are so ignorant about the physical attributes of a firearm, it would make your head spin!  I'm taking dumb, stupid, AH in the highest degree. And there are a S*** load of them living quite happily in their city controlled environment. As our overall rural populations decrease and suburban areas pick up that migration, yeah, a certain type of population control may not be a bad thing! The bigger picture shows those folks are also spread out all over.  Maybe the average rural citizen knows the difference between a 22 and a 30-30 but still may be lacking in the ability to educate them selves in the safe handling of a carry conceal weapon. The mind set is alive and well..... how many times have you been forced toward the shoulder of the road driving your vehicle because some jerk was hurtling a 4000 lb missile at you? Training or no training, stupid is a common human attribute. Making it easier for all types of folks to put loaded weapons in their pockets has a good news/bad news rider attached. Just how that balances out in the long run may not benefit the 2A crowd. Lets say Hilary won.....as she held the pop vote totals, Supreme court goes left, deaths by CC handgun stats go up or are cooked, That's there in for anther thumping of the 2A.  a bigger turd sandwich that what may have happened if they just leave the 38 state Concealed Carry requirements as they are. I think a better win may be just expanding the current 38 states to all 50 and be done with it. Constitutional carry is technically correct, I get that, reality is we have degenerated from the days when you had to own property to be able to vote. My wife works in child care. An awful lot of kids are medicated and way, way out of control.  The Law has more or less mandated a slow death to what we old guys knew as personal responsibility and the way to teach it to the young. That's just reality the way I see it. 

Edited June 25, 2019 by xtriggerman

[Capbyrd]

15 minutes ago, xtriggerman said:

Ha Ha... here we go again. I like constitutional carry also and let the bodies fall were they may! As a person quite familiar with non country raised folks, It will be interesting to see if the negligent discharges surge with those citizens that want criminals to fear them because they have a gun. Beyond that desire..... they are so ignorant about the physical attributes of a firearm, it would make your head spin!  I'm taking dumb, stupid, AH in the highest degree. And there are a S*** load of them living quite happily in their city controlled environment. As our overall rural populations decrease and suburban areas pick up that migration, yeah, a certain type of population control may not be a bad thing! The bigger picture shows those folks are also spread out all over.  Maybe the average rural citizen knows the difference between a 22 and a 30-30 but still may be lacking in the ability to educate them selves in the safe handling of a carry conceal weapon. The mind set is alive and well..... how many times have you been forced toward the shoulder of the road driving your vehicle because some jerk was hurtling a 4000 lb missile at you? Training or no training, stupid is a common human attribute. Making it easier for all types of folks to put loaded weapons in their pockets has a good news/bad news rider attached. Just how that balances out in the long run may not benefit the 2A crowd. Lets say Hilary won.....as she held the pop vote totals, Supreme court goes left, deaths by CC handgun stats go up or are cooked, That's there in for anther thumping of the 2A.  a bigger turd sandwich that what may have happened if they just leave the 38 state Concealed Carry requirements as they are. I think a better win may be just expanding the current 38 states to all 50 and be done with it. Constitutional carry is technically correct, I get that, reality is we have degenerated from the days when you had to own property to be able to vote. My wife works in child care. An awful lot of kids are medicated and way, way out of control.  The Law has more or less mandated a slow death to what we old guys knew as personal responsibility and the way to teach it to the young. That's just reality the way I see it. 

I'm way more scared of the rural methheads than I am the average city dwelling ignorant moderate.  

[chances R]

13 hours ago, gary_boom said:

Has anyone ever failed the 8 hour class ? The class I attended set the bar pretty low.

Absolutely.  Not frequently but it happens.  I have had range failures as well.

[chances R]

2 hours ago, E4 No More said:

Since the law holds people to a legal standard in both self-defense and negligence situations I think it should be up to the individual to decide what training they need.

you obviously don't understand human nature.....

[hipower]

2 hours ago, E4 No More said:

Well, there are people such as I who have a background in not only the Marine Corps but also as a LEO. Do you think the 8 hour class with a qualification requirement did anything for me that an online course couldn't?

Probably not. It's as I said. Primarily a revenue source. Secondly it does give those without your background a bit of an education. 

I'm not saying this is the answer to all the people getting a CCW, it's just a procedure that gives that warm and fuzzy feeling to the public at large. It lets them think all is well with the world if you do have. Secondly, it does, in my opinion, give at least a listing of who might own a weapon to Big Brother. State, or is it Fed now going thru the Dept. of Homeland Security; issues the certificate(call it what you want...permits, liscense, or whatever) to those taking the "course."

IMO, just a revenue source, and another back-door registry of owners.

I don't dispute that there are a great many here, and around the nation, that this course is  probably not relavent to, nor necessary, as they have far more experience than we civilians will have. But that's the way it seems that lawmakers want it done.

[E4 No More]

Just now, chances R said:

you obviously don't understand human nature.....

Yeah, as a former LEO I don't understand it at all. That's sarcasm, BTW.

Humans will do what humans will do regardless of what they are taught or not taught. We see it on the news of HCP holders doing stupid things regardless of their training.

[chances R]

I know we will not come to an agreement on how much training, if any, should be required to carry a deadly weapon in the public domain.  Certainly the majority will not seek any additional training period.  The problem is when the poop hits the fan, I don't won't to be downwind of the fan that is slinging bullets.  Few train for square range accuracy much less stress environments where every shot counts.

[DaveTN]

9 minutes ago, chances R said:

you obviously don't understand human nature.....

I think most of us do. I think people should be trained, but I too think that is their responsibility. I recently changed my mind on requiring training; you can’t require training for a Constitutional right. Tennessee doesn’t recognize carry as a right; so, they can require anything they want…. but that doesn’t make it right.

Also, take a look at the accidental/negligent shootings we see. It appears to me that most of them are committed by people who at one point had basic training but have become complacent.

[DaveTN]

16 minutes ago, chances R said:

I know we will not come to an agreement on how much training, if any, should be required to carry a deadly weapon in the public domain.  Certainly the majority will not seek any additional training period.  The problem is when the poop hits the fan, I don't won't to be downwind of the fan that is slinging bullets.  Few train for square range accuracy much less stress environments where every shot counts.

I have faced a gunman trying to take my life, more than once, and lived through it. I’m not the only one around here that has. Some of us have experienced what it is like. Please explain how you train someone for that. I have a pretty good idea of what I will be able to do when the "bullet slinging" starts; do you?

I’m not saying training is not a good thing. I’m saying that you implying that our lame azz HCP class helps prepare someone for a shooting, in any way shape or form, is just way off base.

BTW… “We” don’t get a say so, “They” came to the conclusion that live fire is not required and they don’t care what we think.

[Defender]

56 minutes ago, hipower said:

Probably not. It's as I said. Primarily a revenue source. Secondly it does give those without your background a bit of an education. 

I'm not saying this is the answer to all the people getting a CCW, it's just a procedure that gives that warm and fuzzy feeling to the public at large. It lets them think all is well with the world if you do have. Secondly, it does, in my opinion, give at least a listing of who might own a weapon to Big Brother. State, or is it Fed now going thru the Dept. of Homeland Security; issues the certificate(call it what you want...permits, liscense, or whatever) to those taking the "course."

IMO, just a revenue source, and another back-door registry of owners.

I don't dispute that there are a great many here, and around the nation, that this course is  probably not relavent to, nor necessary, as they have far more experience than we civilians will have. But that's the way it seems that lawmakers want it done.

This!  I dont care what they say, when you have to report a gun serial number with the qualification sheet, thats a record somewhere of who has the guns,

[E4 No More]

26 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

I have faced a gunman trying to take my life, more than once, and lived through it. I’m not the only one around here that has. Some of us have experienced what it is like. Please explain how you train someone for that. I have a pretty good idea of what I will be able to do when the "bullet slinging" starts; do you?

I’m not saying training is not a good thing. I’m saying that you implying that our lame azz HCP class helps prepare someone for a shooting, in any way shape or form, is just way off base.

BTW… “We” don’t get a say so, “They” came to the conclusion that live fire is not required and they don’t care what we think.

When I was a LEO I read about a lot of cases where highly trained LEOs didn't react as they were trained. Some ran away and some missed their target from 3 feet. Training does not predict how an individual will react when  gets real in a hurry!

[DaveTN]

2 minutes ago, Defender said:

This!  I dont care what they say, when you have to report a gun serial number with the qualification sheet, thats a record somewhere of who has the guns,

I don't think HCP requires gun information anymore, are they bringing it back for this new permit?

[DaveTN]

3 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

When I was a LEO I read about a lot of cases where highly trained LEOs didn't react as they were trained. Some ran away and some missed their target from 3 feet. Training does not predict how an individual will react when  gets real in a hurry!

Absolutely. And I’m too old to run or fight. All I can do is either bust a cap or do nothing. 

[Defender]

11 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

I don't think HCP requires gun information anymore, are they bringing it back for this new permit?

I didnt know they stopped...i was going on what i saw when i got mine...