Make it legal to carry without permit: yes or no?

[dunndw]

I'm conflicted. The instructor in me says now. After seeing people who couldn't hit the target at 3 yards thinking they could still carry a gun I can't support free for all carrying with no testing process to weed out people that honestly don't need to have a loaded gun in public.

The American in me wants to say yes...what part of "shall not be infringed" is so dang hard to understand.

[Krull]

Yes and no.....you should have to pass a test like the hunter safety class....and no you shouldn't have to pay for your "right" to bear arms. Everyone carry opens up the possibility for more attacks on our right. Now we don't see to many permit holders causing drama.

[Punisher84]

I'm conflicted. The instructor in me says now. After seeing people who couldn't hit the target at 3 yards thinking they could still carry a gun I can't support free for all carrying with no testing process to weed out people that honestly don't need to have a loaded gun in public.

The American in me wants to say yes...what part of "shall not be infringed" is so dang hard to understand.

This is where I fell for a long time. Then, I just realized the permit class doesn't teach much of anything and after I saw people taking 2 and 3 levels of advanced training who could still barely hit a target, I just said screw it. I'm fine either way. The biggest thing to me is I think if you have a permit, you should be allowed to carry anywhere.

[JayC]

You're buying into the progressive argument... We already have 20 million unlicensed drivers over the age of 16 on the roads today... They're called illegal immigrants... They're driving among us every day.... So no allowing everybody over the age of 16 to drive wouldn't drastically increase the number of wrecks, the streets wouldn't turn red with blood.

The entire reason we all like handguns for self defense is because they're the BEST choice for self defense, light weight, easy to use, and effective. The VAST majority of citizens can be handed a handgun, and defend themselves pretty well with it. With little to no training.

The majority of the information on the test is worthless for HCP... Truth is most people don't need to know the difference between a j frame and a k frame revolver to carry a firearm for self protection.

We should focus on the best of both worlds... keeping the current HCP for those who want to carry in other states, and a constitutional carry for all citizens of TN, which requires you to pass the background check to purchase the firearm.

I think everyone should be allowed to carry if they take a class and carry a card in their wallet saying they passed the test. Sound familiar? I have seen many boneheads at the range and even my own family that simply don't know the safety rules until I tell them. If everyone over 16 could drive without a license we would have many more wrecks on the streets. While I think the CCW class is lame at best, it does give basic information that every gun owner, much less CCW, should know. Maybe the compromise is the state does not get involved. You take the class and leave with a card in your wallet from XYZ training academy that says you are "certified." This is how the impact weapon cert is handled.

[JayC]

Yes and no.....you should have to pass a test like the hunter safety class....and no you shouldn't have to pay for your "right" to bear arms. Everyone carry opens up the possibility for more attacks on our right. Now we don't see to many permit holders causing drama.

Well that begs another question... why do we need hunters safety courses to hunt on private land in this state? Why not just make it again an online written course and do away with the shooting part... I'm sorry but standing in line waiting to shoot clay pigeons doesn't teach you much if anything about firearms safety.

Do we really need the government getting involved in this?

[Randy L]

Has anyone here taken the TWRA hunter safety course it used to be gave at high school. I took mine in 1983 and both of my sons have taken theirs it is a much better course than the handgun safety course the only difference is the legal stuff. That is where it needs to be it could be a 6 week course like it was when I was in school. also it needs to be instructed early on to every child. How many children have we lost because they found a gun maybe at a friends house didn't understand the danger and someone dies? Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it is a verse from the Bible but it also applies here. I have never supported the idea that I should as a law abiding citizen should have to pay any money to do what the United States Constitution already guarantees. I did not learn one thing from the handgun course that I did not already know. I have made up my mind I will always carry no matter what laws are changed in the state and keep a copy of the US Constitution on me. Politicians always talk about reasonable restrictions the founding fathers understood that is why they didn't have any. The second amendment was and is about being able to defend against a tyrannical government not necessarily personal protection. Hope this doesn't ramble too much just some quick thoughts on the subject.

[Krull]

Well I think anything that can solidify safety is a good thing. Too many of us take for granted what we already know. I agree the classes are boring to us lifetime firearms owners and handlers , but we assume too much about others ability to grasp the reality of situations because we grew up with it. Maybe they didn't. There is nothing wrong with the hunters safety class. Private land? I remember last year a kid shot another kid when his loaded chambered rifle "slipped" out of his hand and discharged.

[Krull]

I agree we shouldn't have to pay....maybe you should be able to "challenge" the classes with a short questionnaire or something and not have to take the actual class. Heck I don't know.....but I don't think every Tom dick and Harry should carry a firearm until some training has been done, or some knowledge has been shown. Just my opinion.

[peejman]

You're buying into the progressive argument... We already have 20 million unlicensed drivers over the age of 16 on the roads today... They're called illegal immigrants... They're driving among us every day.... So no allowing everybody over the age of 16 to drive wouldn't drastically increase the number of wrecks, the streets wouldn't turn red with blood.

....

I'll agree with this analogy assuming that everyone who carries a gun practices with it for about 2 hours per day (which is the average time a person spends driving).

[Guest cheez]

My main concern would be reciprocity. I think you would definitely lose that without some kind of requirement, now if we could establish nationwide constitutional carry!

TN gun laws are a severe infringement on our second ammendment rights. Especially the typical TN fee grabber money we have to pay for our right. That said though unless every state in the union went to constitutional carry I will want to keep my HCP. I travel to 20 plus states every year and most would not like me carrying without my HCP.

[strickj]

Being afraid of people carrying guns without any training is the same as the flock being scared of people with permits carrying in parks.

[Krull]

Being afraid of people carrying guns without any training is the same as the flock being scared of people with permits carrying in parks.

No it isn't. Not even close.....if you don't know what the heck a hangfire is you don't need to carry a firearm in public.

Edited December 27, 2010 by Krull

[tnhawk]

If you legally able to own a gun, you should be able to carry it. However there should be requirement requiring safety training and an understanding of the laws coverning legal use.

The system in place now restricts issuance of permits, while not assuring permit holders remain current on the changes in laws, proficient skills or safety.

[1gewehr]

I am in favor of unrestricted carry. States that have it (Vermont, Arizona, Alaska) have no higher rate of shootings by concealed carriers than any other state. there is no proof that it presents any hazard to the public. As far as reciprocity goes, how difficult would it be to allow the State to issue a card for that purpose upon request? $10 for a TICS check and $10 for a pretty card should do it.

It might be useful to remember that gun control is a very recent invention in the US. In TN, it first came about to keep blacks unarmed. I remember a NC Highway Patrol officer telling me in 1979 that nobody cared whether I had a concealed weapon as long as I was defending myself if it got used. At the time there was no such thing as a concealed carry permit in NC. Those who felt they needed to carry did so without any license.

The training argument is illogical. We allow many extremely dangerous items to be used by normal people without ANY training at all. Chainsaws, nailguns, ATVs, all cause more accidental deaths than handguns, yet require no instruction or license.

Government is good at providing restrictions based on what bad things MIGHT happen. Unfortunately, this view is at total odds with a free society. In a free society such as that promised by our Founders and the Constitution, the average person should be free to do what he likes as long as it is not presenting an immediate and obvious hazard to others! Handguns are not rocket science. If it's safe enough for the police to carry them, it's safe enough for the average person.

[Punisher84]

No it isn't. Not even close.....if you don't know what the heck a hangfire is you don't need to carry a firearm in public.

Call TBI then because I bet there are a few thousand permits that need to revoked.

[Guest Archminister01]

LOL..I will say this with as little typing as possible. I just moved here from a state where the only thing you need to do to carry a loaded weapon is be of age and pass a background check. That state is Arizona and the streets do not run red with blood. I have never seen an armed individual act any way but courteous while in public. There was no exceptional weapons related events and no extraordinarily high rate of gun related crimes or injuries because of the carry laws. Folks arent being killed daily from accidental discharge etc.

Unless Tennessee is special in any way that would make all of you that say we need regulation think that it would have mass hysteria and mishandling of weapons going on, then why wouldnt you want this state to be a constitutional carry state?

Am I really missing something or am I sensing a form of reverse gun paranoia going on from within the current gun carrying ranks? Are you really that afraid of allowing everyone the ability to carry as long as they pass a background check and are of age?

You can take this as you like it but I think that way of thinking is ridiculous and judgemental. That same judgemental attitude is the one used by those in power to make the rules that want to take our guns.

Once you start down the slippery slope of making regulation, it only gets steeper. The founding fathers had the best of intentions when they wrote what they thought to be a fair and simplistic set of governing rules. Look what has happened to them in the hands of those who presumed that they knew better and had to protect us from ourselves.

Edited December 27, 2010 by Archminister01

[Guest Archminister01]

I am in favor of unrestricted carry. States that have it (Vermont, Arizona, Alaska) have no higher rate of shootings by concealed carriers than any other state. there is no proof that it presents any hazard to the public. As far as reciprocity goes, how difficult would it be to allow the State to issue a card for that purpose upon request? $10 for a TICS check and $10 for a pretty card should do it.

It might be useful to remember that gun control is a very recent invention in the US. In TN, it first came about to keep blacks unarmed. I remember a NC Highway Patrol officer telling me in 1979 that nobody cared whether I had a concealed weapon as long as I was defending myself if it got used. At the time there was no such thing as a concealed carry permit in NC. Those who felt they needed to carry did so without any license.

The training argument is illogical. We allow many extremely dangerous items to be used by normal people without ANY training at all. Chainsaws, nailguns, ATVs, all cause more accidental deaths than handguns, yet require no instruction or license.

Government is good at providing restrictions based on what bad things MIGHT happen. Unfortunately, this view is at total odds with a free society. In a free society such as that promised by our Founders and the Constitution, the average person should be free to do what he likes as long as it is not presenting an immediate and obvious hazard to others! Handguns are not rocket science. If it's safe enough for the police to carry them, it's safe enough for the average person.

Cheers man ..you said it better than I did. Sorry I didnt read farther in before making my last post but I couldnt take any more nor belive some of what I was reading. Very Well said!

[strickj]

No it isn't. Not even close.....if you don't know what the heck a hangfire is you don't need to carry a firearm in public.

Sure it is. There are plenty of places where no training is required for gun carry and nothing bad happens.

Same as- there are plenty of places where park carry is allowed and nothing bad happens.

Take a look at GA's laws for one example. No permit required for car carry. No training or loooong wait for a permit. Pay your 50 bucks and you're off to the races! Never hear of anything bad happening there.

"People shouldn't be allowed to carry guns in XYZ because that's where my kids play/people drink/whatever." - Irrational fear with no evidence to back up the claim.

"People shouldn't be allowed to carry guns in public if they did not attend an 8 hour class on how to oil a handgun" - Irrational fear with no evidence to back up the claim.

The TN HCP training requirements are a joke.

[Guest tedbo]

Constitution lover,here!

My Creator gave me the right and DUTY to protect me and mine. The FF's guaranteed it by the Constitution (Law of the land).

Any polititians that ever thought/acted against that should have been run out of town on a rail along with being tarred and feathered when these stupid idjits first started opening their mouths.

Everyone should be able to carry as long as they haven't been convicted of a murder or other heinous crime. Yes,that would include ex-cons(refer back to previous sentence). They have served their debt let them get on with their life.

If they get arrested for such a crime a second time,then WHY the heck were they out to begin with?

Now,as far as a permit and its costs,we should be putting those costs to education.

Education of proper gun handling and current laws we all must abide by.

I think it would be cheaper in the long run in several ways.

Educate,educate,educate! That is the proper tool.

What we are paying out for a carry permit should instead go towards costs of educating proper gun handling.

Paying for a right isn't a right it is a privelege.

I too, have been around guns and people carrying guns since I was 5 years old and have yet to see anyone get shot unless it was in a training scenario.

[Guest President Fernatt]

The feelings seem to all be along the same lines. I had another question in the original thread that no one has really touched on and maybe those from Arizona can help me out. I think if total constitutional carry was permitted it would seem like an initial victory...but does anyone think it would backfire by encouraging almost every business to place up a "gunbuster" sign? People from other states have any experience in the matter?

[Jonnin]

I am no fan of the "permit". In my opinion, the only permit I need is a copy of the 2nd ammendment, and also in my opinion, NO place can restrict that (cannot be infringed) not airports, not businesses, not courtrooms, nothing. That said, I approve of background checks: criminals have to be prevented from such easy access to weapons. Society has to function and basic attempts to keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals must be made.

The class needs to be part of highschool. We see it month after month, though only a few per year how many kids get shot because they were fooling around with a gun? This happens because the kids are taught all about sex and VD, all about dope and booze, but showing them the 3 simple rules of safe gun handling is not presented to them. The class would not be needed if schools would take 1 week off from the "this is your brain on meth" and replace it with a week of safe gun handling. Not even shooting the gun, just explain that all guns are always loaded, do not point them at anything you do not intend to shoot, etc. This would save many lives of these 15-25 year olds that find/buy/etc a gun then shoot their buddy showing it off.

The permit does not make me feel that someone with a gun is more qualified (ooo, this guy PROVED he can hit a massive target at short range, barely!!!) than someone who has not had it. Ive seen people who have had the class that are dangerous to be near, and others who can barely hit a 10 inch target at 20 feet. Ive seen guys who dont have a permit who can hit a 2 inch target at 50 feet and who are very safe to be around. The permit and the class are just a tax on the gun owner, and thats how I always have and always will see it.

[JayC]

I agree we shouldn't have to pay....maybe you should be able to "challenge" the classes with a short questionnaire or something and not have to take the actual class. Heck I don't know.....but I don't think every Tom dick and Harry should carry a firearm until some training has been done, or some knowledge has been shown. Just my opinion.

What is the real level of knowledge that needs to be passed on? The fact is the vast majority of firearm owners know enough to defend themselves.

The training argument is invalid to begin with... Police Officer by far receive a LOT more training than the average HCP holder let alone the average citizen who owns a firearm. Yet police officers are 5 times more likely to kill an innocent person than your average citizen...

98% of the time a citizen is involved in a shooting, nobody except the bad guy ends up dead. Only about 2% of shootings by citizens end up with an innocent person being killed. And keep in mind that figure doesn't account for all the cases of where a firearm is displayed by not fired, and the bad guy runs away.

(Since I know somebody is going to dispute police officer vs citizen innocent death rate: http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/5.1/gun-facts-5.1-screen.pdf page 28. Comes from a study written by Clayton Cramer and David Kopel)

I think we should encourage firearms training, it's helpful to train and practice as much as possible, but there is no need for the state to FORCE you to have 8 hours of virtually useless training in order to get a permit to carry a firearm in this state.

Again, I ask, how many people are FAILING the current course? How many fail the written part virtually nobody... How many are failing the practical (shooting)... maybe 1-2% at most (probably a lot lower)... So why is it we need to pay $50-100 for a class, another $20-30 for ammo, to take a class that virtually everybody passes? Can we not have the same basic outcome by requiring people take a free (part of the state permit fee) open book test online and accomplish 98% of the same result we have today?

Or do we even need it... could we end up with the same result and just hand out a safety/law brochure with every firearm purchase? I think the results would be pretty much identical to what we have today.

Look at AZ, they have constitutional carry, how many non-permit holders have killed an innocent person by mistake during a self defense shooting in the last 6 months... 0.

[Guest HexHead]

Everybody? No, felon's and those who have been found mentally insane probably should have restrictions placed on their ability to carry concealed weapons.

Everybody else, YES, we should encourage constitutional carry here in TN.

I'm all for a simple test, if you can legally own it, you can legally carry it.... period... simple law.

I've come to feel really strongly about this recently. I would still have a permit since the reciprocity with other states is desirable to me. In AZ, you also still need to permit carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, I'm okay with that also, as it's probably the only way it would pass here too. People that carry "full time" would probably still opt for the permit.

However, there shouldn't be other restrictions on carrying if you are legally allowed to own a gun. The cry about criminals and felons etc are without merit because they aren't legally supposed to have a gun in the first place. Criminals don't care about permits. If you use your gun illegally, they should throw the book at you. If you use a gun to commit a crime, tack on 5 years. But drop the BS carrying charge. Charge them heavily for owning the gun illegally in the first place, not carrying it illegally.

If you can pass the NICS and buy a gun legally, that should give you the right to carry it. I'd even be willing to trade giving up "private sales" without a background check to ensure only people allowed to own the gun in the first place is carrying one.

Edited December 27, 2010 by HexHead

[Guest HexHead]

I am in favor of unrestricted carry. States that have it (Vermont, Arizona, Alaska) have no higher rate of shootings by concealed carriers than any other state. there is no proof that it presents any hazard to the public. As far as reciprocity goes, how difficult would it be to allow the State to issue a card for that purpose upon request? $10 for a TICS check and $10 for a pretty card should do it.

Other states that offer reciprocity often insist that the carrier's home state have criteria similar to the state granting the reciprocity. It's one of the reasons Wyoming was looking at dropping several states and why TN didn't recognize Alabama until fairly recently.

[Krull]

Sure it is. There are plenty of places where no training is required for gun carry and nothing bad happens.

Same as- there are plenty of places where park carry is allowed and nothing bad happens.

Take a look at GA's laws for one example. No permit required for car carry. No training or loooong wait for a permit. Pay your 50 bucks and you're off to the races! Never hear of anything bad happening there.

"People shouldn't be allowed to carry guns in XYZ because that's where my kids play/people drink/whatever." - Irrational fear with no evidence to back up the claim.

"People shouldn't be allowed to carry guns in public if they did not attend an 8 hour class on how to oil a handgun" - Irrational fear with no evidence to back up the claim.

The TN HCP training requirements are a joke.

In GA you have to have it locked in your glove box. *Not the same thing as walking around with a loaded,chambered pistol. *My fears of being shot in a bathroom because the moron next to me dropped his weapon are not the same as the liberal dipsticks who would rather you get eaten by a brown bear as opposed to being able to defend yourself. *Don't even put me in that category.*