Responsibility of HCP Instructors to evaluate expertise of students?

[wcsc12]

As a instructor, I am of two minds on the permit thing. I believe in the 2nd admendment..but I've seen people who couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a tac nuke. I have failed people on the shooting portion...never had anyone fail what is basically a open book test...yet.

If someone was so bad they were dangerous to other students or myself...they would be asked to leave.

Is that with a refund or without a refund?

[dunndw]

If they are dangerous to me or my students...no refunds. I will work with students to help them pass if they do fail the shooting portion.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk

[Makiaveli]

they are granted their RIGHT

This is where I think you are off. How can the govt. grant us something we already have? You are saying, in effect, that unless you can prove competency, then your right should be taken away.

[Guest clownsdd]

It is my right to carry a handgun.

It is my responsibility to do it right.

NOT the gubment.

[Guest bkelm18]

Since when was a right "granted"? Something is either a right or it isn't. If it is then it's not granted by law, it's protected by law.

You can call a turd sandwich a rose, but it's still a turd sandwich. Whether we think it is right or not, we are granted the privilege to carry by the state of Tennessee. We have no right to carry in TN. In fact is illegal to carry a firearm in TN. Having an HCP is merely an exception to this law. It is what it is.

[tnhawk]

When I took my HCP class this past weekend we had a few students who obviously had never fired a handgun before. There were enough of them on the firing line that the RO didn't notice the trouble I was having with my gun having light strikes...

What's done is done, I just wanted to see what everyone's thoughts were about it.

My concern would be having a pistol I couldn't depend on! I'm sure most instructors point out that completing the class is only the beginning of learning to carry responsibily.

Edited August 17, 2011 by tnhawk

[zapfbroad]

For the HCP instructor to evaluate the "expertise" is not the job. They're responsible for the attendants & employees safety in accordance to the rules they outline. They're to provide instruction regarding the Basic laws & Basic operational hardware of firearms. They're to administer a Basic range test. The same holds true for driving exams, scuba certifications, small plane pilots, etc. You just need to pass Minimum requirements. Continuing in any endeavor that requires licensing or certification with ignorance and without practice may result in death, especially real estate & insurance agents hah.

Allow a little natural selection to work for us here with a bit more hands off approach. This is why when I buy an iron or toaster it's got a multi lang manual that cost half the production price because of all the disclaimers, warnings & indemnification clauses that won't be read by the idiots who killed themselves to warrant aforementioned. If you build walls based on ignorance or idiocy we can't have our village right. Less rules.. if society was a tad dicier we wouldn't have so much time to have idle playgrounds and be quite so hedonistic.

The gov't shouldn't infringe any further on our 'inalienable rights' that are constitutionally declared rights as granted by God. I tell people freely I'm beholden to no man on this earth so please take a step back.

via EPIC4G SRF1.1.0 by Android Creative Syndicate

[Mike.357]

scuba certifications,

oddly enough to become open water certified by PADI I had to take multiple classes in a pool and classroom as well as complete two open water dives which showed I knew the skills learned in the pool. If I f'd up on a dive the only person I could hurt was me, but if I did similar with a gun I may well not be hurt in the least.

[zapfbroad]

but you must acknowledge that those were demonstrating mastery of that skillset, to pass you must accomplish a Minimum still. My point is that no testing will be inclusive of the skills that must be honed over time. There are varying degrees of difficulty where you can set minimums at but those are still all Entrance exams to play. to go pro you gotta practice

[Guest Miracle]

My concern would be having a pistol I couldn't depend on! I'm sure most instructors point out that completing the class is only the beginning of learning to carry responsibily.

I could not agree more. Once granted a permit to carry, one should continue his training on how to use a weapon properly. That's the exact same thing I have been arguing in favor for this entire thread.

You can call a turd sandwich a rose, but it's still a turd sandwich. Whether we think it is right or not, we are granted the privilege to carry by the state of Tennessee. We have no right to carry in TN. In fact is illegal to carry a firearm in TN. Having an HCP is merely an exception to this law. It is what it is.

This.

This is where I think you are off. How can the govt. grant us something we already have? You are saying, in effect, that unless you can prove competency, then your right should be taken away.

Not meant to be disrespectful, but if your argument holds any weight, why then can the government, federal or local, withhold a 19 year old from self defense carry? Or why can they prohibit someone convicted of a felony his "right" to carry a gun?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

[Makiaveli]

Not meant to be disrespectful, but if your argument holds any weight, why then can the government, federal or local, withhold a 19 year old from self defense carry? Or why can they prohibit someone convicted of a felony his "right" to carry a gun?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

No disrespect taken nor do I think you meant any The point is, we have the right. Period. The govt has been given the ability to deny us that right due to the laws we have passed. The Constitution, in my understanding, merely affirms the rights we have. It doesn't grant them to us. That thinking is what allowed all the restrictions that have been passed.

FTR, I'm a Libertarian and so I take exception to almost all the laws that don't involve someone infringing on another's rights. Murder, theft etc so we are clear. I could argue against all sorts of things, but I am not delusional and so I know our society is too sick to handle the true freedom we should have. So I won't rant against driver's licenses, but I will object to things like even with a HCP I won't be able to carry at work due to it being a city building. Odd since you would think in a building full of police officers and armed security it wouldn't exactly be a big deal....

[BigK]

What rights does the bill of rights "grant us"? NONE!!! They are ours already. Including the right to keep and bear arms.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a WINNER!! This ^^^ EXACTLY!

[Guest Miracle]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a WINNER!! This ^^^ EXACTLY!

Then why can a state or local municipality deny a 19 year old his right? How about that convicted felon we mentioned earlier? States have constitutions too... they can, and in most cases, do, have some sort of firearms regulations. Look.... I want to be able to own a gun as much as, if not more than most of you... but I think the state of tennessee is very lax with their laws and regulations, so that isn't my argument here. My argument is this: there are a lot of ignorant people out there. People that do not grasp the basically simple universal rules of handling a firearm, and even less have experience in actually using a gun. All I am advocating is a continual training, instead of barely scathing by on an HCP class, and not doing anything else. That's it.

I tend to take a less libertarian viewpoint on a lot of things. I just don't think the gun market should be a free, open, whomsoever will type business. Not everybody should, nor is everybody worthy, and a lot are not smart enough to handle a gun... that's just the way it is.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

Edited August 19, 2011 by Miracle

[sigmtnman]

Because The State Loves You | Libertarian News

[zapfbroad]

That video is disturbing on a lot of levels

via EPIC4G SRF1.1.0 by Android Creative Syndicate

[G27]

A right isn't something granted by the state. That's a privilege.

I agree with OS -there should be no permit required, no minimum standard.

What part of 'shall not be infringed' makes this difficult to understand for some folks?

[G27]

I tend to take a less libertarian viewpoint on a lot of things. I just don't think the gun market should be a free, open, whomsoever will type business. Not everybody should, nor is everybody worthy, and a lot are not smart enough to handle a gun... that's just the way it is.

Yah, that's pretty obvious.

God forbid people be free and we follow the COTUS as it's written.

[BigK]

Then why can a state or local municipality deny a 19 year old his right? How about that convicted felon we mentioned earlier? States have constitutions too... they can, and in most cases, do, have some sort of firearms regulations. Look.... I want to be able to own a gun as much as, if not more than most of you... but I think the state of tennessee is very lax with their laws and regulations, so that isn't my argument here. My argument is this: there are a lot of ignorant people out there. People that do not grasp the basically simple universal rules of handling a firearm, and even less have experience in actually using a gun. All I am advocating is a continual training, instead of barely scathing by on an HCP class, and not doing anything else. That's it.

I tend to take a less libertarian viewpoint on a lot of things. I just don't think the gun market should be a free, open, whomsoever will type business. Not everybody should, nor is everybody worthy, and a lot are not smart enough to handle a gun... that's just the way it is.

I know people too stupid to raise kids, but we don't stop them from breeding. Is that even a protected right in the Constitution? I have power saws, a nail gun, and a few hammers in my garage. I've never received formal training with them and compared to many, I might seem less than proficient. Should I be denied the privilege of buying tools? I know they aren't as dangerous as a gun, but I still might hurt myself or someone else with them out of stupidity.

In principle, I don't want idiots handling guns around me either, but I still don't advocate disarming them. I feel denying them the best possible means of self-defense merely because they lack proficiency is just wrong. I also don't think more laws requiring training are the answer either. At the end of the day, you gotta just accept the fact that you can't fix "stupid".

I wasn't going to mention this, but where's my right to buy a fully auto M-16 or a grenade launcher gone? Our founding fathers intended us to have access to them as well. They were protecting our rights FROM THE NEWLY FORMED GOVERNEMENT (not our own stupidity). They viewed gov't as the enemy of our freedom. They envisioned us needing to overthrow the new government they were creating, if it became oppressive. How do we do that with the tools the current gov't is "allowing" us to own?

Edited August 19, 2011 by BigK

[Guest Miracle]

A right isn't something granted by the state. That's a privilege.

I agree with OS -there should be no permit required, no minimum standard.

What part of 'shall not be infringed' makes this difficult to understand for some folks?

So you want convicted felons eligible to own firearms and carry handguns?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

[sigmtnman]

So you want convicted felons eligible to own firearms and carry handguns?

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

If they are safe enough to walk among us, then yes. If they are not safe, then they should not be walking around.

[G27]

So you want convicted felons eligible to own firearms and carry handguns?

If they've served their time, why shouldn't they have the right to defend themselves?

[Guest Miracle]

Wow. Agree to disagree. I'll bow out of this one gracefully.

Y'all have fun.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

[Makiaveli]

Wow. Agree to disagree. I'll bow out of this one gracefully.

Y'all have fun.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

So if I get a felony for insider trading I shouldn't be allowed to own a gun? No one is arguing that a person should be allowed to carry while still serving a sentence, ie on parole/probation I don't think. But if you have served your sentence then why shouldn't your rights be restored?

Let's look at it another way, this person is too dangerous to be allowed to own a firearm, but he is safe enough to walk the streets? So that means his previous conduct was so horrendous that he is forever tainted. Then why was he allowed out of prison in the first place? So this is more a sentencing issue than a gun rights issue. I always get seriously bent out of shape when I read about a criminal getting arrested who was just released in July and who received a 5 year sentence for the same **** crime in November. Umm wait what? Happens all the time but no one makes a big deal out of it until some "important" person gets mugged or carjacked. But enough on that...

People toss "Felon" around like it automatically makes the person irredeemable. Now don't get me wrong, some criminals should be shot, others locked in a hole forever to rot. And never get me started on pedophiles. But does your garden variety criminal who racked up a non-violent felony deserve to forever be barred from defending himself?

**edit** FTR I am not a felon, don't knowingly have any felons in my family, etc. About as close as I come is a long time friend of mine's daughter married one and I don't associate with him due to him being a jerk as much as my work restrictions.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Makiaveli

[G27]

Wow. Agree to disagree. I'll bow out of this one gracefully.

Y'all have fun.

Probably best, gun control generalizations based on emotion don't stand up to factual discussions very well.