• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

From the NRA-ILA: More Unnecessary Regulation Being Proposed for Right-to Carry Bill

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
Thursday, April 14, 2011

Key legislators who have supported past Right to Carry bills in Wisconsin have recently begun to demand that a mandatory training provision be a component of any Right-to-Carry bill introduced this year. The National Rifle Association (NRA) is the world’s largest firearms safety and proficiency training organization but it trusts citizens to assume this responsibility on their own. The government should not deem it necessary to micromanage the citizen exercise of essential rights. This is not the American way.

The fact that the NRA’s trust is well placed is proven through the experience associated with millions of citizens who have obtained concealed carry permits in the nine states with no mandatory training component and millions of others in twenty other states who are able to carry firearms in public, concealed or openly, without a permit being required. Not one of these 29 states is experiencing problems. If there were problems, at least one state through all of the years would have amended its law to require training. In light of this long standing and well-tested rule of responsibility set by the citizens of these other states, there is no valid reason for Wisconsin’s legislators to believe that their constituents will prove to be the exception.

More disappointingly, even some firearms instructors in the state are promoting a training mandate. These are people who should know better but they too choose to ignore the proven experience in all of these other states. While some are unfortunately motivated by what they see is the potential to profit handsomely, others are simply misinformed. They must understand that citizens are capable of deciding for themselves that attending firearms training is the responsible thing to do.

Many who claim that a training mandate is essential, point to the required training that law enforcement officers complete. The training necessary for citizens and law enforcement is different because their objectives are different. A citizen’s goal is to survive a life-threatening encounter. Research and experience shows this most often involves scaring away an attacker without a shot being fired and seeking safety. Law enforcement officers require extensive training because they must engage in pursuit, apprehension and suspect control. In other words, they must bring the fight to the criminal. This is much more complex and dangerous than simply fending off an attacker.

In addition, much of a law enforcement officer’s firearms training revolves around threat identification and shoot/don’t shoot scenarios. This is necessary because police officers frequently enter unknown circumstances after a call for assistance. Citizens, on the other hand, rarely have difficulty determining who the threat is. For instance, a woman being attacked by a man in a parking garage is certain of who is posing the threat.

Some claim that there is no cost associated with a training mandate. This is untrue. The cost is that some people, such as stalking victims, who most need immediate protection offered by a firearm aren’t able to get it. The cost certainly outweighs the apparently non-existent benefit of a mandate based upon the experience of the other states.

Your NRA is working diligently in Madison to ensure that the strongest possible Right-to-Carry legislation finally becomes law in the Badger State. It is your responsibility to educate your friends, family and legislators.

Please contact your state legislators to ask that they support your Right-to-Carry, it is critical that you ask them to oppose the imposition of needless mandates and restrictions. The experience shows that these do nothing but deter good citizens from protecting themselves and their loved ones from harm.


You know what this means, folks. Start calling both your state legislators and demand that they follow the NRA's lead on the subject and not require training. It is completely unnecessary, and over a dozen states do not require training at all to exercise one's right to carry.

Suggested wording: "The nations largest organization of firearms training instructors do not want mandated training, even if it benefited their individual instructors. Why are you demanding training? The States of Washington, Indiana, Georgia, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Arizona, Alaska, Vermont, Maryland, Hawaii, and New York do not require a training class to get a carry license. There is no reason to require this for Wisconsin. It is a right, not an expensive privilege."
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
Required training? No thanks.

[video=youtube;mhIJOVD8hwY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhIJOVD8hwY[/video]
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
As I pick myself up off the floor.............

WOW!

This is very interesting and welcome news from an organization that seemed to have lost it's direction in the past.
I am very happy the NRA is now on-board with our rights instead of negotiating them away.

Does anyone have a direct link to this so I can get it on my FB page?
 

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
No sources. No quotes. No pics.

Didn't happen.




9:00am on a Friday is a bit early for propaganda...
 
Last edited:

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
No sources. No quotes. No pics.

Didn't happen.




9:00am on a Friday is a bit early for propaganda...

Don't shoot the messenger. :uhoh: I just copied it directly from the NRA-ILA site, and added a bit of commentary insofar as "if the NRA, the biggest gun training org out there, is saying training shouldn't be mandatory, why are you listening to a small subset of instructors who live in a neighboring state?"

I don't see the issue here. I think it's universally well known here is that constitutional carry is the goal, and if that cannot be done, the least costly method to licensing concealed carry should be done. That means no training which can add over 100 dollars to the cost of a carry license.
 

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
Don't shoot the messenger.

Not my intention. Just pointing out that there is absolutely no info in that story. Hell, 5 minutes here and the author could have all the names he wanted...

Key legislators, some firearms instructors, Many who claim, Some claim...


It's a long winded ad for a national organization half heartedly disguised as urgent information. i.e. propaganda.

Your NRA is working diligently in Madison to ensure that the strongest possible Right-to-Carry legislation finally becomes law in the Badger State.

The guys here are way ahead of curve. They know who the players are. And as an innocent observation I'll point out that if the above statement was even remotely true it would have been talked about here a thousand times over. Yet there has been nary a peep. So the above statement could be seen as a "bit" (cough cough) disingenuous. IMHO.

:)

You know what? I'd also like to point out that the guys here have been relentless in their battle. They have been writing, calling, and voting. For the NRA to just come in and take credit in that fluff piece ad is kind of sickening. If, when, and what we get here in Wisco will have nothing to do with the "efforts" of the NRA and everything to do with members here. Unless it's Concealed and not Constitutional. Then it's the NRA's fault.

:banghead:
 
Last edited:

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
Well, I happen to agree with you about the not sharing credit part. ILA tends to do that, and to not understand that purely because they are a powerhouse in DC (they do that really well and I give them much credit for it), that they are not the only players in the statehouses across the country. SAF/CCRKBA gave a lot of credit to grassroots groups that they work with when they file suit. NRA-ILA's litigation division doesn't tend to see that. See Heller, see McDonald. Heller was a privately funded suit, and SAF did the McDonald case along with ISRA.

Still an NRA member though. The discounts are cool, their training certs are well recognized, and I vote against members of the board who think that not playing well others is somehow a good thing.
 

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
I am an NRA Certified Firearms Instructor and State of Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor and I support permit-less carry with no formal training. Training is an obligation that goes hand in glove with the right to carry and each individual is in a good position to judge whether or not his/her training level is adequate, and if not, what additional training is needed.

If Wisconsin gets permit carry and requires training, if allowed to do so, I will become a WI instructor and offer such training at deeply discounted prices. (See my posting offering the Utah "permission slip" class on the last weekend of the month for less than 1/2 of the lowest rate in Utah and 10% of the lowest rate in WI.)

"Permission slips" do have utility however, particularly if you travel. And, here, they come in handy because they bypass the Brady Bill check, all waiting periods, and the State and Federal GFSZ laws. I still believe they should be optional just as I believe that in the case of permit-less carry, each individual is responsible for obtaining training in the applicable laws
 

Flipper

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
If the training thing gets into the introduced bill, it says to me the LRB just dusted off the old PPA. Not much orginal thinking in that group. I wonder if there is anyone on their staff that could get all 4 of the following correct: 1) Difference between a shootgun and a rifle 2) Difference between a revolver and a pistol 3)Which of these 4 is a gun 4) Difference between clip and a magazine.

Maybe we should develop a test for the LRB, after all they are drafting the law, they should have a knowledge of the subject.
 
Last edited:
M

McX

Guest
I am an NRA Certified Firearms Instructor and State of Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor and I support permit-less carry with no formal training. Training is an obligation that goes hand in glove with the right to carry and each individual is in a good position to judge whether or not his/her training level is adequate, and if not, what additional training is needed.

If Wisconsin gets permit carry and requires training, if allowed to do so, I will become a WI instructor and offer such training at deeply discounted prices. (See my posting offering the Utah "permission slip" class on the last weekend of the month for less than 1/2 of the lowest rate in Utah and 10% of the lowest rate in WI.)

"Permission slips" do have utility however, particularly if you travel. And, here, they come in handy because they bypass the Brady Bill check, all waiting periods, and the State and Federal GFSZ laws. I still believe they should be optional just as I believe that in the case of permit-less carry, each individual is responsible for obtaining training in the applicable laws

you may kick me if you desire. i'm going to be a weenie. hold out and see who they res. with. bet in advance it's Utah- or related. Walk on their permit and deprive them of revenue, therefor casting a discenting vote on them for what i got, while they were there.
 
Top