Requirement for LTCF poll?

[Chevmeister]

What do you guys think. I know im gonna get flamed for even considering this. But another thread had me thinking.

[XUSNORDY]

Good idea for a poll. IMO mandatory training should include qualification to graduate. I'll bet there are persons carrying this moment with a LTCF or OC that could not meet a basic qual without the training. Too many different laws here and there to make a "all 50" thing possible.

[XD45]

no offense to the majority of this site, as i'd say 90% my comment doesn't apply to you. But before coming to this site i'd have said no, but after reading what some people have done/almost did I DEFINITELY feel there needs to be a training requirment.

[JoeWilliams]

I actually wouldn't have a problem with mandatory training/qualification.

So long as it was available from non-government sources, and completion of the course mandated the state issue the LTCF. IOW, that being the sole requirement.

[Pa. Patriot]

Big fat NO for me.

I have nothing against training, as anyone that knows me knows I'm a big advocate. But "rights" are just that.
Either we have them or we don't and a "requirement" means you don't have them.

[Pa. Patriot]

Crap. I selected "no, keep as is" and I should have selected "screw it no training, no LTCF, let everyone carry 50 states"..

[bdancer]

I wouldn't mind seeing a written exam that covered the basics of PA firearms law--i.e., what you can get charged with if you injure a bystander, shoot a warning shot, shoot someone without a weapon, etc. Make it easy to pass, so that it's not a deterrent to getting a LTC. But such an exam would force people to consider the consequences of irresponsibility, and lead them to learn how to use their weapon appropriately. I'm not a fan of mandatory live fire training; too much government telling me what to do--people, if they understand the consequences, will train on their own.

[FromMyColdDeadHands]

While I agree that most of the population probably would require training to become safe/proficient w/ a firearm to carry it, I cannot in good conscience agree with ANY requirements, It runs contrary to my literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment, the biggest problem is anytime someone gives the government an inch they take 10 miles, that is why NO concessions ought to be made, whether they are considered "reasonable" or not. We have surrendered a large part of our RKBA under the premise of "reasonable" limitations, its time to stop making concessions and go on the offensive to take back ALL of our 2nd amendment rights!!!

[gf45acp]

A right is a right. Period.

[Statkowski]

It's called holding a person responsible for their actions. If their actions are wrong, then shame, shame on them.

Anything less assumes everyone is guilty until proven innocent.