National Gun Forum banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
One thing I have always been a strong believer in (and I am not trying to take credit, but I have never heard of anyone speak of this before).

Incentive based firearms training.

Instead of being required (like some politicians have suggested) to take safety courses, or to purchase a firearm. Offer an incentive based class.

Please forgive me because I am still working out the rough portions of it. But in basics.

For simplicity we will label this within four groups (and as I am no expert, I will leave this up to firearms experts to state who and what classes fall within these bounds).

Group one = highly trained individuals.

Group two = moderately trained individuals.

Group three = Low trained individuals.

Group four = untrained individuals.

If you are able to provide a certificate stating that you fall within group one, then you pay no tax on your firearm purchase, and you are not required to attend a CCW class and pay no fee for receiving your CCW from the local LEO. The cost of your CCW class would be removed because that would have already been covered in your group one training. Additionally, you would receive a reduced tax on ammo purchased for such and such amount of time, and once you prove continuing training this extends.

If you are able to provide a certificate stating that you fall within group two, then you pay normal tax on your firearm purchase, and pay a reduced cost for your CCW class and pay a reduced cost in acquiring your CCW. Ammo taxes would remain the same (within a given amount of time).

Group three. You pay normal tax on your firearm purchase. A reduced cost for your CCW class (though slightly higher than group two). and Ammo taxes remain the same as now (once again within a given amount of time, but less time than group two or one).

Group four. You pay an increased tax on your firearm purchase. Normal cost on CCW class, normal fees for acquiring your CCW. and normal taxes on ammo purchase.

Yes Group four may seem to get the low end of the stick. But it ensures that those who purchase legally are trained, without restricting anyones rights.

I know there are still some bugs to work out, and please offer feadback. I am actually drafting a formal letter to several people, and would apreciate some feedback.
Please turn on the flame throwers now.
 

·
Old School.
Joined
·
11,011 Posts
What your saying looks good on paper but by the time politicans get done with it, it will be a worst mess than some places are now. A women in our CWP class was passed even though she turned her head and closed her eyes when she fired the gun. The man in charged said he had to pass her because it was the law. Go figure.:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,978 Posts
Somehow this looks like it might be a good idea on paper.
I want to make sure I understand your steps of getting a CCL and lowering cost depending on experience, right?
But, and I always hate the but, what about forgeries, certificates for the advanced shooter, gun handler, etc. could be forged quite easily unless you want to go to the trouble/expense as the government when printing out any currency?
I have worked in printing companies and believe me a "black and gold" certificate would be very easy to counterfeit.
I could be wayyyy off base, but it concerns me. Now you want to know why?
The biggest fear I have is taking tests, and yes I have cheated on one or two, NONE of them to do with anything legal, ie, drivers license, getting my CCL, etc., there are plenty of people that would cheat.

CDP, please tell me if/how far off base I am. I have been accused of being a conspiracy theorist before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,978 Posts
What your saying looks good on paper but by the time politicans get done with it, it will be a worst mess than some places are now. A women in our CWP class was passed even though she turned her head and closed her eyes when she fired the gun. The man in charged said he had to pass her because it was the law. Go figure.:confused:
WTF??? that is nothing less of BS
 

·
Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
CDP, please tell me if/how far off base I am. I have been accused of being a conspiracy theorist before.
I don’t really think you are too far off base. Regardless of how difficult you make it to counterfeit, someone will always find a way. But I do not think it would be a huge problem.

Baldy, that is BS. What responsible person would continue with that type of class?

I know that the politicians would probably dork it up, that is why I want to get it as idiot proof as I can before I send it up.
 

·
Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Please tell me that you are joking.
 

·
Texas Legal Gunslinger
Joined
·
3,531 Posts
Hmmm... I thought I posted this, but I must have missed it somehow.....

But, we have a somewhat similar process in TX, but it is only for your concealed license. Here goes.

When you first apply, you pay a total of (appx) $275-300 to get your license. $140 goes to the state, the remainder is the cost of the course. You are required to sit through the full 10 hour course which has mandated parts, such as range time (50 shots, minimum point requirement) and demonstrating you know how to work your firearm.

When you renew your license, the fee to the state is $70.00. You only are required to take a 5 hour (I believe) class. I don't know what the fee is, but I presume it is less than the new course. You are still required to do the range time and demonstrate functionality.

After you have renewed twice (so, on your third renewal), you do not have to take the class, but only have to get fingerprinted and fill out your application. No range time.

So, while not exactly similar to what you are describing, perhaps it is a starting point.
 

·
Harley Dude
Joined
·
14,651 Posts
There are at least five states that do not have a sales tax, so you pay no tax on the purchase of a firearm. So I certainly don't want to put any ideas into Governments head that a firearm tax is a good thing.

Levels of training based on experience do make a lot of common sense to me. Inexperienced folks require a much higher level of training and don't get it in many classes because of the class being filled with individuals at all levels of experience.

I would set the level of training hours required to the level of experience of the individual. Maybe they have to take a short test to prove that experience level.

Then the cost of the course and/or permit may be tied to that same level of experience or training.
 

·
Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Thanks Sig, I forgot about those five states with no sales tax. Any suggestions?

TX, that is kind of similar to NC, but our class is not 10 hours and you do not have to take it again when renewing. Let me think on it some and see if I can refine it some.
 
G

·
I don't like it. It has nothing to do with your ideas, they are great, it has everything to do with the government. Getting the government and politicians involved with anything is a sure way to screw it up, spoil it, and keep its corruptness from dying. Like a zombie.

Maybe if this was run by a private organization that the government recognized, and the membership allowed the reduced/no taxes on firearm purchases, etc., then it might be able to work. Other than that I can see the government using this as a opening for more gun control.
 
G

·
I know there are still some bugs to work out, and please offer feadback. I am actually drafting a formal letter to several people, and would apreciate some feedback.
Please turn on the flame throwers now.
Uh..yeah. OK Sport. Here comes some flames....:13:

Excuse the expression....but are you out of your bleedin' mind?

What you are proposing is nothing less than registration and a permission slip from some fat a**ed politician or gummint puke to give you, or ugh, me, permission to do something that is, in fact, a right. Screw that nonsense! "...provide a certificate stating..." Oh PUHLLEEEAASSSE!

Oh and while we're hammering this, stow the moral equivalency BS with your arguement. It ain't gonna cut it cupcake!

Theres this little thing called the 2nd ammendment and then there's DC vs Heller affirming gun ownership as an individual right. Ever hear of either? How about the Vitter ammendment? Ever hear of that one? How many times did you call your politicians while Reid was blocking the vote?

Do us all a favor and drop this rather simple minded and naive attempt at gun registration. Or better yet, just say you work for the Brady bunch and get it out there!

Good God, just when I thought I'd heard it all....:mad2:
 

·
Pro Gun Advocate
Joined
·
10,940 Posts
I have to say that, given the declining volume of accidents against the increasing volume of gun owners shows that there is no problem to solve here. Nor are there any glaring misuses of the right to self-defense that I've seen.

If you propose different levels of expertise, here’s what a politician will do with your proposed ranking:

Group one = highly trained individuals = ‘reasonable’ 2nd Amendment Rights.

Group two = moderately trained individuals = self defense at home, no carrying in public.

Group three = Low trained individuals = keep a gun at home for self defense unless you have children.

Group four = untrained individuals = unassembled and locked requirements until you advance (to the satisfaction of the State).



Bad idea to create different classes of gun owners, unless you--as a gun owner--want to identify a non-existent 'problem' for the pols to 'fix.'
 

·
Harley Dude
Joined
·
14,651 Posts
I still think that CDP has a good idea about the training issue.

The comment about the gal who went through the class and shot her firearm with her eyes closed is very important, I think.

For the protection of a new gun owner and to give them the confidence that they need to be able to handle that defensive firearm safely and effectively I think more training is in order based on an individuals level of experience. I'm sure I would want it if I was afraid of the gun I had to qualify with. It just makes good "Common Sense!"

I am not in favor of government control or fees for gun use. But I am in favor of making sure a student can defend themselves, knows the laws, and is confident with their chosen weapon.

There must be a way to make that happen.

If a student flunks the basic course they must take it over or take a basic firearms class that teaches the student how to handle their weapon.

Many of the state classes concentrate on the law only and do not even get into the subject of how to use a firearm.

Oregon and Washington did not take students to the range for qualification at the time I took the class.
 

·
Pro Gun Advocate
Joined
·
10,940 Posts
I shot for my qualification, but it's not required by the state.

Seems to me that the industry needs some self-policing before the door is open to regulation. I can't believe that the girl actually got qualified!
 

·
Ancient Gaseous Emanation
Joined
·
55,728 Posts
Nowhere in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States do I find the word "qualified". I couldn't find the word "trained" either. In fact, I could find no qualifications restricting the Right to bear arms mentioned in the Amendment.

I went and read all ten Amendments. No training was mentioned, nor monies demanded, for the exercise of any of the Rights enumerated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,978 Posts
Nowhere in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States do I find the word "qualified". I couldn't find the word "trained" either. In fact, I could find no qualifications restricting the Right to bear arms mentioned in the Amendment.

I went and read all ten Amendments. No training was mentioned, nor monies demanded, for the exercise of any of the Rights enumerated.
Good points, each one, something to remember. But with out the courses and money paid, we are illegal to carry guns. Catch 22 if you ask me.
 

·
Ancient Gaseous Emanation
Joined
·
55,728 Posts
Good points, each one, something to remember. But with out the courses and money paid, we are illegal to carry guns. Catch 22 if you ask me.
Nope, not Catch 22. Unconstitutional.
 

·
Drunk Supernova
Joined
·
6,002 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Nowhere in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States do I find the word "qualified". I couldn't find the word "trained" either. In fact, I could find no qualifications restricting the Right to bear arms mentioned in the Amendment.

I went and read all ten Amendments. No training was mentioned, nor monies demanded, for the exercise of any of the Rights enumerated.

I agree, it is a right that requires none of those things. That is why I call it voluntary incentive based training. With the proper incentives it makes no sense to not become qualified. And does not restrict a right because you are not being forced to take the courses.
 
G

·
I agree, it is a right that requires none of those things. That is why I call it voluntary incentive based training. With the proper incentives it makes no sense to not become qualified. And does not restrict a right because you are not being forced to take the courses.
Technically you are not forced to pay taxes, either...

This is why I suggested it be run by a private organization, separate from the government, but recognized by it. The only problem I see is this new program ending up like car insurance- what used to be a good, smart thing to have, the government made mandatory.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top