Texas LTC Instructors Opposing Permitless Carry...

[Gun Kraft]

Keep in mind Gun Kraft is a cop who has admitted he will draw on you if you happen to print and have not disclosed to him you have a CCW.

I said there's a good chance I would draw because in the city I work I have yet to encounter a single person legally carrying concealed (which means they're either doing it correctly or I haven't met any). The only people I have met on patrol that I have noticed carrying were doing so illegally. What I do is reasonable and prudent based on the circumstances. Some people got upset about it when I posted that back in 2014, and likely will get upset about it now. I don't know what this has to do with the current discussion though. Is this an ad hominem or red herring?

Are you serious? If that is really the case, he wouldn't last a day in Idaho.

Saying that is like laughing at a guy who wears a parka in Alaska, thinking they'd wear a parka in the Bahamas. Back in 2014 I also mentioned how I worked on patrol reflected the area I worked in (the county has 1.7 million residents, 300 CCW permits issued), and I would handle myself differently in someplace like Nevada where concealed carry is more common.

For someone considering themselves a subject matter expert, and providing training, and a LEO he doesn't seem to have any definitive answers to the questions asked in the post linked.

Funny he doesn't trust untrained people but he "can't say for certain" if you're required to tell a cop you're carrying when stopped for a traffic infraction, considers a traffic stop an arrest (it's not), and calls an infraction a crime.

I can't say for certain because that's a condition of that poster's CCW and how that county defines "investigation". Different agencies, different standards.

A traffic stop is an arrest. From https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...ble-cause.html
A driver is stopped for a routine traffic violation. The driver technically is under arrest because the driver is not free to leave until the officer has written a ticket

And yes, an infraction is still a crime. From https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclope...ion-33814.html
In every state, crimes are put into distinct categories. The categories are usually "felony," "misdemeanor," and "infraction."

[pepsi2451]

I said there's a good chance I would draw because in the city I work I have yet to encounter a single person legally carrying concealed (which means they're either doing it correctly or I haven't met any). The only people I have met on patrol that I have noticed carrying were doing so illegally. What I do is reasonable and prudent based on the circumstances. Some people got upset about it when I posted that back in 2014, and likely will get upset about it now. I don't know what this has to do with the current discussion though. Is this an ad hominem or red herring?

Do you think part of the reason you don't support constitutional carry could be because it would be harder for you to justify drawing on anyone you suspect is carrying a gun?

Saying that is like laughing at a guy who wears a parka in Alaska, thinking they'd wear a parka in the Bahamas. Back in 2014 I also mentioned how I worked on patrol reflected the area I worked in (the county has 1.7 million residents, 300 CCW permits issued), and I would handle myself differently in someplace like Nevada where concealed carry is more common.

Why don't you handle yourself the same way here in CA you would in NV? Does the 2A apply less in CA or is it just easier to get away with it?

[heidad01]

There are a lot of cops who do not know enough of the law and just go by what they like or feel good to do but do not care if that is infringing on the citizen's rights.

There is no news or data from states that have constitutional carry indicating any person carrying and shooting in self defense ended up shooting a bunch or any innocent by standers. Surprise!

Works in those states, it will work in all states.
So far, the number of bystanders shot by cops outweighs the number shot by constitutional carriers by a very large margin. Large as in uuuge.

[SharedShots]

I have been very honest about my feelings about constitutional carry, which is to say I have mixed feelings about it. I think everyone should be able to carry, and I think everyone should have training in that regard. Some people have misinterpreted what I've said to mean people must pay to get that training. That is not the case.


I agree, and I've taken some of those classes. The majority of state-mandated CCW training focuses on basic firearm safety because their focus is preventing accidents instead of self-defense. Shouldn't a CCW class focus on self-defense?


I don't think a single class will make students well trained, but I hope it will put things in proper perspective. I think CCW training should include holster practice, mindset, situational awareness, tactics, stress inoculation, de-escalation techniques, laws (criminal and civil), and post-shooting considerations. Maybe even throw in low-light, emergency medical care and force-on-force if you can. There's no way a single class can teach everything, but it can move people from unconscious ignorance (where they don't realize they don't know something) to conscious ignorance (where they realize they need to learn more).


There are TV shows (Best Defense), websites (Lucky Gunner) and Youtube videos (Warrior Poet) that offer good free instruction. (Just to name a few.) Combined with dry-fire practice and you don't have to spend much to get better prepared for self-defense. Can you do better with more money? Sure. But there's some good stuff available for free.



Consider the case of the Wuestenbergs. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...le/5361865002/ I don't think they're idiots, and it looks like they received some training (her gun handling looks decent) but unfortunately didn't get proper training on when it's appropriate to use lethal force. There was no reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury. Now they're both facing felony charges, lost their jobs and their lives are ruined. This is why I think it's so important people get training. I don't think you must pay to get the training, but I do think CCWers need training.

I've read all your posts in this thread. I have three questions because in all of this you haven't stated it (perhaps I missed it?):

Do you think carrying a firearm by a person not legally prohibited from doing so, meaning they have done nothing that prevents them from legally owning a firearm is a

[ ] right or;
[ ] a privilege?

The answer should make it perfectly clear for everyone.

Then, should anyone have to do anything to exercise a right other than to do so knowing that there are consequences for exercising a right if doing so harms other people?

Last: Should any private business have the authority to decide if any person can exercise a right unless that authority is subject to due process (adjudication by a court)?

I think answers those three questions without qualifiers would go a long way to clearing up in anyone's mind what and why you believe what you do.

[Gun Kraft]

Do you think carrying a firearm by a person not legally prohibited from doing so, meaning they have done nothing that prevents them from legally owning a firearm is a right or a privilege?

I think it's a right, just like freedom of speech. I'm looking forward to NYSRPA v. Corlett.

should anyone have to do anything other than knowing there are consequences for exercising a right if doing so harms other people?

Ignorance is not bliss. You carry concealed because you want to protect your life and the lives of those you care about. That's what the Wuestenbergs did and due to lack of training their lives are ruined. They didn't harm anyone else, but they did harm themselves. That's why I think training is so important. It doesn't matter whether you pay for it or not, but getting that training to the best of your abilities is important.

Should any private business have the authority to decide if any person can exercise a right unless that authority is subject to due process (adjudication by a court)?

I'm having a hard time trying to figure out what you're getting at with this question. Near as I can figure out, you're asking if the training requirement and process for CCW permits is valid. In other words, should private instructors rubber stamp any applicant that comes along, or should they deny an applicant if they fail to meet an established standard for that course? In a way, this seems like a trick question given the first question.

My answer is a private instructor should deny an applicant if they fail to meet the established standard for the course. That standard is set (or reviewed and approved by) the issuing agency. The private instructor has entered an agreement with the issuing agency to only certify students who meet that standard. Failure to do so would be unethical and a violation of that agreement.

[fnlrun]

THAT right there is America!!!!!!!

[ACfixer]

Do you think carrying a firearm by a person not legally prohibited from doing so, meaning they have done nothing that prevents them from legally owning a firearm is a

[ ] right or;
[ ] a privilege?

The answer should make it perfectly clear for everyone.

I think it's a right, just like freedom of speech.

But you feel I should have to pay you to train me and judge me worthy or not of practicing my rights, got it. Yep, your answer makes it clear to everyone.

It really should be too difficult to figure out why people feel this way:

Oh and after seeing gunkrafts post in another thread... he’s part of the problem.

These are your fellow Calgunners that feel this way about you, the people that carry and follow the law. I really doubt the crooks you bust like you very much. Where does that leave you?

Think about that for a few minutes.

[-hanko]

THAT right there is America!!!!!!!

I can tell you the Canyon Sheriff is the exact opposite. I renewed my enhanced cwl...started early April with renewal form drop off and $20. Deputy Debbie's approval letter came 2 weeks later. Went back for pic and temp ECWL good for a month...$18 paid that day. The laminated license showed up in yesterday's mail.

Canyon now does online appointments. You're admitted 10 minutes before appointment time, and the appointment time starts with no BS delays. I was out of there in less than 10 minutes on both visits.

No limitation on guns you can carry. NO INTERVIEWS.

[Gun Kraft]

But you feel I should have to pay you to train me and judge me worthy or not of practicing my rights, got it. Yep, your answer makes it clear to everyone.

You conveniently ignore the part where I said this:
I think everyone should be able to carry, and I think everyone should have training in that regard. Some people have misinterpreted what I've said to mean people must pay to get that training. That is not the case.

[Gun Kraft]

Why don't you handle yourself the same way here in CA you would in NV? Does the 2A apply less in CA or is it just easier to get away with it?

Do I have to spell out the obvious? Because in the county I work in, CCWs are (unfortunately) a rounding error and everyone I have encountered carrying concealed is doing so illegally. Based on probable cause I respond accordingly.

If I worked in a shall issue county like Del Norte, or a shall issue state like NV, I would not have reason to believe every person I met was carrying illegally. Therefore how I would react if I encountered someone who was printing would be different because I would not immediately have probable cause to believe what they were doing was illegal.

[9Cal_OC]

Do I have to spell out the obvious? Because in the county I work in, CCWs are (unfortunately) a rounding error and everyone I have encountered carrying concealed is doing so illegally. Based on probable cause I respond accordingly.

[CAL.BAR]

While there is no doubt as to the hypocrisy of the CCW instructors on a Constitutional basis, just ask ANY range employee or gun shop employee about how "regular people"handle guns and you get a earful on how UNSAFE untrained (and even some trained) people are with guns. So.... before you raise your flags in support or allowing EVERYONE to be armed at all times with NO required training, you might want to ask people who see those well armed (and untrained) masses handle their firearms what THEY think.

[Mute]

In spite of all the hand-wringing and pearl-clutching, in states that have gone to permitless or Constitutional carry, there has not been an epidemic of unsafe gun handling or misuse of firearms. Again, would it be better if all who decide to carry a gun get good training? Absolutely. But the idea that without it, there would be some kind of heightened threat to public safety, is not supported by reality.

[pepsi2451]

Do I have to spell out the obvious? Because in the county I work in, CCWs are (unfortunately) a rounding error and everyone I have encountered carrying concealed is doing so illegally. Based on probable cause I respond accordingly.

If I worked in a shall issue county like Del Norte, or a shall issue state like NV, I would not have reason to believe every person I met was carrying illegally. Therefore how I would react if I encountered someone who was printing would be different because I would not immediately have probable cause to believe what they were doing was illegal.

I am curious how you came to the conclusion its probable that anyone you meet carrying a gun is doing so illegally. How many legal CCW holders do you think travel through your county? How many people do you think carry illegally in your county?

I don't see how anyone can in good conscience take an oath to uphold the constitution and then use the suspicion that someone is bearing arms as the sole reason to draw a gun on them. I get that you can get away with it in your county but in my opinion it doesn't make it right. I hope I never run into you. Cops like you are one of the many reasons I try to avoid counties like yours.

This is getting off topic and I don't think anyone is going to change your mind so I will just say you do you. I only brought it up because I think it speaks to your motivation for not supporting constitutional carry. If CA went constitutional carry (snowballs chance in hell) all the same people in your county would still be carrying but you would no longer be able to draw on them for it.

[ACfixer]

You conveniently ignore the part where I said this:
I think everyone should be able to carry, and I think everyone should have training in that regard. Some people have misinterpreted what I've said to mean people must pay to get that training. That is not the case.

No, you originally said training should be required and you happen to be a CCW trainer. I'm sure you can see where some of us have a problem with that because if YOU decide if my skills and training are good enough, then YOU can arrest me if you say they aren't and I carry anyway. In short, you want you and your buddies to decide who carries. Pardon me for feeling that's a long way from constitutional carry.

Like I said, I am not the only one that views you in the light that I do, not by a long shot and I never really said anything until a dozen others confirmed my feelings.

I thank God that I now live in an area where exercising my 2A rights is downright commonplace, both open and concealed. If you drew on a citizen for printing or carrying open here, you would lose your job and rightfully so.