Comments about ‘Letters: Training already gone’

This letter makes a great argument for the exact opposite of what it recommends in its last sentence. Nuts (of any kind) and Guns do not mix.

Re: "Approve the constitutional carry, and put the training on a state-sponsored website."

Hear, hear!

Government-approved "training" must be homogenized and dumbed down to the point of uselessness, anyway. The NRA has, for generations, sponsored real, practical training on gun use, that has shown real, practical effects on behavior. We should leave training on Second Amendment activities to people who both appreciate the Constitution, and who have the knowledge and ability to teach it.

Concealed-carry permit requirements were never really about training. They've always been, rather, about making it difficult and frustrating to obtain a permit, in the vain liberal hope that intentionally meaningless hassle will prevent some percentage of Americans from adopting this tried-and-true tactic as one of their self-protection tools.

Except for the nonsense about online "training," this is an excellent letter.

And I love the photo with the article. Right there is a fine example of "gun safety Utah style."

Would the average, "well trained" graduate of a Utah concealed carry class recognize the dangers illustrated in that photo?

I thought not . . . . .

Good letter. I'm with one old man, in seeing no reason for a concealed carry permit at all. But if we have to have one, let's standardize the training.

Ouch. Glad I don't own a gun.

Eric, if you are FOR "Constitutional Carry" without training requirements, then you and I are not in agreement. I do not oppose the right of Americans to bear arms, but we do need to use commons sense. Allowing anyone and their cousin to pack a gun without any training is just stupid.

Remember those two little usually overlooked words in the Second Amendment. WELL REGULATED.

The Legislature took an interesting tack in reacting to criticisms from other states that the Utah conceal carry permit requirements were too lax - just eliminate the requirement altogether! Training? That's a liberal dodge to deprive people of their God-given Constitutional rights.

In the spirit of further clarification and simplification, maybe the Legislature will reaffirm and clarify the 1st Amendment, by eliminating laws against fraud, libel, and perjury.

Think about it folks - "Fraud" is nothing more that somebody or organization just exercising their 1st Amendment rights. It's up to the listener to do their homework and decide if they agree with the statement or not. Same thing for perjury - people see things differently, why try to persecute somebody for having a different opinion?

Laws restricting free speech are un-American!

Maybe we can get to the point where the entire Utah State set of laws can exist on a 3 x 5 card, which means most Utahns would be able to read and (potentially) understand them.

The argument that guns and nuts don't mix is a silly one, as is the ridiculous "common sense" comment. The constitution says that citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. It does NOT say citizens you like, or citizens who can hit a bullseye, or citizens that have the appropriate training as determined by people that a) don't have a clue, or b) want to restrict the right.

Sorry folks, if you want freedom, you have to accept the risks that come with it. If you aren't willing to accept that risk, then go somewhere where the rights ARE restricted, so that everyone will be "safer". Like Illinois.

There are already states that let ANY citizen of legal age with no record carry concealed. None of them have had any problems with "gun nuts" causing problems. In Vermont, that includes 16 year old kids being able to carry.

Sorry folks, your own imaginations are running away with you; the reality is, it simply isn't that big a deal.

I mean, you DO know that criminals carry daily all around you, right? Yet you are worried about law abiding citizens?

How's that for common sense?

Sounds like the trainer needed more training, IMHO.

For those who are genuinely interested in getting trained, don't waste your time with a CC class; find a place where the cops train, and go there. That is what I do, and it is MUCH better than any CC class I've seen in Utah.

@ Rural Sports Fan; You nailed it right on the head.

Rural Sports Fan -- have you ever been in combat? Would you want to be there with others around you who had no idea what they are doing?

But somehow you think it's okay for just anybody to be out and about to "protect" us when chips are down?

Gun toters without training are like turning anyone who can hold a scalpel loose in the operating room.

Re: "Would you want to be there with others around you who had no idea what they are doing?"

You already are.

They're called criminals. They carry concealed without permits all the time.

The only open question is, are decent citizens going to be bullyragged and hassled, by anti-gun liberals, into leaving at home the tools they need to protect themselves from those who will never get the proper training and will never follow whatever rules feckless liberals demagogue into existence?

With all these folks carrying their guns around anyplace they want we better considered a crossfire scenario. I know some of these guys are just waiting for their big chance to be a hero. Just the other day I saw one of our guns-R-us Legislators with his jacket pulled back and his palm casually resting on the top of his pistol. He was drumming his fingers over his gun just having a light conversation with someone. What a strange society we are living in. Well I plan to keep a keen eye out when I’m at the mall so I know where to duck when the crossfire starts.

Ok liberals, tell us what right in the Constitution we have that is contingent on training, certification, or education of any sort.

If you want to mandate that we need all the training and certification to get a gun, what about free speech. Are you going to require that protestors go through training and licensing before they can protest? What about the press, are you going to require that they obtain certification that they will not be biased and will properly research information so that they don't harm the reputation of others?