Just posted in that thread, I assume I'll be being called an enemy of liberty or some such nonsense for suggesting that having a permit option with training along with permitless is better than "Vermont Carry".
No one here thinks that.
What I'd like to see is a three tier system.
- Constitutional Carry.
- Optional permits for reciprocity.
- Optional permits with additional optional training endorsement for enhanced reciprocity.
Training should be STRONGLY encouraged for everyone, perhaps with some kind of incentive for getting it, (cheaper, longer lasting permits for tier 2 and 3 perhaps) but fall short of ever being mandatory. Ultimately, training is a potential discriminatory hurdle. The widow on a fixed budget and who has her late husband's revolver could very well fail to meet any portion of a training class, or marksmanship requirement, but there's no reason to believe she needs to, just to gut-shoot some mugger right on top of her either. I'd argue the same for some people who are legally blind.
Some more good things I'd like to see.
- Blaze orange signage larger than 8.5x11" (prevent anti-gun .org spam faxing) with specific wording, font size and graphics, required at EVERY public entrance, not just one.
- Further requirement that someone discovered carrying in a posted area be verbally asked to leave by the owner or authorized staff, and it's then trespass if the person still refuses to leave.
- All Constitutional Carriers and licensed carriers are deemed as being "Permitted" in regards to fed.gov GFSZ's.
- Lockers at all prohibited .gov security areas for carriers.
