• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Senate Bill 75 was initiated by a NRA firearms instructor-harder to get permit

brk913

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
370
Location
Plainville, CT
While I too disapprove of any legislation regarding permits and firearm ownership we currently live in CT, Constitutional Carry may come some day but I don't see it for many years. Since we need to "follow the rules" in order to obtain a permit I see nothing wrong with this, currently it is the only way to take the class so this will not burden anyone more than they are now and the author of the letter is correct, this is nothing more than a money grab by the NRA. I also agree that if we must mandate a safety class it is best to take the entire class in person. The person who wrote this article pretty much summed up everything very clearly. Let me add the financial information. Last year the NRA sold 380,000 student pistol packets, they charge $11 each for those, let's say they make 1/2 of that as profit, that's $2,090,000. If they switch to this so called blended format they will charge the student between $50-$100 for that class. Using the same 380,000 number that is a profit of between $19,000,000-$38,000,000, this new format has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with 19-38 million dollars... http://www.taketimetoplay.net/the-tttp-blog/blog
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,170
Location
earth's crust
While I too disapprove of any legislation regarding permits and firearm ownership we currently live in CT, Constitutional Carry may come some day but I don't see it for many years. Since we need to "follow the rules" in order to obtain a permit I see nothing wrong with this, currently it is the only way to take the class so this will not burden anyone more than they are now and the author of the letter is correct, this is nothing more than a money grab by the NRA. I also agree that if we must mandate a safety class it is best to take the entire class in person. The person who wrote this article pretty much summed up everything very clearly. Let me add the financial information. Last year the NRA sold 380,000 student pistol packets, they charge $11 each for those, let's say they make 1/2 of that as profit, that's $2,090,000. If they switch to this so called blended format they will charge the student between $50-$100 for that class. Using the same 380,000 number that is a profit of between $19,000,000-$38,000,000, this new format has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with 19-38 million dollars... http://www.taketimetoplay.net/the-tttp-blog/blog
have you considered CGS Sec. 29-38 ? http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_529.htm#sec_29-38

And then also considered the Ezell v. Chgo case that noted that we have the right to practice?

So folks can have handguns but not able to practice - as a permit is needed to transport to a range.

You need no permit to acquire a handgun. People moving into the state for one example.

So if they want to require a permit, training or a safety class cannot be required as a mandatory for a permit.

There was a DC case noting that a safety class cannot be required to acquire a handgun (Heller II? if I recall correctly)...as its a right.

Reasonable requirements? Not reasonable at all to require training under this analysis. Even using current law.

Rules do not supersede rights. And I liked that you called the statues "rules" as that's exactly what they are.
 
Last edited:

brk913

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
370
Location
Plainville, CT
have you considered CGS Sec. 29-38 ? http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_529.htm#sec_29-38

And then also considered the Ezell v. Chgo case that noted that we have the right to practice?

So folks can have handguns but not able to practice - as a permit is needed to transport to a range.

You need no permit to acquire a handgun. People moving into the state for one example.

So if they want to require a permit, training or a safety class cannot be required as a mandatory for a permit.

There was a DC case noting that a safety class cannot be required to acquire a handgun (Heller II? if I recall correctly)...as its a right.

Reasonable requirements? Not reasonable at all to require training under this analysis. Even using current law.

Rules do not supersede rights. And I liked that you called the statues "rules" as that's exactly what they are.
None of what you posted above has to do with the permit process in CT and the training required. You are simply arguing the old "we don't need a permit" thing again and that is a different topic all together. Again, under current CT law a permit is required to purchase and carry/transport handguns, we might not like it but it's going to require someone with money and big balls to fight that through the courts....
 

Good Citizen

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2011
Messages
104
Location
US
Battle for money

Herb Furhman who appears to be the named author of the letter, after googling, runs a lot of classes, he doesn't want too lose his cash either. I am an nra instructor, I in all honesty don't see a problem with an online component, but I am not giving classes to support my self!
 

brk913

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2007
Messages
370
Location
Plainville, CT
I do a lot of classes too.....but that's not why I am opposed to it, I could move on and just teach advanced courses to make money....my issues are mostly covered in the link I posted above, who actually does the computer part? Is it the same person who is in front of you for the shooting part? I teach a really good class, I am in front of my students for 6+ hours demonstrating and making them practice safe gun handling in the classroom, you can't get that online. If someone makes a mistake in the classroom you can correct them and explain why it was bad, if they do it on the range with a loaded gun someone gets hurt. People learn best in person when they can stay engaged, being part of the instruction and not just being talked at through a computer screen, sitting behind a PC listening to lectures is boring and the majority of people will trudge through without paying attention. Nothing beats hands on in person instruction.

Additionally, it is all about the money, for the NRA and CT Ranges. If CT allows the blended training you may as well give up your instructor credentials as you will never teach another Basic Pistol Class in CT. The beneficiaries will be the ranges, since they can afford to have an instructor on staff during all open hours they will advertise that students can stop in to complete the shooting part of the class anytime and they will do it very inexpensively as the Instructor will be an hourly employee who simply has to take someone out on the range for 15 minutes. Who's going to make an appointment with some guy that they have to meet at some range when they can go by themselves to a range with no appointment needed. Hoffman's, Delta, Blue Trail, Wolf's, Torrington Tactical, Bridgeport and all the others will get all the students, the individual instructors will be gone......
 
Top