Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Now Kentucky is racing to pass constitutional carry....

Might be interesting to see which way the winds blow regarding legal and civil defense issues of constitutional carry after a non CCDW holder shoots someone claiming self defense.

I do support constitutional carry, but I also support making it mandatory for someone to undergo some training, that would give them some idea about what the law says about their right to legally shoot someone. I don't think that's asking too much.

That is the concern I have about it. Now, I'll start this out by saying that people have been carrying concealed forever, back before there were such things as concealed carry permits, or licensed carry. I know, because I did. But, I grew up handling guns, and think I know a little about gun safety. I do worry about those people who go out and buy a gun, people who never been around firearms, and know nothing about the safety aspect of handling a gun.....and you can bet your azz there are such people.

We don't hire a cop one day, and then issue him a gun and a badge the next day, and put him on the street. We don't sign a guy up in the military one day, and then give him a gun and send him off the war the next day. We give those people training on how to use that weapon, and maybe even more importantly, especially in the case of the police, WHEN to use it. Yet, constitutional carry allows people to go around packing, who have never had one minutes worth of training as to when it's legal to use their gun.

I do support constitutional carry, but I also support making it mandatory for someone to undergo some training, that would give them some idea about what the law says about their right to legally shoot someone. I don't think that's asking too much.

Kentucky still has Constables, who are elected peace officers with arrest powers and the full weight and authority of law, in all 120 counties. Absolutely zero LEO training required for that position - all they have to do is win a local election.

If we in KY can give some nobody arrest powers and peace officer authority with no LEO training, then the rest of us nobodies ought to be able to handle concealed carry.

You're right about the constables, which is a position that should have been done away with years ago. Most that I've known were some idiot that liked to play "I wanna be a cop when I grow up."

Like I said, I have mixed feelings on it, as I still believe someone needs to undergo some sort of training as to what's legal and what's not......and that would include constables as well.

With Rights come Responsibilities.

Whoever carries has a responsibility to themselves.

Again, you may as well say you don't support the Constitution.

You can see it any way you want to, but that's not how I'm looking at it. I've been hunting for over 60 years, yet the state of Kentucky tells me that if I want to hunt on certain state and federal lands here, that I must take and pass a hunter safety course. Yet, they say that some 21 year old person that has never handled a gun before, can walk around in public carrying one......even if they don't know how to us it, or when it's legally to do so.....but that same 21 year old cannot go hunting unless they have taken a safety course. I just find that somewhat contradictory, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution......except to narrow minded people.

You can see it any way you want to, but that's not how I'm looking at it. I've been hunting for over 60 years, yet the state of Kentucky tells me that if I want to hunt on certain state and federal lands here, that I must take and pass a hunter safety course. Yet, they say that some 21 year old person that has never handled a gun before, can walk around in public carrying one......even if they don't know how to us it, or when it's legally to do so.....but that same 21 year old cannot go hunting unless they have taken a safety course. I just find that somewhat contradictory, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution......except to narrow minded people.

The founders were a lot smarter than you. Take note.

And you too.......something I figured out a long time ago.

The point that I'm trying to make has absolutely nothing to do with the Constitution. If Kentucky says it's alright to carry without a permit, then that's their right to do so. So, that means that it's okay for anyone without any training about safety or the law, to walk around armed. However, at the same time, they're telling those same residents that they can't use a firearm for hunting, unless they have passed a safety course. To me, that doesn't make sense........and yeah, our hunting license does tell us that hunting is a privilege and not a right.

You still are too slow to understand. Kentucky can say anything they want. They infringed the 2nd Amendment when they made laws against it. All this is is un-infringement. The Constitution doesn't give anybody anything. The Founders themselves tell you it simply recognizes rights existent in nature. If the Federal government can't bestow it, how can the state of Kentucky? If the state can't "grant" you the right, then they have no right telling you what to do. The government's only power on this relies on tyranny. Your state government backed off on an already tyrannical stance. Then its essentially saying that it had the power to infringe but decided not to anymore. lmao.

Of course it's okay to walk around armed. Is training good? Certainly. More training is even better. It's just not "required". Self defense is a right and the gun is a means to that end. A good means.

If you think hunting should be a right then by all means try to get the state and country to amend their constitutions to recognize it.


Now, I'm not going to knock the hunter safety courses, as they're a good thing for beginning hunters to take, especially those who may not have had a parent to teach them gun safety. AND......I am a firm believer in personal responsibility, which means that it ultimately falls upon the shoulders of the person themselves, to make sure they are aware and familiar with all the aspects of safety and the law. AND....I am also a firm believer in punishing them if they don't.

Which brings us back to the subject at hand, constitutional carry, something I see as a little of a Catch-22 situation. On one hand you tell someone that they don't have to have any training to carry that gun, that's it's their right under the Constitution to do so, even if they have to shoot another person. Okay....I agree. Then, on the other hand, you tell them that if they want to go hunting with that gun and shoot a deer, then they must have training. To me, that sounds like a deer is more important than a person.