U.S. Concealed Carry Association to be Featured on 60 Minutes with CBS News

Wisconsin-Based USCCA President Tim Schmidt Discusses Concealed Carry Reciprocity

Concealed Carry Success
Concealed Carry Success

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- The United States Concealed Carry Association (USCCA), a Wisconsin-based organization providing education, training and self-defense insurance to responsible American gun owners, will be featured on 60 Minutes for a segment with CBS News this coming Sunday, February 11, 2018.

The House has passed the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act that would allow Americans licensed to carry concealed firearms in their own states to bring those weapons legally into other states. Steve Kroft takes a look at this common-sense legislation that the U.S. Senate could pass and send to the President for his signature. His report will be broadcast on the next edition of 60 Minutes, Sunday, Feb. 11 at 7:00 p.m. ET/PT.

The interview, which will air across the nation, will feature expert commentary from Tim Schmidt, the Founder & President of The United States Concealed Carry Association on gun rights and legislation moving through Congress.


The United States Concealed Carry Association has been urging lawmakers in Congress to follow through on their promise to pass national concealed carry reciprocity, which would ensure that concealed carry permits issued in one state would be considered valid in the other 49 states. U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act through S.446 last year and Congressman Richard Hudson (R-NC) did the same through the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 in H.R.446. The House bill has passed the U.S. House of Representatives. Both bills would ensure that concealed carry permits issued in one state would be respected in them all.

60 Minutes has won more Emmy Awards than any other primetime broadcast, including a special Lifetime Achievement Emmy. It has also won virtually every other broadcast journalism award, plus 15 Peabody awards for excellence in television broadcasting. 60 Minutes was created in 1968 by Don Hewitt and premiered on CBS September 24th of that year.

About the USCCAU.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA)

The U.S. Concealed Carry Association (USCCA) provides education, training and self-defense insurance to responsible American gun owners. Headquartered in West Bend, WI, the USCCA is the largest and fastest-growing association whose sole focus is the responsibly armed American.

  • 186 thoughts on “U.S. Concealed Carry Association to be Featured on 60 Minutes with CBS News

    1. Jake, in all your blather, you have yet to address my points. You state we are unwilling to discuss your points and attack you personally. That is total bs and exactly the opposite of the truth. You have been continuously attacking firearm owners and have not ever addressed my points, even though I have repeatedly brought them up to you and requested a rebuttal. You always say the same things, which have always included mandates and other unconstitutional points, to which we have repeatedly explained on many levels how your views are wrong.

      And here you are again with the same bs and still not addressing my points.

      1. OK, I guess I am missing some part of this if that is what you think… And THAT is how discussion works, you say something, i say something, we discuss it.. We don’t attack people on a personal level.

        How you think I am attacking people is beyond me? I never said we gun owners lack common sense or responsibility. What I said was there ARE gun owners that lack common sense and responsibility and we have all seen them. BIG difference.

        I have also not advocated for passing restrictive laws, rules or regulations.. Not once have I done that.. What I talked about was my opinion that I think training for weapon retention is something that should be part of a license.. NOW, it is entirely possible that may require a law to enforce.. That’s just obvious and common sense in itself BUT, and this is the big part, how does that RESTRICT, PROHIBIT, PREVENT or stop anyone from exercising their 2A rights? It does not at all do any of that for the second amendment rights of the people.. Not even a little.

        It does not in the least and to be clear here is why and what I said… I did not say that if you don’t do the training you can’t own and bear arms. I SAID, if you don’t do the training and something happens, LIABILITY FOR ANY SITUATION you may encounter falls on YOU personally.. i.e. THAT would be taken into consideration during any charges that may or may not come from whatever actions you took.

        Say you end up having to shoot someone.. Whether you took the time and effort to have training WOULD be considered in the case. If someone took away your weapon and shot other innocent people with it, that WOULD be considered… any training you had, would be considered in a case against you. If you CHOSE to forgo that training, YOU are liable on a personal level entirely.. you will be charged because you took NO responsibility at all for your own actions or ability to SAFELY carry a firearm on your person..

        Because some people are not bothering to actually read what I am writing, there is a HUGE assumption here by some people..

        Not only that, some here are taking that as meaning that I am saying I somehow want MORE regulations mandated that would TAKE AWAY our rights.. That is just a plain lie and anyone actually reading this stuff, knows it. My opinion and suggestion does not in any way restrict ANYONE or anything. Having no training does not “take away” any rights.. It just puts full liability on YOU the gun owner carrying in public AND shows YOUR choice to be as responsible about it as you can.

        And to clarify, the ONLY 2nd Amendment restrictions I DO want and agree with are laws that insure VIOLENT FELONS, the INSANE, PEDOPHILES and RAPIST lose all of their 2A rights, PERIOD.

        Now if THAT is what you people are attacking me over, that is even worse.. ANYONE that advocates a violent felon or insane person still retain their weapon rights is a true and utter moron.

    2. @Jake: I have a far better idea. Why don’t you propose repealing ineffective gun laws and then and only THEN can we have a dialogue? 22,000 + laws and you want “good faith” by adding more? Nope, I want YOU to show that YOU support 2A Rights by supporting a repeal of do nothing laws. Now, you want to reply to something, reply to this, specifically. Otherwise you’re just one more antigun troll fishing for more laws the same as you’ve been doing from the beginning.

      1. Actually I already have.. When I came home and saw what the people of this country allowed to happen while I served, passage of the so called patriot act, the demise of our country from inside out and more, being I am now home all the time I decided to fight back and have been doing just that. I AM raising the voice for real and have been out there.

        I carry every day just like you probably do as well.. and I make it clear I do to those I talk with, debate with and help with trying to find a solution that works on both sides without removing more actual rights.

        There are things that can be done to both:

        1) make gun owners appear more responsible to the anti gunners WITHOUT actually taking away or actually restricting the rights we have. i.e. ideas that show gun owners ARE the responsible types without actually restricting or removing 2A rights.

        2) I am active in the push for national reciprocity now. This is my main thing right now.

        3) Working with more states to get Constitutional Carry, including MY home state. I helped in Kansas while based there from 2012 – 2014 before being medically retired.

        4) and finally, and this some of us have been working on BEFORE this weeks mass shooting… trying to get more schools to allow people like me, former military veterans and law enforcement to volunteer in our communities to patrol our schools armed on a rotating basis depending on how many volunteers we get that CAN AND DO PASS a full Background check (even though most of us former military did or may still carry security clearances). And yes, it would be REQUIRED to pass another background check to be part of this to insure the PUBLIC can be safe knowing we are the good guys.

        How about you? How many meetings and phone calls have you been in lately with actual people in charge about this stuff? Me? in the just that 30 days, about 8 different ones.

        You see, there is a LOT more to the 2A situation.. and I don’t think some of you here understand how serious the battle BEHIND the scenes.. the battle NOT SEEN in public or in the media actually is.

        WE are already in a full on war for our very rights you all say you support.. What worries me, is that when someone has a different opinion, instead of TALKING about it, saying why you disagree and coming up with a DIFFERENT SOLUTION, some of you just outright attack and get into personal insults.

        I could have walked away from this discussion long ago.. I did not.. You might want to ask yourself why… The answer? Because if I don’t keep fighting, WE WILL LOSE our 2A rights completely.

        Right this moment I am waiting for another meeting to be setup BECAUSE of what happened this week… In some ways, what happened this week is a turning point… and a surge is being put forth outside the medias eyes to force and push an AR-15 (they call it an assault weapons ban, which does not exist in civilian life) outright ban… except this time, they are not just going for the rifles.. The ban is NINETY pages. That’s 90 pages long we just got…

        And not only are they going after the weapon itself, this time they are going after the parts, pieces, and anything that can be attached to, used to repair and/or make, enhance or otherwise modify OTHER style weapons to perform ‘like’ an AR-15. They have also include the AR-10 and a number of other designations this time around.

        Now, realistically, will that on its face get passed? No.. However it IS VERY possible, parts and pieces of it do get passed in lobby bills… you give us this, we give you that.. And lobby groups on OUR side, are now saying they are changing how they go about getting our weapons.. they are now going to push behind the scenes not only on those things I listed piece by piece, but are going to start pushing more school based instruction and wording of lessons to ostracize “guns” and “shootings” and such to children STARTING in Kindergarten.

        You all only know part of what is now going on. At some point though, WE HAVE to step up and we have to show the country, the people who are ON the fence about guns that we ARE the good guys.. that we DO have common sense and that we DO take responsibility for our actions and ownership…

        I thought when I started the discussion, it would be a good place to get some differing opinions and ideas… Boy was I wrong…

    3. Jake, you are one of the few trolls we get on this site. You have stated several times that you weren’t going to post again, but here you are once again. Belief in our Constitution isn’t extreme, being anti-rights is unconstitutional. You keep claiming that you don’t believe in government mandates, but have yet to explain how a “mandate” can be enforced other than by government.

      You are either stupid or deceitful. We don’t need any more controls on the 2A. There are already thousands of laws that are available that make harming and killing people illegal and have punishments for those crimes. You have also not explained how your mandates would have any effect on the shootings you have repeatedly mentioned. This again shows that you are either stupid or deceitful.

      You have also still avoided my statement about how making lawful ownership more onerous and costly is unconstitutional by disenfranchising group of people, ala the Jim Crow era. This also shows your igorance or deceitfulness.

      Don’t bother responding if you aren’t willing to discuss these issues.

      1. I am responding to make TWO points to your comment.. I already said it was pointless to continues since none of you actually read or seem to understand what I said.. AND since you seem to enjoy attacking someone with a differing opinion on a personal level because you don’t like the opinion.

        My two points are this.. Just because someone argues against you, does not make them a troll. And second, I have already “discussed” the issues here with many posts.

        All the replies that came in today I read.. And nearly every one threw a personal insult at me, proposed that I was part of the anti gun side of things, was a troll and so forth.

        You all win. The so called “discussion” is over. If that makes you all feel better, that in itself is very telling too.

        It is truly sad to see people that cannot actually debate or discuss differing opinions without attacking the other person directly because the opinion is not liked or does not conform.

        But whatever, that is your way and it is clear those of you doing this will continue to do so.. which means, we gun owners WILL LOSE it all someday in the future.

        We already see the ‘other’ side now make a lot of noise of bringing back that piece of crap “assault weapons” ban they pushed through during clintons era. BUT they have also announced a new even more powerful strategy.. you have all seen the ‘children’ interviewed on TV lately..

        The liberals have figured out they can USE the children to change everything now.. and while they already have been to some extent, mark my words, we are going to see a MASSIVE push in our schools teachings and in colleges to indoctrinate children to such a level, in a couple generations, guns WILL become outlawed because they will outnumber the rest of us when it comes to those in power in government.

        To me, the only way to beat that is to ‘appear’ open to some basic non-infringing compromise.. to appear to work toward DE-escalation. To me, the LEAST harmful, the least restrictive possibility to that would be doing something as my opinion suggested.. PROVE to the people we are a common sense and responsible group outright by taking it upon OURSELVES to agree to insure we have been trained and understand how to retain our weapons, when to properly use them and that we are level headed in doing so..

        Do you realize how many replies to me here, come across anything but? Some of the replies to me here come across as outright attacks against me or my character.. to the point of unhinged anger in some of them. Do you really think that makes the rest if us gun owners look sensible or responsible to those trying to destroy the 2A??

        I sure as hell don’t think so.

        But whatever. You all attacked my opinions and attempt to actually DISCUSS it. And so YOU win.. here in this little internet forum.

        In reality, those that lambasted me with those comments are actually those that hurt the 2A more than help. And in real life, all they had to say is pointless and meaningless anyway.. no harm to me at all. It is just a pretty big shock that even among gun owners and 2A supporters, instead of TALKING and sharing differing opinions, we end up attacking each other within…. And that right there WILL be the doom of our 2A rights in a couple generations.

        BTW: To all the others that posted with your current insults and fake accusations because I piss you off, I won’t be replying since you cannot seem discuss things in rational tones or without anger issues…

        You want to talk, I am all for it. You want keep throwing down, go for it.. just don’t expect me to continue to reply directly to your bullshit.

        1. @Jake, You write, inside your fifteen loquacious paragraphs, “You all win. The so called “discussion” is over. If that makes you all feel better, …”. This is not about feelings. We all and you, too, should have an unqualified aversion to misinformation being spread about the content, meaning, and intent of the US Constitution and the nature of our American Civil Rights. So, if what you write about the discussion being over is true, then it is time for contemplative study, and I can recommend some reading material.

    4. And here comes “no more laws” Jake calling for…..wait for it…..yup, more restrictions, more laws. This guy’s got more ways of calling for more laws while saying he’s not calling for more laws than a chameleon does changing colors. He must know the Violence Policy Center’s playbook by heart. If you notice the next phase is to accuse us of wanting the mentally ill and criminals to be able to have unfettered access to firearms. Accusations right out of the anti-gunners playbook.

      You are too easy to read. The longer we go the more shrill they get.

      1. You really are a fool. I have commented in numerous OTHER POSTS in this discussion, the comment about mentally ill and “VIOLENT felons”. However, it is apparent you are nothing but a troll and not even reading what was written based on your last reply.. Not only that you have yet to even answer ANY direct question I asked you.

        So there is no point even continuing.. You can play your word games by yourself. Everyone else knows you a fool and the fact that you lack any common sense when it comes to firearm responsibility. YOU are the danger to everyone because you cling to this notion that you and your morals and opinions are right and everyone else is wrong.

        I have clearly said I do not advocate for new laws, regulations nor anything of the sort BY GOVERNMENT MANDATE. But apparently you cannot understand English. Self policing by gun owners by discussing and voting in reasonable solutions as a compromise, is a long way away from what you are trying to twist things into. Anyone with anything resembling a brain can figure it out.. and I really hate arguing with an unarmed man in that department.

        One thing is clear to me however thanks to you… it is clear people like you are just as much a danger to our 2A rights as the nutcase anti gun types are. You cannot even discuss the issue without insults and ridiculous comments that pretty much show everyone your true mentality. You want to give up everything instead of finding solutions that help. And there are solutions without forcing the government to pass new laws, rules and regulations WITHOUT our say.

        You have done a great job of showing the EXTREME types anti gun people talk about when it comes to 2A supporters and gun owners.. You definitely succeeded in showing you are at that end of the spectrum. At this point I have to wonder if you are not one of those that walks around city streets with your AR-15 to get attention and get on youtube or some such thing. I bet you even went out and bought all the coolest tacti-cool crap you could fine as well.

        And sadly, extreme types like you make the rest of us look bad because MOST firearm owners actually DO want a DISCUSSION with varying OPINIONS and to find a common ground that could be agreed on by everyone so in the end we don’t LOSE IT ALL.

        I am done trying to have an adult debate with you. It is apparent you are not reading what is said and that which you do read, you lack reading comprehension regarding the comment. As I said previous, twisting things around to fit YOUR narrative is what liberals do. What’s that say about you? (rhetorical, don’t bother answering as continuing this with you is like talking to a brick wall).

        1. @Jake, You write, “Self policing by gun owners by discussing and voting in reasonable solutions as a compromise…” How do you propose that would work? How would you get all the gun owners together to vote? How would you exclude non gun owners? Who would pay for all that?
          Why not leave the choice to get firearms training up to the self vote of the individual, and he can self police himself?

        2. This is so much fun, watching the antigun side shed all their pretense and yet still hide behind “we can find reasonable restrictions”. I absolutely love it. And when called out on it the only response they’re left with is insults; “you’re the morons, you’re the true enemies…”.

          I have to admit, inviting you to a one on one discussion was a horrible idea. Without this being in the public light no one would believe what has transpired here. Can we rent a public hall and do this in person with Jake, Wild Bill, Heed The Call, myself and a few others? It would be the best entertainment of the month. I vote Bill as Constitutional historian.

          1. @Vanns, Oh, thank you very much. I just have an unqualified aversion to persons intentionally spreading misinformation about what the Constitution says, means, and protects. There are so many people on this site that have knowledge and experience to unmask the trolls, that the conversation is in good hands.

    5. Jake, so you finally do admit you want government regulation and that you believe in classes of society and the return of the Jim Crow era, since you haven’t addressed nor refuted me on those points.

      You failed to explain who would regulate the laws that you believe we, the people, should enact to regulate the 2A. I don’t believe the “honor” system would work; therefore, it would be left to the government to regulate.

      Your “retention training” and safe handling that you drone on about would not have prevented the shootings you mention in your posts. So clearly you must believe in other forms of regulation. Regardless of the fact that your regulations do not prevent criminal activity for which we already have laws and punishments.

      1. Can’t we all just hug it out and finally admit what I realized a while ago, Jake is a troll and most likely an anti-gun planted troll at that. This is, in my memory, the first time we’ve had the “pleasure” of his company. I do know one thing, Fredy has been enjoying the hell out of all the replies to this column.

        Let’s see if “Jake” appears again.

        1. LOL seriously, because you cannot answer MY direct comments and questions with LOGICAL answers, now you want to play games and call me a Troll?

          Whatever.. Go on, play your games.. I am tired of it.. I tried to have an open discussion with varying opinions and you turned in into something else.

          I said it before, unless all we 2A supporters start talking and listening to ALL opinions, unless we find some compromise or middle ground, WE WILL LOSE our 2A or worse, end up in an actual civil war.

          I have served in other countries to defend them.. I sure as hell do NOT want to have to do so in my own streets against other Americans.

          You can clearly see, yet again today, the anti gun push to ban AR-15’s because yet again, another NUTCASE went off in a school. Apparently that is just fine with you since you don’t believe in any kind of rules that insure mentally insane and violent criminals should be forbidden from getting firearms.

          My proposal was to simply insure those carrying KNEW how to use it, KNEW the proper TIME to use it and knew how to RETAIN THAT WEAPON when attacked. And you went over on this tangent it complete and utter ridiculous bull trying to turn me in to some anti gun troll. Do you really think the majority reading all these comments are as stupid as YOU seem to think?

          Now we have to fight the liberals yet again over major gun control.. maybe we ‘win’ again.. or maybe this time, THEY WIN and we lose.. all because people like YOU refuse to even discuss it or listen to other opinions and suggestions. You just name call and pout like a child because your opinion is the only one that should matter, in your eyes.

          Yea, I want violent felons and insane people fully restricted. I want people to have SOME basic idea of how the heck to retain and maintain control of a deadly firearm in a fight. And I want people to use COMMON SENSE and take responsibility for that personally.

          What you want, I have no clue because it makes no sense to have NO rules.

          BTW, some of us out here actually volunteered to work as patrol officers, armed, in our local schools. All of us that do are former military and law enforcement. We have a couple civilians also in the program and do you know why they were entrusted to do this also?

          BECAUSE THEY took it upon themselves to get some BASIC WEAPON HANDLING, WEAPON RETENTION and weapon use etiquette training first. THEY took initiative to show people, the community and everyone else that they were taking the responsible approach and not playing ‘pretend’ weapon experts like so many people do.

          I am tired of this because it is not even a discussion any more.. It is YOU trolling and playing word games.. It is you twisting what is said to try and maintain some sense of power and control you seem to think you have here. Well, I am done playing your game.. You go on and do whatever you want.

          I will do what I want.. and thanks to those like you, will now be MORE of an advocate for at least some basic firearm training for those that get licensed to carry. It is people like you that scare the hell outta me because you lack any common sense and show no inclination to take any responsibility at all for carrying a deadly weapon.

          1. @Jake, You write, “… since you don’t believe in any kind of rules that insure mentally insane and violent criminals …” There are more than 20,000 such rules. They did not prevent the shooting.
            You write, “My proposal was to simply insure those carrying KNEW how to use it,…” This is not true. You advocated mandatory training. If such training is mandatory, prior to exercising a Constitutional Civil Right, that would be an infringement. It is up to the individual to decide what training to get, if any.
            All of the rest, residue, and remainder of your fourteen paragraphs is just flotsam.

    6. @Jake: Phew, I have NEVER seen anyone write so much crap about how they don’t want more gun laws while continuing, endlessly, to say that we (the grand and all powerful “we”) should formulate the exact rules and regulations he says we shouldn’t have! You would have made a fantastic General in charge of the circular firing squad.

      You have, indeed, given more than a few of us our laugh for the week and I really believe you don’t understand the slap your head, duct tape your head, ridiculous nature of your comments.

      1. Just read though all this. Vann, wild Bill. It’s you two that come across as fools and trolls. Really. You’re both all over this site pontificating and throwing insults because , as jake says, you can’t actually have a proper discussion or put together a logical argument.

        It li also pretty clear Wild bill pretty much works for Ammoland, responding to all and sundry with pompous opinions to generate activity on the site and perhaps generate more clicks on the advertising. Or you doing it free and don’t know you’re a tool for others to make money?

        Keep making your points jake. The bullies try to stop you with insults but a lot more people read this than make comments. You have supporters but bill and vann have nothing else to do except troll this site day in day out.

    7. Apparently most here just want to dump on me because they do not like my opinion or just want to keep trying to twist what I am actually saying with false information.

      Add to that, I just saw the news about, yet another, school shooting..

      One of the messages I have been trying to get you all to realize is that unless WE gun owners start taking proactive steps to defend our own 2A from being attacked, we WILL LOSE IT and stories like the one just now hitting the news, WILL BE THE CAUSE. You can bet right now, the left is moving to go after us full tilt yet again. And while this new school shooting is not because of anything having to do with our discussion here in terms of it happening, it IS directly related to the lefts ability to yet again point AT WE gun owners and call us unhinged, unsafe, unreasonable and on and on and on…

      Every time we see a story like this, there is another MAJOR SURGE of anti gun movement. And this one WILL BE much worse because it once again involves DOZENS OF CHILDREN being shot.

      It does not matter what your “literal” interpretation is of the 2A. Unless we step forward and accept that things DO need to be changed to protect others with reasonable solutions that do NOT RESTRICT ownership, we are going to lose. Unless WE make ourselves look responsible, reasonable and using of common sense, your literal “argument” about the 2A is going to fall more and more on deaf ears.

      And if this continues, DON’T blame ANYONE else for losing the very rights you say you defend.. because it will BE WE GUN OWNERS that are at fault for our unbending, unreasonable stances that we refuse to even consider even listening to other opinions or options that might help.

      Placing rules and regulations that can help in this regard DO NOT INFRINGE ON YOUR RIGHT TO OWN OR BEAR ARMS. In no way does anything I said stop you from going out and buying a weapon. In no way does it stop you from putting it in your pocket and carrying it every day. BUT some reasonable common sense rules CAN be a stepping stone toward showing the anti gun side peoples WE ARE reasonable and we DO take responsibility. Just yelling “NO” regardless is only going to force them to really act and do everything they can to outright abolish firearms as we have seen around the world in many other countries now.

      I am done with the discussion though.. It is clear a few of you simply want what you want, regardless of any other opinion.

      I can tell you this, you DID change my mind on one thing. Prior, I really stood the line when it came to ANY rules or regulations being added even though, in my opinion, I thought a few that included training were reasonable.

      Now, some of you have swayed even me to think that may be the right choice even more because I don’t want to ever have to deal with someone again that shot themselves or allowed their weapon to be taken from them and used against another innocent person. Perhaps someday when YOU experience that in real life as I have, you might think about that. It changes your entire perspective, just as combat did the first time I was in in my 20’s.

      I fully support the 2A. But I don’t support literal non-budging stances against reasonable rules to protect both the 2A and others. I fully support laws that make sure VIOLENT felons, nutcases, pedophiles, rapists etc completely and utterly lose their 2A rights for good.. NOTE I SAID VIOLENT FELONS. I am not talking about every kind of felony out there.

      I guess we shall see what the future holds.. My bet, we are ALL going to lose our 2A or worse, going to have to take up arms in our own streets and cities to literally defend it again. Unless we gun owners can find a way to mitigate what we see happening, unless gun owners will come to the table, mark my words… the day is coming.

      I would say it has been a good discussion.. but that would be a lie.. I WILL say I am shocked at the fact some of you refuse to actually discuss it, instead just turning this into a name calling, insult throwing diatribe against me while also twisting my words into something I never said.. And that is part of the issue, especially if gun owners are not even willing to actually understand and listen to other peoples’ opinion or ideas without getting angry as we see here.

      1. @Jake, You write, “Apparently most here just want to dump on me because they do not like my opinion…” No, You invite it because you just recite liberal propaganda, and your opinion is devoid of any understanding or the Constitution or the nature of Civil Rights. Still waiting on your academic credentials, by the way.
        Your rants are so long that it is annoying to unravel them. If you really knew your subject, you could explain it in a three short paragraphs. Your long writing, however, is evidence of an unfocused mind.

      2. The bad thing is, there’s not much anyone can, nor any law that can be passed, that will stop someone from killing whomever they choose. Whether by firearm, car, truck, knife, baseball bat or bomb. The fact is people who really want to kill others will do exactly that. Sad but true. this is why the 2nd A must remain untouched so as our 2nd A rights won’t be infringed (anymore than they already are)

        Also, the left will NEVER give up trying to take our 2nd A away. Again…Sad but true.Our best bet is to calmly talk sense ,one on one, to those liberals when the chance arises. (yeah I know) But if we don’t truly try to make them see the logic in the 2nd A rights, they’ll never understand it. They’ve been(or choose) to be brainwashed by the left.

        And no matter what the dem politicians claim, say or do, they ARE LIBERAL SOCIALIST PROGRESSIVE MARXISTS, and no longer bear any resemblance whatsoever to the American Democratic Party of the past.9as bad as they were) The dems have been taken over by socialist commies and illegal aliens and backed by muslim money from the middle east.. Plain and simple. Never give the Dems an inch on more gun control laws because they’ll take a mile. A quick look at our current CCW laws and the however many thousand other restrictive gun laws we have now , is the proof of that.

        IMO, if the left doesn’t wise up and if they stay on the path they are now, there’s going to come a time when the modern version of the “Civil War” will be likely be fought again. I highly suggest we all reload ammo, stockpile gunpowder, ammo and stockpile approprriate firearms, in order to be ready for the day…. should it come. just my 2 cents.

        1. @Country Boy, Great comment but it’s a waste of time and breath. I recall an incident where a local politician was very anti gun. He was accosted one evening while out for a walk in his neighborhood by some gun toting youths. He was very lucky to get away with only minor injuries. He lost his antigun attitude damned quickly. Applied for and got a ccw and began to carry. I don’t remember but I think it was near Chicago. For most of our antigun adversary’s this kind of experience is the only thing they will ever understand. Just sayin’

    8. Jake, you are the only one attacking anyone on a personal level by calling firearm owners all criminals, lacking “common-sense” and being unsafe with firearms. I am sure, based on that and your “vast” life experience as a LEO and military service member, that you don’t include yourself in that group of unworthiness.

      And you still avoid my statement about how making it onerous and costly unconstitutionally disenfranchizes group of otherwise lawful citizens, ala Jim Crow, and makes legal ownership perilous by making a good citizen a felon for unintentionally breaking a law, which does nothing to further our safety.

      But please do continue to cry about how you are being victimized for your opinion.

      1. I am not attacking anyone nor did I ever call anyone or all gun owners criminals or a broad statement of lacking common sense.. YET AGAIN you twist what I said to fit YOUR interpretation.

        I SAID, my issue and opinion is regarding THOSE LACKING COMMON SENSE and not using common sense or taking responsibility. I am speaking in general terms, not at specific people here or anywhere.

        The ONLY people I am specifically calling out in that regard, if you will, are those I have witnessed and seen in real life, which is how MY OPINION was formed.. because I HAVE seen and experienced it..

        ANYONE with my background fully knows what I am talking about.. YOU CANNOT relate to anything, whether it is combat, whether it is shooting someone or being shot, or whether you witness someone shooting themselves or another person.. And I have said more than once, I HAVE and I draw FROM that real life experience.

        Arguing a position without knowing what you are talking about IS part of the problem here for some people.. They seem to think they know what they are talking about or seem to know what I am saying even though it is real life experiences that I am basing MY opinion on, not just some idea that the 2A is there and so that’s all that it should be.

        Anyhow, I posted my last comment and explained why.. so this will probably be the last direct reply to a post..

        Recommend at least reading what I said in my last post because I articulate the danger of really losing our 2A and why I think we are headed that way if people don’t change and are not willing to step up and talk about it while listening to differing opinions.. and today’s shooting is going to make it much worse… yet again.

        1. @Jake, Could you, please, list for me the sense that is common to all? I don’t want to have missed anything.
          You write, “ANYONE with my background fully knows what I am talking about.. YOU CANNOT relate to anything, whether it is combat, whether it is shooting someone or being shot, or whether you witness someone shooting themselves or another person.. And I have said more than once, I HAVE and I draw FROM that real life experience.” What… do you think that you were the only one in combat? Do you think that a little combat qualifies you as an expert on the nature of Civil Rights or the US Constitution? Forget the propaganda, do some reading (Hobbs. Locke, Rousseau) and come back to us any time.

    9. Jake, no, shooting at the NSA is an example of criminal behavior. None of your “common-sense” training would have prevented that. Also you have stated that we should vote on restrictions, training, whatever, which means government control/permission/regulation.

      I have also repeatedly experience pained how making it onerous and expensive unconstitutionally disenfranchizes groups of citizens, reminiscent of the Jim Crow era, and makes lawful ownership perilous, an unintentional mistake turning a good person into a felon. These points you have yet to address.

    10. @Jake And when someone uses a truck to mow down 100 people you’ll be right there demanding tougher laws on rental trucks, background checks and training. Oh wait, that’s already happened!

    11. @Jake: How much easier can you make it for me than to simply quote you? “…WE should come up with and vote on reasonable rules and regulations so the government does not have to.”.

      BTW, did you just think these “reasonable rules and regulations” were going to be mere suggestions or did you then expect them to become law? Uh, yeah, that’s what I thought, because some well meaning people thought them up instead of the “government” well then, that’s perfectly okay! What planet did you come from? The government IS people. NO more gun laws PERIOD!

      Thanks for the softball question.

    12. You know, with all the comments I have made regarding MY opinion vs other opinions, and even with being personally insulted more than once because MY opinion does not fit with others, I have continued to discuss and debate here..

      What I cannot figure out is why no one is actually reading what I am writing? I keep getting replies about how I want “government mandated” or how I want “restrictions” to be passed. NOT ONCE HAVE I EVER SAID SUCH A THING.

      I also keep getting replies about me having my opinion for economic gain because of certain training I do for people and groups.. Yet not once have I said ANYTHING about being paid or having a business doing any such thing. Not everyone does what they do for money so taking my words out of context and ASSuming things is part of the problem in this discussion.

      The fact is you don’t like MY opinion. Even when I try to explain that I look at the Constitution as something MORE than a unflinching literal document, some come back at me about that.. which means some consider it to be literal and unflinching.. Which to me is a insult to the founding fathers.. because I look at them and what they gave us as geniuses. And in MY OPINION, I very much doubt the founding fathers did not intend for society to have the Constitution grow as we did. They had to know it would need to grow as we the people and our country did. I think they gave us the framework to start, fully expecting us to AS A PEOPLE, allow and change the Constitution via a majority and decision of the majority.

      So to clarify CLEARLY and state what I am saying as clear as I possibly can, THIS is my opinion and what I have been saying.. and if after this, people still twist it around, well… then not much else I can do.

      1) I do NOT think GOVERNMENT mandated training is the way to go. What I DO think is that as firearm owners, WE can come up with a reasonable set of rules and regulations that the PEOPLE VOTE on to insure that:
      a) those carrying do so responsibly and with BASIC training and knowledge on how to secure and maintain CONTROL over their firearm when they do carry it. Just as you have to know BASIC safety and rules of the road to drive etc, if WE decide as gun owners to SELF regulate, not only would it get the left liberals off us but would show the world we DO consider this a serious issue and we DO take responsibility for it. The government does not need or have to be a part of this if WE the people work locally on this.
      b) IF WE gun owners did something like that, it would be up to the PEOPLE to decide by voting. And then training would be done by those of you interested IN having business or doing that kind of training for money etc.. AND I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE. The training I do is outside this scope. I never mandated nor even hinted that it would be “government training” or anything of the sort.

      2) The training I am talking about is mainly based around WEAPON RETENTION and properly securing your weapon when you carry it, BOTH to avoid accidental shootings AND to avoid someone taking your weapon from you and using it against you or others, which I stated before I HAVE SEEN happen. In fact, I seem to also remember seeing a video online somewhere showing this very thing happen to a gun owner but I don’t know when or where that occurred. No one can deny this does not happen.. and happen more then it should.. especially since I just checked writing this, and sure enough I can find quite a few videos and stories right now online about this very topic and people getting dead because they were clueless and did not even have the most basic of weapon retention and defensive training. One is even of a good Samaritan shot from behind while trying to do the right thing by someone else with a gun.

      3) In no way does ANY TRAINING restrict or place ANY kind of restrictions on, reject, interfere with, alter, stop someone from, or prevent a law abiding citizen from owning AND bearing arms. And for the life of me, why some of you keep using that excuse as an argument, is beyond me. in MY opinion, this argument is being used because you just don’t want to have to learn something. Or perhaps you have something to hide.

      There is NO valid excuse and playing off the words of the 2A not saying it specifically, it is not valid.. And on the other side, it is not valid because the 2A ALSO does not say the reverse to that. I think this was intentional by the founding fathers because they thought we would be smart enough to realize it would have to adapt in the future to society and the changes sure to come within the country over the years.

      Sure, the 2A does not say a lot of things. Then again neither does it SAY things as well.. It goes BOTH WAYS. And as I have said numerous times, I very much doubt the geniuses that wrote it, expected a civil society to not be able to reasonably and with common sense, adapt it for the future.

      If you don’t want to get trained, then don’t. But should you ever find yourself in trouble, say someone snags your gun from you and shoots others with it, prepare to explain why you did not feel it necessary to use the common sense and take responsibility to actually KNOW what you were doing and how to retain that weapon in court when you get sued or even charged for negligence.. kind of the same thing that happens when you drive a car without a license or a motorcycle with required training.

      I can tell you this.. If I am ever in another situation in real life again and this time some gun owner comes along and I get hurt or one of my family gets hurt BECAUSE that gun owner was a moron, you can bet I WILL go after that gun owner in court with everything I can. If a gun owners lack of common sense and lack of responsibility causes the direct injury or death of someone in my family, I will take everything I can from them. If it turns out they had NO training, no experience and the attitude they did not need to because they thought they were bad ass just because they carry a firearm, it won’t just be the law they have to worry about.

      What gets me is a car is JUST as deadly as a gun. A knife is as well. A gun is more convenient but they are all just as deadly when used to kill. Yet you have no problem with being required to show you can drive to get your license. You have no problem requiring everyone be trained to do numerous other things, even other CONSTITUTIONAL things like being a SWORN Police Officer, being an Attorney or a Judge and so on – ALL specifically written and covered under the Constitution, just like the 2A. A gun is MUCH easier to lose or have someone take and use against others… and while it is a “right” to bear arms, it is also a MUCH bigger responsibility to do so. The idea some basic training to protect that right, seems to me to be common sense.

      3) Finally, THIS would also be a step in the process against FELONS, Violent criminals and those with mental problems from being able to carry… In fact, it would really help with possibly catching those with some mental issues. While in one of my LEO duties, I had responsibility for certifying and signing off on new officer training and actually being able to field a weapon.. Without that, they obviously could not be a sworn officer. Twice I have actually rejected a person due to a fear of the person’s mental capacity during training.

      The first one was a male that just became over the top gun hoe about carrying a gun and about using it. It became all he talked about to the point it was clear to pretty much everyone in that group, he should not be carrying a weapon. There was more he said but you get the idea. It was because of this, in firearm training, he suddenly was sent for a mental eval… and thankfully got some help.

      The second was also a male. The first issue was when he shot himself in the leg one night “cleaning” his weapon. He too was booted because a couple months later during weapon retention training, not only did he get the weapon taken from him quite a few times, but during one of them he ended up shooting himself AGAIN in the same leg. (the best part, 6 months later after being let go, he did it a third time but my understanding is to the other leg)

      How many times have we seen the reports of people pulling guns on someone shoplifting or opening fire on someone just running away that was not even armed or many other situations? Perhaps SOME training would have changed that entire situation. YOU cannot fix stupid. You cannot fix ALL problems. You cannot STOP all insanity. BUT doing NOTHING and simply standing on the side spouting “the 2nd Amendment does not say it” as an excuse is just as wrong as doing nothing. Being a gun owner, requires common sense and responsibility, IN MY OPINION.

      So this kind of training would likely stop a few with hidden mental issues from passing the course and being able to carry until they were seen and cleared. IF I were going to be a instructor and I had a student that displayed erratic behavior, a penchant for wanting to carry a gun etc, I would not sign off on the student in my course until I was SURE they were all there and someone I would TRUST with my own family.

      But in one regard, you are right. At this point you all don’t have to do anything… mark my words however…. The left and the anti gun movement IS going to grow much stronger and faster and if all us gun owners simply keep being stubborn and not budging in the least, not finding our own solutions to police our own, we will lose.

      There MUST be a middle ground.. Too much has changed for there not to be anymore. And now today, the anti gun movement has grown to a level they truly ARE a real threat at getting the 2nd Amendment actually removed from the Constitution when they again take full power in Washington.

      I don’t want it to get that far. And I sure as hell do not want to see war in the streets of my own country… because that is EXACTLY what we will have if WE gun owners don’t listen to other opinions, discuss those opinions AND come to some form of compromise that is reasonable WITHOUT actually restricting law abiding citizens outright.

      IF we don’t, the left WILL go after the 2A completely.. and then we won’t have a choice at all. We will have to fight literally.. and I for one, do not want to see that ever in my country.

      1. @Jake, Twenty-one paragraphs? No wonder no one reads your disjointed, illiterate rant. Rules and regulations mean nothing without government to enforce the rules and regulations that you propose, thus your argument implies government involvement.
        You write, “…it would be up to the PEOPLE to decide by voting. And then training would be done by those of you interested IN having business or doing that kind of training for money etc.. ” First, what you suggest is not how our constitutional republic works. Please see the US Constitution. Second, even if the PEOPLE decided by voting the result would be unenforceable without government. If the voted on result were unenforceable, why bear the expense?
        You write, ” There is NO valid excuse and playing off the words of the 2A not saying it specifically, it is not valid..” What does that even mean? This is just one sentence in your twenty-one paragraphs of illiterate nonsense.

    13. @WildBill: It’s a throwaway account and because of what I used to do years ago (which you and a couple of other folks are aware of) I take great pains to keep my identity under wraps. Nothing comes back to me.

      As for people like Jake, they are false flags. They are the ones constantly parading around saying “I believe in the Second Amendment BUT……”. There are no “buts”. Consider that since 1934 we’ve had more than 22,000 gun laws passed in this country….now understand that that works out to more than 265 gun laws passed EVERY SINGLE YEAR since 1934! And people like “Jake” keep saying we need more. Just give us a law for training or a law for background checks or make bumpfire stocks illegal. The time has long come for us to tell them NO more laws or regulations of any kind. The time has long come for us to start repealing all gun laws.

      Of course the “Jakes” of the world will scream, cry and whine that this isn’t “reasonable”. What isn’t reasonable is continuing on a path that has failed for more than 80 years.

    14. Jake: You don’t wish to debate either publicly or privately. You simply want to hold court, repeating your calls for restrictions on Rights. It matters not whether those restrictions come from the Federal Govt. or local Governments, they are restrictions and those of us who understand what freedom is and understand how many of our freedoms we’ve lost to people who think like you soundly reject your ideas and thoughts.

      There, you’ve made me break my original thought of not responding further. Opinions like yours are anathema to those of us who abhor restrictions on basic, inalienable Rights.

      1. Let me ask you one question since you keep repeating it and I never said it.

        What have I said that would “restrict”, place restrictions on, prevent, stop, refuse or keep ANYONE that is NOT a felon or mental patient, from owning and bearing arms?

        NOT ONE THING have I said that would do that. Being trained does not take away OR restrict anything. No where did I ever mandate any such thing. I said be trained and be responsible. I ALSO said it is something that WE gun owners and citizens should SELF POLICE. WE should come up with and vote on reasonable rules and regulations so the government does not have to.

        Stop trying to twist what I said. And start READING what I am saying.

        Now, answer MY question.. In what way or manner would having training stop you or anyone else from owning and bearing arms? I will wait.

        1. @Jake, Any thing that one would have to do prior to exercising a Civil Right is a restriction on and abridgment of that Civil Right.

    15. All: I offered “Jake” an opportunity to contact me directly to discuss the facts of this, not merely opinions. He has declined. If you notice, in his replies, he cherry picks exactly what he’ll reply to and refuses to address facts that have been presented that are contrary to what he previously stated.

      As a result of this and analyzing his posts, I call BS on “Jake”.

      1. At some point arguing with stupid will only make you look like a fool. Quit while you are ahead. Jake has no interest in hearing what we say, but wants us to listen to everything he opines about.

        1. and again with the personal attack.. The problem is YOU DO NOT HAVE A REASONABLE ARGUMENT against my opinion so now you resort to attacking me.

          THAT is the problem here.. Not me.

          I am reading everything being written.. but unlike you, I am not CHANGING what you say or ASSUMING something that was said like you are doing with me. I just wrote another open post explaining EXACTLY what my opinion is and what I have clearly said without ANY ambiguity. There is NO reason what so ever anyone should have any reason to change the words or my meaning now once you read that.

          BTW, some here want to just attack me on a personal level… which shows me YOU are the ones that probably are the danger because instead of recognizing this was a discussion and debate over differing opinions, you are now lashing out in anger at me personally..

          In real life, does that mean because you are angry at my differing opinion, I would have to also worry about just how far you would let your ‘anger’ go? I.e. pull a firearm on me or someone else?

          1. @Jake, I think that you misread his post. Only the last sentence applies to you. The reasonable argument against your opinion is that what you have expressed has all been pretty much repudiated. Only hangers on liberals and dedicated propagandists express your opinion about the Constitution and our Second Amendment Civil Rights. Yet, you have the audacity to question our credibility. You have yet to post a single university, college, class, seminar, or book from which you get your notions of what a Civil Right is or the nature of the US Constitution.
            To fail to challenge your flawed notions, would be to ratify them.

      2. I am not going to debate private.. I make my opinions public. And I stand by them.. I don’t need to do it behind the scenes in real life.

      3. @Vann, You are pretty gutsy giving this “Jake” the ability to contact you directly. Some of these internet trolls know how to mine information. You could wind up with a brand new mortgage on the ranch or an empty savings account!
        Opsec, brother, opsec.

        1. Yea on this I agree.. which is also why I won’t make contact outside this discussion.. OpSec. Just because we disagree in argument, does not mean it needs to go outside of the forum.

          1. @Jake, Don’t let these comments from the “holier than thou” get under your skin. It’s not worth it. I’ve had experience with them before. Many I respected at the time, now I don’t post near as much as I used to, nor do I respect any now. Just not worth getting my blood pressure worked up. They don’t respect anyone’s opinion but their own.

            1. @Bill N, Jake is the holier than thou that claimed his combat experience makes him an expert on the US Constitution and the nature of Civil Rights. Jake questions the credibility of everyone, then can produce not a single book that he has read concerning the US Constitution or the nature of Rights. With all due respect, I think you have picked the wrong horse.

    16. Jake, we cannot compromise with those who want to abrogate our rights. They will not stop until they revoke or make it so onerous as to essentially make legal firearm ownership illegal. Just look at the laws in CA, CT, NJ, and NY, etc., and they keep more restrictions because the infringements they already had didn’t prevent any crimes. Those laws only make legal ownership more expensive and more likely for a law-abiding citizen to unintentionally break the law. How is that good or just? And what benefit is there to society in that?

    17. Jake, I am not angry, nor have I used any ad hominem attacks, nor did anyone else. Your not liking us standing up for our rights isn’t name calling nor personally attacking you. Your calling firearm owners irresponsible and lacking common-sense, is a personal attack.

      1. Actually Wild Bill did, not you. Pretty much said because of MY opinion and my argument with passion, that he equated me to those that “go postal”, basically afraid for his safety based on my comments, because he disagrees with them.

        Just because someone has a differing opinion, the attacks on me by some are not warranted. The problem is I am being perceived as more than what I am because I am passionate and arguing my opinion without backing down.

        And it is also clear some people cannot stop “reading” into what I am saying.. they are literally changing what I have been saying.

        For example, this idea about my argument being for economic gain.. Which is bullshit. I have NOT ONCE SAID I do this for money. Not once have I said I charge ANYONE for the training I do.. in fact I did not even elaborate to say WHO I train nor why nor the circumstances. Not once.. I simply said what my background was IN REPLY to someone else in a basic sense.. Yet some here KEEP equating that to me saying I am in this for profit only because they clearly change the narrative on what I actually said.

        Perhaps it is my style of writing that is also part of the issue… BUT to me, I am writing specifically what I mean and my opinion from my point of view WITHOUT attacking someone on a personal level or labeling them a potential nutcase that would go postal because of my opinion.

        To me it is black and white. There is no grey area. Either someone is a law abiding RESPONSIBLE gun owner that uses common sense and looks at the big picture, or they are not.. I have seen, and I have NO doubt everyone here has seen, a LOT of people out there that should not be carrying just based on how they ‘play’ with their weapons in public or in some cases, even carry them. And it is that which makes everyone of us look bad in the long run.. and to me, WE need to take responsibility by doing as my opinion suggested so that we don’t lose our rights.

        This idea that it is all or nothing, is what I have a problem with.. As I said, I very much doubt the founding fathers intended the Constitution to be literal, absolute and unflinching. And some of the comments here, to me, basically say that is what the argument against me is.. You want the 2A to be literal, absolute and unflinching. And I am saying it can’t be or we will lose it completely.

        1. @Jake, You state, “As I said, I very much doubt the founding fathers intended the Constitution to be literal, absolute and unflinching.” You are very much wrong. That is exactly what the Founding Fathers intended.

          1. I am wrong? Really? PROVE IT. Where did the founding fathers say YOUR opinion and interpretation was the correct one? I see no such thing. I don’t see ANYWHERE they said it was literal. Show me one place that PROVES the Constitution is to be taken literal and I will agree I am wrong and you are right.

            MY opinion is that it is not literal rather a framework they expected WE the PEOPLE to work within and to allow to GROW as society changed and the country grows.

            The founding fathers were a hell of a lot smarter than you or me or anyone else here. And I have NO DOUBT what so ever, they were smart enough to realize that the future would be MUCH different then anything they could ever imagine carrying a flintlock.

            1. @Jake, Yes, your assertions about the Constitution are wrong. The Founding Fathers were not in a position to say my opinion was right. I, after much study, formal classes, professional guidance, and examinations am in a position to say that the Founders did intend that the Constitution was to be literal, absolute, and unflinching. Please see “Processes of Constitutional Decision Making Cases and Materials. By Sanford Levinson and Paul Brest; Decision in Philadelphia, The Constitutional Convention of 1787. By Christopher Collier and James L. Collier;The Federalist (Papers) by Jacob E. Cooke; Notes of the Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 reported by James Madisen; The History of American Law. By Lawrence Friedman; Declaration and Resolvesof the First Continental Congress by John Adams; Freedmen, The Fourteeth Amendment, And the Right to Bear Arms, Stephen P. Halbrook; The Tyranny of Good Intentions by Paul Craig Rogerts and Lawrence Stratton; Journal on Firearms and Public Policy Vol. II David B. Kopel, JD editor; Our Lost Constitution by Senator Mike Lee; Supreme Court Gun Cases by Kopel, Halbrook, and Korwin; The American Freedoms Primer by Les Adams and others and individual case law but I am tired of typing.
              You have no doubts because you are unlearned. You spout propaganda with no understanding of our Constitution.

    18. Jake, you keep saying mandated by raining. Who, but the government can mandate it? Just admit you are anti-rights. No one here is stating anyone should have unrestricted access, we are against mandates. You then state you are in favor of “local” government mandates, which means you *are* in favor of mandates.

      We do take the 2A literally. That’s how it is written. You believe in interpreting it how you believe it should be. Do you believe the word arms in the 2A only refers to handguns? If they meant that, why didn’t they stipulate that? You lost when you started down the path of government control, then you attempted to retract that by stating you didn’t want government control, but there is no other way to do it, but by government mandate.

      I also explained how adding costs to the RKBA disenfranchizes people, and that is unconstitutional. Democrats were known for that during the Jim Crow era, making it illegal for blacks to own firearms and restricting their right to vote, etc. You are showing your true colors.

    19. Jake, all of us base our beliefs on our knowledge and experience, you are not special. We disagree with you because you believe our rights should be abrogated by our government, the same government that is supposed to be subservient to “we, the people”, not the other way around as you seem to believe. Your “common-sense” ideas that you continually attempt to bash us with, we have shown you common-sense reasons why your ideas are not compatible with rational thought and violate our RKBA.

      You are allowed your opinion as much as we are. You perceive yourself to be better than the rest of us – you are not. We still live in an egalitarian society in the USA. Your opinions are clearly antithetical to most of the reduced of our views, which is why you are receiving so much flack concerning your opinions and the way in which you are stating them.

      I don’t use my real name because it is very uncommon and idiots like you are prone to “going postal” and my wife and child mean more to me than you these posts. I do write and talk to my representatives and use my real name when discussing issues of importance with them. You don’t meet that standard and have no good reason for o know who I am. Ammoland knows who I am, that’s all that matters. My opinion is not of lesser value just because you don’t know who I am.

      My screen id is a clue to who I am, that is enough.

      1. You again have missed the entire point of what I said. I have no idea where you get the idea that I am saying the “government” should require training. I said it is my opinion that people SHOULD be trained. No where did I say that I want the government to mandate training. IF something like this were to be “mandated”, I would want it to be done and VOTED ON as a law locally BY THE PEOPLE. You keep trying to throw this “government” mandate and I never said any such thing.

        I fully believe WE should regulate ourselves locally by coming up with and voting on reasonable common sense rules and regulations, JUST AS THE CONSTITUTION STATES.

        As for common sense, you are damn right I keep saying it because I cannot see how you think it is common sense to allow ANYONE to freely have unrestricted access to firearms in TODAY’s society. I wish you all would actually READ what I am writing and stop making your own BIASED statements to what I am saying. While it has not outright been said, none of you have even touched on WHY I SAID IT.. To prevent FELONS and mental people from having open access without ANY checks and balances in the system. AND to prevent more people from being stupid just because they can when it comes to firearms and safety.

        There is a HUGE difference between SELF/PEOPLE governance and decided on rules for society vs having government do it mandatory.. and you seem to be missing that huge point.. Perhaps if WE governed ourselves better, there would not be a liberal leftist attack on our 2A rights because WE would be taking our OWN responsibility (ANOTHER word I keep saying and you ignore) for how we act and what we do.

        While 90% of us are good and law abiding gun owners, it only takes a few to screw everything up.. and we see that more and more every day… not just with guns.. but with Cops who are judged because of the actions of a few, with judges, with FBI or DOJ agents… and many many more areas. Because of the idiocy of a few, the goods one suffer.. and because of a few morons, insane people and those that think they don’t have to abide by a majority in society, do stupid things on purpose in public, it makes ALL of us gun owners look that way.. And everyone here reading this knows it because we see it in the news, online and every where else.

        We don’t live in the 1700’s. We live in a modern age where society has not only grown from the extremely small population of 13 colonies to over 7 BILLION people, but our way of life, tech and so much more has changed.. INCLUDING the fact that by far we have a much bigger crime issue and mental health issue in this world then anything the founding fathers probably saw when they wrote it. They could not imagine the capabilities we have today on top of that.

        They left it to US, WE the people to make COMMON SENSE laws, rules and regulations to govern based on the outline they put together in the US Constitution. Anyone that thinks they did not intend for the people to allow it to grow and adapt, is a fool. They were a lot smarter then any of us are.

        And where you get off with these comments about me thinking I am special or something?? YOU are making a baseless accusation. I am expressing an OPINION. I am not walking around saying I am better than you or anyone else. BUT I DO express and debate and argue MY POINT OF VIEW without equivocation.. which definitely seems to be a problem here.

        Me arguing my side passionately seems to be a problem for you and some others.. And not only that, because you don’t like my opinion, you resort to INSULTS and name calling…

        You seem to think because I stand by and passionately voice MY opinion that somehow that means I think I am better than you or that only my opinion is the right one.. And THAT IS A HUGE PART OF THE PROBLEM here. You don’t have any clue who I am in real life.. You a basing your insults on nothing but the fact I am arguing against YOUR opinion.

        And then when you really get going, you start throwing direct personal insults as well.. Which I have not done… Going postal? really? You think because I am expressing MY opinion and arguing against you, that is a sign of someone that is extremely dangerous? You sound like a liberal because that is what THEY SAY about conservatives everyday. Do you have any idea what the hell you are talking about or what a real discussion and debate is?

        Making accusations against someone and insulting them on a personal level without basis, is the mark of someone that clearly is not interested in TRUE opinion by others. It truly is sad to have people throw words and insults around like that today because they happen to not like what someone else states is their opinion..

        What you want, and what some others here want, is for me to conform to YOUR opinion. You want me to stop putting out MY opinion because you want what you want, everyone that thinks differently be damned. You say YOUR opinion is the right one and I am wrong. Who says YOUR opinion is right and mine is wrong? YOU?

        There is no right or wrong when debating opinions.. and you can’t seem to grasp that at all. Your opinion is not any more right or wrong then my opinion. And you do not have the power, in fact no one has the power to decide on their own, when it comes to someone’s opinion.

        THIS is exactly why we probably will someday lose our 2nd Amendment.. Because so many gun owners REFUSE to listen, discuss and debate rationally without name calling, without throwing insults and without getting angry over someone else’s differing opinion. You don’t have to agree with or like my opinion. In fact I could care less if you do. I am simply discussing and arguing MY point of view thinking it might actually get some people to think about BOTH sides of the issue, not just one tunnel vision based edict.

        I fully understand the idea some of you want to take the 2A completely and utterly literal. You want no laws at all. You want no checks or balances at all when it comes to the 2nd Amendment. If more of you actually knew what the real world was like on the street or around the world, you might re-think that.

        I, of course, don’t agree with that. Because I think, the founding fathers were smart enough to know if society were to succeed, WE would have to govern OURSELVES in a common sense and responsible way… and if we cannot do that, we WILL lose it all… including the 2A, no matter how much you want to pretend it won’t happen.

        WE have to learn to govern and compromise as a society overall. By WE gun owners policing ourselves, voting on reasonable rules and regulations that protect society as a whole, THAT is how we keep our 2nd Amendment. Not by sitting in the corner, crossing our arms with a pout on our face shaking our head ‘no’ at every other idea or opinion that comes out.

        The problem is WE cannot even seem to debate and discuss the very issues even online in a forum like this because if you don’t like someone else’s opinion, you devolve into a pissing name calling match.

        1. Well, Jake, I read this part that you wrote, “I cannot see how you think it is common sense to allow ANYONE to freely have unrestricted access to firearms in TODAY’s society.” Your chosen words indicate that you think people are “allowed” to have firearms. That is blatantly wrong. People have a Constitutionally enumerated Civil Right to make, obtain, keep, and carry firearms. No training required.
          Your chosen words indicate that you think that “TODAY’S society is somehow different from previous society. That is blatantly wrong. The way the human brain functions has not changed in all of human history. The way that people interact has not changed in all of recorded history.
          And your chosen words ” “unrestricted access to firearms” indicates that you think that some authority has the power to restrict access to firearms. That is blatantly wrong. Our personal Second Amendment enumerated Civil Right to keep and carry firearms is a shield, behind which we can step and not be touched by governmental powers and authorities.
          Your chosen words “common sense” indicates that you believe there is some “sense” that is common to all. There is not. Your analysis of the characteristics of a Right is just one more proof that there is no sense that is common to all

          1. You know, I was going to reply but then I just read YET ANOTHER STORY of a moron who went off his rocker, using a gun to shoot up a place. Just now, breaking news, some idiot opened up on the NSA facility out of the blue with his weapons.

            That is being responsible and using common sense. Yep, sure is. AND THIS is how we get the left and anti gun nuts off our backs.. Yep, sure is.

            If we gun owners don’t step up and don’t start discussing ALL OPINIONS and trying to find reasonable and common sense grounds in agreement, THIS WILL get worse and we WILL LOSE the 2A completely.

          2. Jake, again, you are not seeing a lot of negligent discharges and related deaths, the CDC stats refute your “opinion”, and that’s a fact, on which none of your views are based. At least now you admit to calling us criminals, further showing your intolerance of not only facts, but of everyone else posting here. Yet, you demand respect because you know better than the rest of us. Thank God (said as an Atheist) that your opinion means nothing in relation to your ability to abrogate our rights.

            You can whine and complain, but today, tomorrow and the next, we will still have our RKBA. If we we the criminals you believe us to be, we wouldn’t be here refuting your “opinion”.

          3. @Wild Bill, I pick no horses in this race or any others any more. I simply advised him to drop it for his own mental health. lol, The advice I offered will be ignored I’m sure. I assure you, I couldn’t care less.

        2. Jake, again, I have not used any ad hominem attacks in my replies to you. Your saying so, just as your opinions, doesn’t make it true.

          There are not 7 billion people in the USA. And the percentage of law-abiding citizens is greater than 90%, and since we are discussing firearm owners, and more specifically, CC holders, they are the most law-abiding group, 6 times more than LEOs, who are 10 times more so than the general public. So, no CC holders are far from those that you need worry about. Also, statistically, according to the CDC accidental firearm deaths are about the lowest likelihood of ways to die. So your fear of death from another firearm owner is misplaced.

          We have been providing you with facts to support our opinions, but you are motivated by your feelings. Feelings don’t trump facts.

          We have “listened”, rather read your lengthy posts, and have disagreed with you. You choose to be argumentative and believe your “vast” knowledge and experience makes you then arbiter of what is “common-sense” and right.

          We have readily refuted that on many levels. You come back arguing the same “common-sense” and imply we lack it. Then you followed up by implying that we are criminals and are unsafe firearm owners because we don’t agree with you.

          I also pointed out how making ownership costly, unconstitutionally disenfranchizes groups of people.

          We don’t need more limits on the 2A. If someone commits a crime, that’s already illegal. Infringing on the RKBA is proven by other states that have severe limitations to not work. It doesn’t prevent crime and only turns good people into felons when they unintentionally break one of those laws. That doesn’t make us safer.

    20. @Wild Bill

      Your comment I am replying to:
      QUOTE: @Jake, none of the experience and training that you mention qualifies you to make decisions about requiring training before a citizen can exercise their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights.
      I have a lot more training and education than you, but I won’t one upmanship you, not because it would not fly, but rather because my training and education does not qualify me to decide what training people must have prior to exercising their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights.
      Finally, your arguments are hollow because you seek financial gain from the mandatory requirements that you advocate. END QUOTE.

      WTF are you talking about? Who said I was making DECISIONS for others? I have CLEARLY said more than once that this is MY OPINION. I am not deciding anything nor do I have the power to decide. I am clearly DISCUSSING this based on MY OWN OPINION, nothing more, nothing less. Or are you saying because you don’t agree with it, then I have no right to a differing opinion?

      Second, you are the SECOND person that has tried to call me out about experience.. I posted my real life experience and credentials above in another post, so let’s see yours because I very much doubt your comment or people who make statements like that, without backing it up. MY careers are public record, I don’t hide behind fake names on the internet in fact. An easy search can be done to find my info.

      You also then make some ludicrous statement about me getting some kind of “FINANCIAL GAIN”.. What the hell are you talking about? I don’t get paid from anyone for any such thing.. I am a disabled Veteran as I stated. My SOLE income now is V/A disability.. So WTF are you talking about where I get some kind of “financial gain” for my opinion? And as either military or LEO, that is not even allowed.. so again WTF are you talking about?

      Or are you again ASSuming that I get paid for training people somehow? Instead of assuming things, why don’t you ASK for clarification if you don’t get the comment or statement someone makes?

      You also posted another reply listing 8 points and trying to lump MY OPINION in with some other media outlet or something some other person(s) may or may not have said.. Again, WTF are you talking about?

      What the heck is up with those of you that seem to think that a CIVIL SOCIETY should NOT have any rules, restrictions, regulations or means to control what would be basically the same as going back to the wild west or earlier?

      Do you seriously think the genius minds that gave us our Constitution meant for their words to be taken without ANY thought as to growth, evolution, changes to society? Really? You think they were smart enough to protect our rights but too stupid to think we would use COMMON SENSE and responsibility of a CIVIL society to form rules and regulations to maintain that civil society?

      Get off your self important, only your opinion matters pedestal. It makes you sound like a liberal because THAT is what they do.. They don’t allow OTHER OPINIONS or dissension to how THEY think WE all should live. And that is what YOU and some others are doing to me.

      I am, or thought I was, debating a serious topic with adults using MY OWN OPINIONS. And while they may be differing from your opinion, I have NOT been personally using insults against you or anyone when I did not agree with YOUR opinion in the discussion.

      I have argued and debated MY opinion clearly, openly and have not run away from you or anyone else. You don’t like my opinion, so be it. THAT IS ALSO PART of the point.

      But don’t sit there hiding behind a damn keyboard trying to call me out when you have no idea what you are talking about based on what I said above. If you cannot even get THESE simple facts right, then how the heck can an honest open discussion be had about differing opinions?

      I don’t speak out of my rear like some do. I HAVE SEEN IT, I HAVE BEEN THERE, I HAVE LIVED IT. Not everyone is talking crap like some here obviously are. You try to put me down calling me out because I am one of the few THAT CAN ARGUE from a real life actually been there and done that point of view.. and that defeats anything people assume. Unless you have seen it, you have NO PLACE to call me out or decide what is fact or not in my experiences.

      To put it another way, I HAVE BEEN SHOT TWICE on duty in law enforcement. I have also been severely injured in an explosion in the military. So I am VERY aware of what I am talking about. If I had the means, I would post the medical records, xrays and pictures just for you, if you so badly need to understand that fact. I fully support the 2A. BUT I DON’T SUPPORT IDIOTS and FELONS WALKING AROUND CARRY FIREARMS.

      ANYONE that has served in the military or law enforcement can tell you that. ANYONE that has seen combat or been in a real fight, has worked with real firearms their entire life and has SEEN FOR REAL what they do to a human body, can attest to that. Without rules in a society, there is chaos.

      It makes me wonder though.. I suppose some of you advocate for anyone to just strap on a gun, wear a badge and be able to be a police officer, right? Or perhaps military people really should not have the need for training either right? I mean if your opinion is that our 2nd Amendment basically says ‘strap on a gun’ and do whatever with no concerns at all for anything like weapon use, weapon retention under attack.. then LEO and Military should not bother either because we have the 2A and none of that is needed. Let’s just give everyone a gun and send them on their way because that’s what you are advocating for all firearm carrying citizens regardless.

      I am tired of some people here talking out their asses and THEN jumping on me because MY OPINION IS DIFFERENT than yours. I deal with that crap with liberals. To see some that “claim” to support the 2A play word games, pisses me off.

      You can either discuss and DEBATE our differing opinions or you and others can continue to play childish word games.. Your choice. Next time, don’t ASSume things you have no clue about.

      1. @Jake, BCT, AIT(Cbt Eng 12B), OCS, OBC Infantry, CBR, NBC, BTMS, OAC Infantry, C&GSC, OBC JAGC, OAC JAGC, AS, BA, JD UVA. Thirty one years, nine months, and three days USA. Too many certificates of training to even list by abbreviation. Multiple decorations too embarrassing to list even by abbreviation. And not one of these degrees or schools qualifies me to make the decision for my fellow Americans (e.g. to seek firearms training, refrain from seeking firearms training, to demand firearms training as a limitation on the Second Amendment.) or limit their Constitutional Rights.

        You state, on 11 Feb, “… I have that training and I teach others…” and You state on 12 Feb,”I also certified as a trainer (military and now civilian) and … I still teach today both weapon training and survival techniques.” Teaching for money is the economic opportunity that you seek to increase by advocating mandatory training. Or have you never been paid for teaching weapons training and survival techniques.

        I don’t think that (quoting you follows) “… CIVIL SOCIETY should NOT have any rules, restrictions, regulations or means to control…”. Civil Society has many rules. However, some things our society recognizes and have put beyond the reach of rules, restrictions, regulations or means to control. Those things are called Civil Rights and are enumerated in our Constitution. It is clear, by your own chosen words that you have not done your basic academic, philosophical study of the nature of what a Right is or our Constitutional rights.

        1. Why are you throwing in a bunch of military acronyms like NBC, BCT and others, forth? That has no bearing on actual experience or training for weapon handling.. Or did you expect me to not know what you are trying to pass along and impress me with somehow?

          I said I actually have military AND LEO experience in real life AND have been involved directly in person in shootings and other situations IN REAL life. I was stating it as a point of fact, not as trying to impress someone. A lot of people try to argue an opinion or their side without any real life experience. I simply stated a fact that I am not just an armchair wannabe and that my OPINION comes directly from my real life experiences.

          Let’s get off the ‘whose dick is bigger’ bull.. at this point that is all moot in the discussion.

          1. @Jake, You used your Navy experience as a basis for your opinions on the Constitution and the nature of Civil Rights, and opined that no one had more experience than you. I am merely answering your challenge, and I believe that it is your turn to anti up. Or are you just an illiterate propagandist?
            As to your last sentence, you are wrong as usual. You have focused on the wrong organ.

    21. My only question is this. Are these anti gun activist that sits in Congress and the Senate going to provide around the clock armed security or secret service agents protect myself and my family like they? I already know the answer. I am a firearms instructor. Along with teaching citizens how to maitain and fire their firearms safely, I also give instructions about laws of Arizon and Federal Laws. All students must pass a written exam and qualification. They must pass these before they are issued a certificate. These are the standards I put in Place and must be met, which is also the NRA standards. So Tim you tell those anti-gun activist how it really is. Law abiding Citizens do not pull out their firearms unless it is really needed.

    22. I think Tim did a bang up job of keeping the issue straight, even with the limited amount of exposure he got. That idiot woman has no clue as to what’s constitutional & what’s desire. I think the commentator made a fool of himself when he claimed that nowhere in the 2A does it say we have a right to carry concealed. Tim was quick to rebut & point out that it DOES say KEEP, without stipulation as HOW…which would be, as he pointed out…an infringement. The NY Mayor & “his” Chief of Police (appointed, I might add), are just so full of it that there’s nothing else to say.
      I think the point was made & reached some that may have been on the fence. JMHO.

    23. Amazing how many keyboard commando tough guys have no problem criticizing someone that is ACTUALLY standing up and talking about our rights in public… vs someone hiding behind their keyboard criticizing them… I am amazed at how many seem to show this pretend outrage online yet have no balls when it comes to actually showing up at events and walking the line when REAL rallies and such are held to defend that right.

      Some of us actually have stood up and gone out in public defending our rights in meetings, town halls and other venues. Sadly, MOST who yell the loudest are the first to turn away out of fear when called to actually act.

      You want to know why we are losing? Because out of the MILLIONS of firearm owners, only a few thousand are actually doing and standing for that right…. and that is a fact. No one knows the actual numbers but I would guess there are somewhere between 50-100 MILLION gun owners in the USA… yet only 5 million joined the NRA or another organization.. and again, during actual events MAYBE a few hundred to a few thousand stand for their rights.

      Sitting behind a keyboard ain’t going to do squat. You actually have to stand up and take action if you want to defend your freedom and Constitutional Rights. Attend council meetings, town halls, and so forth.. OPEN YOUR MOUTH and start fighting back. Stop sitting on your asses then whining when we lose another piece of our 2A.

      1. Jake, true, I am one of those few you mention. I suspect that posters here are more likely to be of like mind and action than one of the millions that don’t.

        You get more flies with honey… I typically encourage rather than ridicule those that don’t. Explaining our laws and what politicians are doing to limit or revoke our rights, and how the organizations I belong to fight these bad laws, and what I am doing personally, does on occasion result in another active member. It encourages them by seeing that standing up and fighting works.

        1. Always good to remember that, while you may get more flies with honey than with vinegar, you can get the MOST flies with a big steaming pile of BS. Our mainstream media clearly subscribes to this dictum. Nevertheless, I was pleased with how Tim did, and I thought he came off as a very reasonable guy. That’s probably why they gave him so little air time. Of course, the show was biased, everyone knew it would be. But Tim didn’t do any disservice by participating, and a lot of folks who don’t watch Fox got a look, albeit a very brief one, at a reasonable “gun guy.”

      2. @Jake…unfortunately this is the way it is. Its alway the few doing the dirty work for all. As a parent, I was always one of a few of the parents who did the volunteering, the fundraising, the clean up, the buying…pretty much everything, and the rest of the parents who did nothing at all, were quick to take the accolades from others for a job well done.

        Calling them out seems to be the only way one will get more people to share the load. Although I don’t like calling others out, I don’t like doing it all myself either.

    24. @joe, most people you see at the range are CC holders? That’s total BS, since only about 16 million people are CC holders nationwide, 32% being women. Every if your specious rant wee remotely valid, we would be seeing CC holders at the vtop of the list of criminal groups. Unfortunately for you, the exact opposite is true, CC holders are the most law-abiding group in the nation, 6 times more law-abiding than LEOs, who are *ten* times more law-abiding than the general public.

      Your post is too similar to the “FA” from MA to be believeable.

    25. Okay, all over with now and, knowing what we did going in to this, it wasn’t half bad. Hudson could have been better prepared but you can’t have everything. I’d call it zero sum gain/loss.

    26. Comment.. Well 60 minutes is doing their usual Bald face Lying in between the cuts where they have Tim and the representative is not as well prepared as Tim is.

    27. This is pure Monetization of a liberty, illegally turned into a privilege, then licensed and taxed for a profit.

      This is one of the many faults of a Capitalistic Economy. It’s pure and unadulterated Crime.

      “Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness” is a false belief that which we are all created equal, and have said unalienable equal right. Such is propaganda.

      “We Are No Longer Independent”

      1. @walter, You started out right. I liked your first sentence. But what does corrupt government have to do with capitalism? Governments are just as corrupt under communism (Soviet Union), socialism (Venezuela), and sudo-democracy (Mexico and Canada).
        The rest of what you wrote, you can believe as you like.

    28. Wow. So many “you shouldn’t do it”, “they’ll make you look like a fool” and other negative comments.
      They didn’t invite you…or me…or Sally…they invited Tim. So, Tim gets to speak for us. We should support him in this.

      Thanks, Tim. Kudos on having the stones to go and talk on camera with uber liberals. We know they don’t support you or us or the second amendment. But if the voice of the people is silenced on the matter, everyone will think we go quietly to the slaughter. They need to be reminded WE, who believe and support the constitution including the right to self defense and to carry arms to that end, are a significant part of society that is keeping ourselves, and them safe. Safe from having all our rights stripped away: the other amendments won’t last long if the 2nd amendment is ever defeated.

      The world is filled with violence. Because criminals carry guns, we decent law-abiding citizens should also have guns. Otherwise they will win and the decent people will loose.
      — James Earl Jones

      Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any body of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.
      — Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principals of the Federal Constitution, 1787

    29. I’m one of those guys with lots of credentials and training, either take my word for it or don’t. But to say that I have never seen someone with a CCW do something stupid and dangerous would be untrue. In fact, as an RSO at my local range, I see that almost all the people who are shooting have a CCW and they are the people doing the stupid and dangerous things. In the state I live in a person who is not prohibited can go on line, pay $20, take a 15 question multiple choice test, which he/she can keep taking until he gets it right, and get a permit. No hands or eyes on the applicant required. Now compare this to states that require a hands on day-long class with live fire and ask yourself which person are you more likely to feel safe with on a range, or on the street? From my perspective a protocol similar to that for getting a driver’s license would make sense, and be the basis for a national reciprocity. I’m sure I’ll get a lot of flack from NRA Instructors for this, but as an NRA instructor I would be happy to offer this class at a reasonable price, let’s sat $50, to qualify people to get a CCW. I would hope they would come back for more training but at least I would be more comfortable knowing that they understood safety protocols, could shoot their gun and hit a target, and most importantly understood the responsibility they were taking on. When, in this day I still hear idiots saying if they shoot somebody outside they will drag him in the house so that they can claim justification, I don’t want that person owning, much less carrying a gun in public. Would you want a person who didn’t take a driving test in his state (I don’t think such a place exists) driving down a street with your kids playing? I doubt it! So why would it be OK for an untrained or tested person with a gun deciding he’s going to stop an assault with his gun on the same street? Do you want a person with one of these untested CCW permits, lighting off in your church because he is defending against a lone wolf active shooter? You want him competent enough to stop the threat, and not kill your wife in the process. I understand the 2A issues, and the “camel’s nose in the tent theory” and I do have the same concerns everybody does about our 2A rights. But we, the gun community, not the gun-haters, need to take a step in the right direction before we lose control of the direction we need to go in.

      1. There’s so much BS in your posting, I’m just not going to take the time to debunk all of it. I’ll just point out that you don’t charge to exercise a Right. If we did you’d be paying a fortune for that little rant of yours that was chock full of untruths and misinformation.

        1. You know it’s funny.. because I too see a bunch of yahoo’s carry firearms that should not be. I am amazed every day how many people I see who I could simply walk up and yank their firearm out of their holster before they had a clue, especially those carrying on their back hip. I think mandatory weapon retention training should be part of the regiment.

          Some of you try to use the ‘militia’ excuse as your right.. well guess what? EVEN THE MILITIA during the revolutionary war was trained by the actual military before ever going into a battle or on a mission. Just because the 2A does not explicitly state it, does not make it wrong or not needed. Common sense should tell anyone that.

          MOST people today that carry, have NO military or law enforcement back ground or training. And MOST people today, have NO WEAPON RETENTION training of any kind. I served to defend our 2nd Amendment.. I did my duty for real.. I am not just another tough guy talking mouthpiece that spouts all the bull about how the 2A is one needs and so on. I have that training and I teach others WHO GIVE ENOUGH of a hoot to DO the right thing and learn how to use their weapon AND retain that weapon in a fight/situation.

          You should recognize that with such a right, comes RESPONSIBILITY. I am sick and tired of people using the “blah blah 2A came with no limits.. blah blah” argument, because it is ridiculous.

          We don’t live in the wild west anymore. It is supposed to be a civil society where people take responsibility for their actions. What I have also found is that the most ‘vocal’ ones that argue against common sense and responsibility are usually the ones that should not be carrying OR would be the first ones to lose their weapon should they actually get in a real fight with one.

          I have seen it many times myself and while we all do have the ‘right’ to bear arms, I seriously wish the founding fathers had stipulated …’unless you are a dumbass!’

          In my opinion, people that argue against REASONABLE training and against insuring they are responsible with their firearms, are no better and just as much a yahoo as those that grab a little video camera and walk up and down a sidewalk in a major public area strapped with their AR-15’s and AK’s because they know it will yank chains and get a police response they can video record for their “youtube” channel.

          1. Yup, exercising a Right is a horrible thing to do. We should all do what just makes everyone feel “comfortable” and safe. Every time I hear someone mention “mandatory training” for firearms I’m reminded of what happened in Rhode Island, a few decades ago, when a police chief said “anyone who wants to own a gun should have mandatory training”. Of course everyone agreed, gee, that’s only reasonable. Then they made it so tough that not even his own officers could pass the final test. So, Jake, who the hell are you to tell someone how to carry a gun? I carry mine in a passive retention holster. You gonna tell me I need a level three? I’ve carried for more than 40 years, on street patrol, in executive protection and as a private citizen. I dare say I’ve probably been through a LOT more training than you have. If someone does something through negligence, that harms another, they’ll be held accountable, the same as any other encounter in life, with or without a gun. More government intrusion in our lives is the very last thing we need.

            And trying to snatch someone’s gun from their holster because you think you can is criminal and may well land you in the hospital or morgue. In short, mind your own business, leave other people to theirs.

            1. Really? You want to go there? Ok, since you seem to think you have more experience and training and stated yours, here is mine: United States Navy Service Connected Disabled Veteran, 7 major injuries all service connected. Retired (with my Combat K9 in 2014 at 100%).

              Additionally throughout my 30+ year career, I had a second career as a fully sworn Deputy Sheriff where I worked 2-3 patrol shifts for whatever county department covered the military base I was stationed WHEN back in CONUS for longer then 6 months. I also certified as a trainer (military and now civilian) and while limited due to my injuries, I still teach today both weapon training and survival techniques.

              Don’t try the one upmanship crap because it ain’t gonna fly.

              Now back to the topic without any more dick measuring.. Read a reply I made to another comment just below this.. I clearly stated what I meant by ‘mandatory’ training and CLEARLY articulated I was NOT talking about government training. I also clearly stated WHAT KIND and the reason WHY the type of training I was talking about would be something good.

              I personally have seen too many morons who thought they knew it all or thought their shit did not stink, end up shooting themselves OR had their own weapon stolen right from them when they were attacked.. and in a couple cases, were shot with their own weapon because they had NO CLUE how to retain that weapon in fight.

              We don’t live in the wild west anymore.. Today, society is growing ever more dangerous and ever more compacted.. and to lose our ability to carry, would be tantamount to committing suicide for ourselves with how dangerous it truly is becoming out there. BUT the problem is, in that growth, if we cannot use COMMON SENSE and RESPONSIBILITY in exercising our rights, then something is very wrong.

              This is not the revolutionary period.. This is modern society, something MUCH different and MUCH more dangerous now.. back then, I doubt they had to worry about some ‘dude’ walking up behind them, snagging their weapon and running away or shooting them with it MULTIPLE TIMES.

              Today WE DO. Today they can snag it and shoot 17-19 people in a heartbeat with your own weapon. Kinda hard to do with a flintlock.. Things have changed and adapt to some of those changes, we must.

              The founding fathers never envisioned anything like this when they wrote the 2A but I have NO doubt they were geniuses and knowing that, I have NO DOUBT they would have expected us to adapt as needed to keep things in check and responsible throughout society.

              Additionally, by gun owners playing well with others, makes US look good and grants us even more goodwill and trust by the population. If we just continue to sit there, arms crossed pouting a constant ‘NO’ to everything like a sulking child, eventually that WILL come back to bite all gun owners in the ass.. even worse then it is now.

              Read what I said below in the post about the kind of training I was talking about in detail. I did not say you have to train to own or bear arms. It was a very specific weapon retention training for CCW/open carry of sidearms every day.

              People that carry everyday, fall into a relaxed routine eventually because it becomes second nature and you don’t even think about the fact you are wearing/carrying a firearm. And that complacency is when thugs attack.. and why so many legal good people lose their weapons to an attack.. because they let complacency get in the way AND because they don’t know how to even retain their own weapon from being taken when it happens.

            2. @Jake, none of the experience and training that you mention qualifies you to make decisions about requiring training before a citizen can exercise their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights.
              I have a lot more training and education than you, but I won’t one upmanship you, not because it would not fly, but rather because my training and education does not qualify me to decide what training people must have prior to exercising their Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights.
              Finally, your arguments are hollow because you seek financial gain from the mandatory requirements that you advocate.

          2. Jake, the issue with government mandated training is that it will be used to limit who gets to have the RKBA. Let’s say you will be required to take a one day class that costs “only” $75. For some people that’s a lot of money.

            Some states require much more training for CC, and it can cost several hundred dollars. Some states also have a system that requires a permit to purchase a firearm and ammunition that also costs several hundred dollars. That further limits by fiscal restraint who will be able to exercise that right.

            Now look at MA and CT, and their ever increasing fees on the RKBA. If this was the 1st amendment, the courts have already ruled that poll taxes are illegal. So tell me which groups are most impacted by high costs to obtain the legal RKBA? Wealthy, old white men?

            I agree that everyone that carries should have training and know how to properly use and maintain their firearms. Government fees and mandatory training isn’t the way.

            When I am at the range and see a novice displaying poor handling, I normally will offer advice and show safe handling. If it is one that isn’t a novice, I might talk to them, or just make the range officer aware.

            When I teach people, my joke about proper handling is that I don’t want to leave with more holes than I came with, regardless of what happens to them. However, I do consider my personal safety as a priority, which is why I want them to practice safe handling, but that will also make them and everyone else around safe, too.

            1. I agree with you about the ‘catch 22’ when it comes to training.. and also agree, having it controlled by the government is not something I would be inclined to agree with either..

              My point was that somewhere, however, there has to be a middle ground.. perhaps simply a requirement that you get trained, get a legit certificate that you submit when you apply for the CCW.

              I see that as NO different then when I have to submit my military documents for my military license plates or for other benefits. With firearms, the government does not have to do anything.. PEOPLE like you or I can set the market once we are trained and licensed as instructors for this specific purpose…

              The problem in this is that not every current instructor that now trains, is not nor do they have actual weapon self defense and/or weapon retention training. I have seen and know a lot of ‘instructors’ that teach enough for people to get a CCW where states due require a certificate of firearm training. And out of the 20 or so instructors I personally know, only ONE of those could train in weapon retention and weapon defensive training. (well two if you count me too.. LOL)

              In fact when I teach, I do teach some of it and while it is a person’s own choice, two particular things I do teach is 1) do not pocket carry a weapon that is striker fire AND does not have a separate safety unless you have it in a trigger safe holster, (I have seen 3 incidents of people shooting themselves due to this in my area), and 2) while it is one of the more comfortable positions for many people, do not carry your firearm on the left or right back hip belt position.

              The second one being part of weapon retention training. Those I have taught have been amazed at the difference between retaining and defending against someone snagging your firearm from the rear hip vs even central on your right or left side. Just that small position change, is night or day in this regard and being able to stop someone instantly from taking your weapon.. even from directly behind or doing a bump and run.

              While we all hate the loss of more and more 2A rights, as I said before there MUST be two things for anyone that carries today in a civil society with rules and laws… Common sense and Responsibility.

              To me, carrying a weapon the wrong way lacks common sense.. and not having any kind of weapon retention, is not being responsible when you carry every day in public.. especially as we ALL know crime is increasing and more and more firearms are being stolen every day now.. (not just from a person I know, but I am including cars, stores and individuals)

              While it may not be as important in rural America and small town American where many of us, myself included, live.. in the big cities, trust me.. hell already has broken loose… and it is only going to get worse… and all it takes is ONE time for any one of us to be in the city and something happens where we end up having OUR weapon taken because we were over confident.

            2. @Jake, You are aware, of course, that driving a car or putting a car on the roadway is a privilege, but keeping and bearing a firearm is a Constitutionally enshrined Civil Right. Therefore the several levels of government can require training and fees for driving that those same governments can not require for keeping and bearing a firearm.
              If a person commits a tort with their firearm, even negligently, unintentionally, or unknowingly, then that person is liable. Having a Constitutional Civil Right will not protect the tortfeasor.
              It would be nice if people would seek training, the best training, and practiced regularly, but that is their decision.
              There are so many S.Ct cases stating that governments can not place restrictions on Constitutionally enumerated Civil Rights that listing them all here would be burdensome. Advocating limitation of a Constitutional Civil Right just for the creation of economic opportunity is no justification.

            3. Jake, when one is CC, there is no issue with someone grabbing your firearm, it should not be seen. If it’s seen, it isn’t CC. Open carry, which this story isn’t about, harbors your issue on weapon retention.

              I know of no one that carries CC that has not had any firearms training in excess of the government’s requirement. The training requirement isn’t enough to be able to knowledgeably and safely CC. The initial training is just that, a first step. One is never “fully trained”, only just more so.

          3. Jake: I don’t believe you’re ever going to change your mindset on this but you really do need to get your facts straight. “As we all know crime is increasing more and more…”. No, actually, according to the FBI uniform crime reports, violent crime has been DECREASING for more than a decade while private firearms ownership has been steadily increasing.

            Your anecdotal reports of people accidentally shooting themselves is meaningless when compared to firearms ownership of more than 100 million and concealed carry permits exceeding 16 million. Police shooting themselves exceed that of civilians, so what? It happens and you deal with it on a case by case occurrence. A rabbit bites a man, do you ban all men from the woods, eradicate all rabbits? Or maybe you just treat that one instance for what it was, a fluke happening or something stupid the man did!

            Stop trying to regulate everything before you find yourself becoming part of what we really despise, regulations run amuck.

            1. To be honest, I don’t trust the FBI or DOJ myself so I have no idea if that is true or not.. It sure ‘seems’ to be the opposite however.. I don’t know about you, but I see and hear about a lot more crime these days then I did even 10 years ago..

              As for my “anecdotal” evidence about people accidentally shooting themselves. How is factual information “anecdotal”? I never said anything about it being some huge number or that changing something or mandating training would bring some kind of “number” down.. Never even eluded to that..

              What I said was, that I personally think weapon RETENTION training is feasible because of people WHO HAVE shot themselves, had their weapon taken from them or worse, been killed BY their own weapon…

              or are you arguing that because it was only a small number you got somewhere, that it is thus less important? So what number WOULD make it feasible then? 100? 1000? 1 million?

              I never said or spoke on that at all.. I simply said it would help mitigate those situations better.. and in my opinion, even ONE INCIDENT is too many if it could have possibly been prevented.

              You then tried going of on some tangent about rabbits and such.. And AGAIN, I NEVER said a thing that even fits into whatever the heck you were talking about in that regard.

              I said, I think training for weapon retention IS something anyone that carries all the time should have and that I have no problem with people being required to have some REASONABLE training and common sense IF they carry all the time.

              Having reasonable training DOES NOT INFRINGE YOUR RIGHT to OWN or bear arms. It is an inconvenience to you and some others. THAT is all. There is no pass/fail for the training. There is no government involvement in DOING the training. Just like me having to submit paper work to show factual information, having a cert that says this person used common sense and took responsibility for concealing and/or open carrying a live weapon shows that responsibility is taken seriously and in a situation, we can trust that person within reason to do the right thing in a civil society.

            2. @Jake, This string is so long that I am not sure that I will get my reply to you in the right place. I have been reviewing your writings and I have noticed something quite fascinating about them. There are several points in your posts which match the talking points of the anti-gun Bloomberg/Violence Policy Center crowd:
              1. you claim Concealed Carry Permit (CCP) holders do not receive enough training;
              2. you claim to have personally witnessed people shooting themselves through carelessness;
              3. you claim that no “reasonable” person should object to background checks;
              4. you claim that “some form of training” should be mandatory;
              5. you claim that there are more people carrying guns in one post and in another claim that “as we all know crime is going up year after year” as if there’s a nexus to be drawn. When intact crime is going down;
              6. you decry the Constitutional Civil Right of law abiding citizens to carry long guns in public because you claim that that terrifies the public, in the absence of any supporting research; and
              7. you refuses to admit that firearms laws do not reduce crime.

          4. Jake: You need to get a serious grip and step back. As Instructors and people who fight for people’s Rights we all want to see folks get training but we NEVER want to require or force them to get it in order to exercise that Right. End of discussion on my part, have a nice day.

            1. @jake…your Mo is coming back to me now. We had a similar discussion on one of the gun forums regarding whether or not a certain optic was used on military prescribed weapons or not…I also recall you had the same tone in your arguement then as you do now…a know it all with no receptivity to others thoughts or opinions on the matter at hand.
              Chill out…

            2. and again, MY opinion. Just because some people don’t like MY opinion, does not make it right or wrong.. I have been arguing my opinion with why and reasons for thinking it is reasonable and a positive thing.

              Just because something is a right, does not mean it is infallible or that reasonable common sense cannot be applied to that right.

              Taking something absolutely literal is not being responsible yet yours, and some others, seem to think that just because it is a right you can do or be or act in any manner you want without repercussions.

              Again, for me, it goes back to common sense and responsibility. I guess I should at least be happy this is not an argument about how there should not be any kind of check and balance like NICS to prevent rapists, murderers and other violent criminals from having the same rights we have to enter a store and buy a gun without any major issues…

              Then again I suppose that is also something some of you would support because it somehow “infringes” on the 2A, which is does not of course in any manner.. Maybe it inconveniences some people sometimes, hell it does me due to holds because of my background, but in no way does that “infringe” on my actual right to own and bear arms as some people seem to think it does.

              Everyone looks at this differently. And for me, common sense and responsibility are important when it comes to carrying a firearm at all times.

            3. @Jake…and all opinions are to be regarded with the same merit, unless there is a disqualifying action or information which would impact said opinion. Everyone has an opinion…but its how you convey that opinion which determines whether or not someone is going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Right?

              I do feel the Right to Bear Arms is absolute. I also feel that right bears a lot of responsibility. And with that responsibility, comes everything one should need to do or know to exercise that right, responsibly and with common sense. Responsibility to me conveys having common sense.

              To have the government legislate the above makes no sense at all. It should be upon the recipient of said right, to use common sense and exercise responsibility…

              How is that done? In my “opinion” I feel we should have programs and ongoing education provided by organizations like the NRA, 2nd Amendment foundation, USCCA, and others, which will responsibly educate and train people who want t own a gun. All of this will be financed by the feds and the funds provided to the aforementioned organizations. Nothing about what I have proposed includes, licenses, fees, mandatory training or legislative oversight…as it should be.

            4. Jake, you may believe your restrictions are “common-sense”, but so does every other anti-rights person. You are stating that those with firearms lack “common-sense” and are irresponsible. Then you are upset that we are disagreeing with. That is your lack of common-sense and is irresponsible of you to state such, if you truly are a firearm owner. Or is it that, like Pelosi and others, such as Giffords, that believe only they should have the RKBA and the rest of us, as in your words are not responsible enough. However, statistics prove the exact opposite of what you are arguing, which again means your viewpoint lacks common-sense.

              We are compromising because there is no compromise with those that don’t believe we don’t have the RKBA.

            5. @Jake, You write, “Just because something is a right, does not mean it is infallible or that reasonable common sense cannot be applied to that right.” You are quite wrong. The nature of a Right is that it is inviolable and it can not be changed by government nor the opinion of an individual or even a majority of people.

      2. @Joe, I hope that you will learn to live with the fact that as US citizens, we have rights. We have the Constitutional Civil Right to keep and bear. We also have the Civil Right to get educated a lot, or a little, or none at all.
        Driving is a privilege, subject to requirements that can not be placed on Constitutional Civil Rights. Nor does your desire to make money selling classes change that situation.
        Oh, and you have so many ideas crammed together in one paragraph that it is almost as if you have chosen to only learn a little about the art of writing.

      3. And I have seen Federal Law enforcement leave an AR 15 on the bench with a round in the chamber and a mag in and insist the weapon is cold because the safety is on. I don’t need an RSO or NRA instructor. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t mention them and I think the guys who wrote that would agree with me as well.

        1. @Jim Bob, Yep, even with training, some people make really stupid mistakes. And yes, there are many foolish people carrying that should not be. That, however, is the nature of Civil Rights, including the Civil Right to decide to get educated, to practice, and to think things out in advance.
          The tyrants are those that believe they are uniquely qualified to decide for us. First, in theory, then in actual fact. That is how we got a group of people in the FBI and Main Justice picking a POTUS for us.

      4. @Joe..
        Vanns40 hit the nail on the head so ill not delve into it further except by saying, i dont want YOU to carry because YOU are tooting your horn about your credentials & that makes me feel like you think that you’re impervious to being wrong. You’re not. Who gives you the right to determine who is deserving of the right to carry? Your credentials? Where did you get them? Who gave them theirs…& the one(s) that gave them theirs…& so on & so forth?
        Most people have common sense. Most know they’re not born with the knowledge of properly handling a firearm. Most know, they need to gain knowledge & training…or perfecting…of their abilities. Most will seek out the ones they feel may help them. That’s called the learning process & it’s been going on for centuries, passed down by those that have learned through experience. But somewhere down the line, some one person had to come up with an idea of what worked…& they practiced to improve it…then shared it. Usually with no charge until greed got in the way. You’re showing yours.
        I don’t want drunks, or druggies driving a 3 ton vehicle towards my family or friends, or anyone for that matter. I can guarantee they weren’t lit when they applied for their license, so how do YOU propose we deal with that? Mandatory blood tests before given a license? Are you going to keep track of them all?
        Until we have an Emperor of America…& you become “it”, your views, or should I say…requirements…don’t mean shit, so keep them to yourself.
        Now look what you went & made me do…do more than just agree with Vanns.

    30. This will NOT be an interview to advance concealed carry legislation – this will be an interview to attempt to advance the idea of MANDATORY GUN OWNER SELF DEFENSE INSURANCE!

      1. Happy to know you were there ahead of time and have seen it already. Please reply with a transcript so we can reply to CBS ahead of the broadcast.

    31. @ft: You are either a troll or you’ve been living under a rock for a very long time. There is not a single State that issues a Concealed Carry Permit without the applicant first having to go through a background check. Of the more than 16,000,000 Concealed Permit holders they have a better history of NON-CRIMINAL history than police officers. Now, your response please!

    32. ft, your objection to the reciprocity is misplaced. This proposed law does not allow anyone that isn’t allowed to carry, carry. Also, just like all other reciprocity agreements between states currently, one must abide by the laws of that state. It’s the same with driving laws. States have many differences for which a driver with a license from another state still must abide by the laws of the state in which he/she is driving in.

      Statistically, CC holders are, by far, the most law-abiding – 6 times more so than LEOs who are 10 times more law-abiding than the general public. Your fears are misguided or you are just being deceitful.

    33. I have a slight problem with this law allowing people from other states to enter the state I live in with their concealed firearms.
      I live in Ma. and have learned to adapt and work within the laws layed down. I have had years of firearms training as a FA Instructor in LE but I still have to obey the laws myself. I have had the safety course. I have had background checks. I have to have my guns secured IF I am not carrying it or using it. I cannot have a gun permit if I have a arrest record for just about anything short of spitting on the sidewalk (thats probably on some jack ass lawmakers agenda).
      So therefore I have a problem with some guy whose permit from east Oshgosh comes into my state without any of the above mentioned rules I have to obey and can go anyplace with his gun concealed, even if the guy has a record for A&B or something. I would rather see all state laws the same and somewhat strict to keep hot heads out and then make it allowable nationwide. I still carry often but almost always carry pepper spray as a less than lethal option.

        1. @BC, Yep, it reminds me of the saying:“Which is better—to be ruled by one tyrant 3,000 miles away or by 3,000 tyrants one mile away?”—Mather Byles

        1. WB, of course he is. No “FA” trainer nor LEO has ever broken the law nor ever had an ND. Oh, wait, LEOs are statistically 6 times more likely to commit crimes than CC holders and the Internet is filled with videos of their NDs literally shooting themselves in the foot, leg, shooting off their fingers, etc.

          Unfortunately LEOs don’t typically practice nearly as often as the rest of us. Nor are they typically held personally liable in shootings, their governments pay for their defenses, unlike the rest of us.

          1. @Heed, Yes, and combine that with his being a Massachusetts bigot, and we can see that ft and the other superior people of the North East think that they know what is best for the rest of us.

          2. It also never ceases to amaze me how a group of LEOs have a suspect cornered and the perp makes a wrong move. Then all of the officers present empty their weapons in his or her direction and don’t hit what they were aiming at. So much for qualifications.

      1. I too have been a resident of MA and CT where the gun laws are a horror story. So when someone from MA says I have to be willing to obey stupid state laws i know it is almost impossible for the individual, like myself, to fight city hall, but these state’s public officials are violating our Constitution, violating their oath of office, and violating the laws they swore to protect. . I moved out of MA and CT and will never go back. I hope someday the people of these states will remove the traitors of the Constitution who run these states, and put them in jail where they belong. If the citizens of MA, CT, IL and CA can not restore our Democratic Republic form of government in these and other states, the United States will become just another country run by a National Socialist form of government just like the Nazi party. PS. The city you referred to is called Oshkosh where, I bet, the citizens are more law abiding than those in MA.

      2. You are completely ignorant of the laws of the land. Yes they get to enter your state but they still have to follow your state laws on where they can go. I have never run across a hothead with a CC permit, they are the other guy who is calm and not looking for a fight. You are either ignorant or a fool or possible both…

      3. The first four words of your second paragraph was all I needed. I don’t know why, but y’all are freaking wicked nutcases.

      4. @ft, If the guy from east Oshgosh (or Vermont where there is no permit) comes into your state AND COMMITS A CRIME WITH HIS GUN, then he will suffer the legal consequences.

        However, if he comes into your state and commits no crime…why do you have a problem whether he has a gun or not? Your fears are unfounded.

        In the words of Bob Newhart, playing a psychiatrist treating someone with totally irrational fear: JUST STOP IT.

        1. @ Paul

          As the fellow from Vermont I and three other friends visit FT’s state perhaps twice a year,to compete in matches.

          Out of the three only two can go armed as they are LEO’s.
          However the other two have non resident permits that are honored in 32 other states but not ft’s state

          All of us when we travel to that state have are match arms locked up in a security vault in the RV and have to have valid match paper work that said match is NRA certified.The RV is diesel and has fuel capacity so as not to have to stop anywhere other than the match site while in ft’s state.Other than the once historical significance that the state once played in this nations founding,the shot heard round the world,there’s nothing else of interest to us so we travel thru.

          That said ft or any other legally armed individual from his state is welcome in Vermont armed and other than travel from his state they wouldn’t need a permission slip from any court,judge,clerk,potentate or petty tyrant of any state to be armed within Vermont’s borders.


    34. As a long time member of USCCA, I like both Tim and the organization. I trust Tim to be honest and make a good showing, as he believes he has. However, I also distrust CBS and don’t think they will “play fair” and air the interview without politically motivated, anti-gun bias. On the other hand, I agree with Tim that we “people of the gun” need to do what we can to bring our message and our POV to a wider audience. It is not necessarily foolish to make this effort to do that. Look at how how the network ended up with egg on its face over previous “hatchet jobs.” I think, and hope, the USCCA will ultimately come out of this looking like a reasonable group with a valid view of the issue that ought to be given due consideration.

    35. USCCA was stupid to agree with this. Schmidt said the interview went well. BS. The final broadcast will be so heavily altered USCCA and Schmidt will look like a fool. These shows, e.g. 60 minutes are tampered with by the anti Americans on CBS, NBC, CNN and ABC and Schmidt won’t have an opportunity to explain the lies. He may not even recognize his own statements. The program will make gun ownership, Schmidt and his statements look like fools. These programs alter their broadcasts to say what they want to be heard and the guest is made a joke. I would not trust any of those TV people to take out my garbage.

      Message to Schmidt. Would you trust couric, rather, jennings or any other A-Hole to speak for you???? You just did fool.

      1. Keyboard commandos who do nothing but sit back and criticize others who are out there really trying to make a change hold very little credibility with those of us who actually have been giving interviews, writing articles and editorial replies for decades.

    36. USCCA is making a BIG mistake being interviewed by 60 Minutes/CBS. The notoriously anti-gun show and network are going to twist and edit whatever the USCCA spokesperson says making it appear that the pro-LTC/CCW/CHL crowd are a bunch of right wing wackos and they’ll NEVER get a chance to rebut the false claims. Not very smart USCCA…

    37. Tim’s no dummy. He’s fully aware of the Couric interview & how the biased media conflates the truth. I’m sure he’s put some checks & balances in his contractual interview. At any rate, I have it set to record & will either cringe or smile.

    38. I stopped responding to requests from news media for my opinion about my profession (engineering) years ago. The agenda, gross media bias, ignorance of the snowflakes I talked with, and a refusal on their part to allow me to review for FACTUAL ACCURACY helped lead me to the truth about most news media. The truth is that most are not after the truth. Whatever they do is self-serving. If their lips are moving……

    39. Tim should require CBS to give him a copy of the interview (broadcast version) for his approval prior to airing. That way USCCA would be well represented in court should this become another mockumentry.

    40. I don’t have much faith in “Can’t Believe Sh*t” (CBS) Network to present a fair and balanced interview. Once the editors get through with it, I won’t be surprised if Tim Schmidt doesn’t come off as a blood thirsty baby killer and potential mass murderer. After all, the network is home to Katie Couric and 60 Minutes is where Dan Rather learned how to create facts and hone his “fantasy news” skills that were so bad CBS had to fire him.

    41. Tim Schmidt stated the interview went well, but like what happened to the VCDL in Couric’s mockumentary, “Under the Gun”, it’s how they frame his answers, and the editing that counts. I hope he learned from the VCDL and also has a separate recording of the interview and the events before and after. Wading through a sewer, one should expect to get dirty.

      It’s a good magazine with a lot of good information and good writers.

    42. I hope they had someone independent from CBS to record everything because it’s highly unlikely that CBS will present it accurately. CBS will probably try to pull what Katie Couric did.

    43. IDIOTS. Being invited to 60 minutes to discuss anything pro gun is like being invited to the Jerry Springer Show to discuss your last date with Nancy who is guaranteed to be a Fred. Again, IDIOTS.

        1. @Vanns40 I totally agree with you. Amazing how something like this brings out the trolls, Every time! As in my earlier post (which I’m amazed made it into print) wait and see what is broadcast. Tim Schmidt is no fool.

          1. Trolls are trolls because they don’t like something, yet they have no basis for their opinion. So, like most lefty liberals, they just fling shit like a chimp because they have nothing else. Racism is one of those piles of shit they fling. I’m surprised that tactic hasn’t shown up here yet.

    44. I wish The United States Concealed Carry Association all the best on their appearance on the Communist Broadcasting System program 60 minutes,however I fear they will take their usual Anti gun/Constitution bent in the interview.

    Leave a Comment 186 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *