Open Carry

Healthcare jobs with pay you can see.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Over the past few years I have come to see the merits of some level of gun control as being both necessary and prudent. I still support the right to own and carry firearms concealed. I think everyone who owns a firearm should have proper training in its use. I may go a bit further and even support mandatory CCW to purchase and use a firearm. The problem with common sense laws is that the other side takes them too far in limiting my second amendment rights. I would not like to be subject to the laws of NY, Illinois and California for example. That said, Open Carry goes too far and isn't necessary. I just can't see myself strapped on the hip with my 357 revolver at Walmart or Target.
 

States Where Open Carry Is Not Allowed​

Only four states and the District of Columbia currently do not allow open carry under most conditions:

  1. California: Generally prohibited; limited licenses may be issued in counties under 200,000 population and are valid only in the issuing county.
  2. Florida: Open carry allowed only when engaged in fishing, camping, lawful hunting or target practice at an indoor range.*
  3. Illinois
  4. New York
  5. Washington, D.C.
*On Sep. 10, 2025, Florida’s open carry ban was struck down by a state appeals court, which ruled the prohibition unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. While private property owners can still restrict open carry on their premises, law-abiding adults in Florida can no longer be prosecuted solely for carrying a visible firearm. However, because the statute technically remains in place until the legislature updates the law, gun owners should stay alert to any changes and exercise caution if they choose to open carry.
 
1759857210651.png
 
I see open carry as a necessity for preservation of our constitutional rights. There are those that prefer small arms, and for them concealed carry may be suitable. If that’s what they want to do I’m not trying to stop them. For those like myself, however, it would be unnecessarily confining to my wardrobe to try to conceal an automatic rifle, multiple magazines of ammunition, and other bulky accessories. If they want me to conceal my “back up” side arm, then whatever, but if Im actually out and about, I definitely want the capacity to lay down defensive suppressive fire. For that you need a lot of ammo and firearm with the right thermal and recoil characteristics to deliver it accurately and rapidly. A hand gun wont work for that purpose.
 
Guillemot said:
I see open carry as a necessity for preservation of our constitutional rights. There are those that prefer small arms, and for them concealed carry may be suitable. If that’s what they want to do I’m not trying to stop them. For those like myself, however, it would be unnecessarily confining to my wardrobe to try to conceal an automatic rifle, multiple magazines of ammunition, and other bulky accessories. If they want me to conceal my “back up” side arm, then whatever, but if Im actually out and about, I definitely want the capacity to lay down defensive suppressive fire. For that you need a lot of ammo and firearm with the right thermal and recoil characteristics to deliver it accurately and rapidly. A hand gun wont work for that purpose.
Click to expand...
Lol
 
I'd be interested to know if there are any data on open vs conceal in terms of accidental shootings or related outcomes. I am inclined to think that I would prefer open carry. If you get past the optics of a bunch of people carrying guns, I might think it might be safer to know who around you is packing.
 
I am disturbed by the number of federal agents moseying around in military gear and ziptieing american citizens on the street with no legal justification.
 
cchoukal said:
I'd be interested to know if there are any data on open vs conceal in terms of accidental shootings or related outcomes. I am inclined to think that I would prefer open carry. If you get past the optics of a bunch of people carrying guns, I might think it might be safer to know who around you is packing.
Click to expand...
One thing we do know is there is a direct correlation between the number of douchebags and number of people open carrying firearms
 
UscGhost said:
One thing we do know is there is a direct correlation between the number of douchebags and number of people open carrying firearms
Click to expand...
Weird...just drove thru Portland and didn't see a single open carry....
 
This is weird...Defending Portland, OR has become a trigger for some folks, I'm finding, and I have no dog in the fight. I was just driving thru on my way to the coast, honest, and it was a pit (so were a lot of the towns on the way, btw, that weren't even 20 years ago). but since you asked I googled it...and you seem to be on to something...it's not just Portland, its the whole state of Oregon. But OPR had interesting things to say too...

www.wweek.com

The Departure of Oregon Companies Speaks to a Bigger Problem for the State

How much faith can one retain in the local workforce when Oregon’s fourth and eighth grade test scores for reading and writing are among the nation’s worst?
www.wweek.com www.wweek.com

www.opb.org

Portland troop deployment sparks mixed reactions across Oregon

As Portland fights against troops, some outsiders welcome an intervention.
www.opb.org
 
BLADEMDA said:
My state, Florida, now allows Open Carry. As a Concealed Carry Weapons holder (CCW) I am not in favor of Open Carry.
With the current make-up of SCOTUS I wonder just how far the second amendment will be permitted in Blue states.
Click to expand...

There's a compelling Constitutional argument for some form of carry, either open or concealed, or both. And indeed SCOTUS has commented on this in the past.

I'm not a fan of open carry (of handguns) but I wouldn't go so far as to make it illegal. Broadly speaking, in the context of self defense, I think the practice is unwise and counterproductive. My personal opinion is that when it comes to handguns, concealed is far more practical. Open carry obviously advertises the presence of a gun, which might be a deterrent, but can draw unwanted and unkind attention as well. This is the polar opposite of the purpose of carrying a weapon for self defense. Concealed carry is simple and practical in every place where it's legal to possess a firearm. It fulfills the basic need for self defense and ought to be the default self-defense right, IMO. I favor legal concealed carry everywhere[1], and probably federally-mandated national reciprocity for state-issued permits (same as a driver's license).

Persons exercising their right to open carry are often doing it as a part of exercising their right to assembly and free speech. They're carrying for the express purpose of being seen carrying. The guys who carry AR15s into Starbucks aren't doing so because they're actually worried about being attacked, they're doing it to get on the news and draw attention to their 2A advocacy. I think they're dumb, but being dumb in public shouldn't be a crime unless it creates a hazard to other people and their property.

I don't think banning open carry of long guns should pass Constitutional review, since the core of the right is to keep and bear arms. The 2A doesn't actually say anything about self-defense (or deer hunting, or Olympic competition, or recreation) although SCOTUS has ruled that those rights are implied and protected. If there's any meaning or teeth to the Amendment that preserves the right of armed resistance to tyranny, the people who keep the arms have got to be able to load them, carry them outside their homes, and freely assemble with other people doing the same.

I understand there are people who don't think any of that should be legal, but their remedy is also right there in the Constitution: amend or repeal the 2nd Amendment.



[1] with some limited and notable exceptions, e.g. sterile areas of airports, courthouses etc - locations where security is present and actually has a duty to protect the unarmed people inside
 
pgg said:
There's a compelling Constitutional argument for some form of carry, either open or concealed, or both. And indeed SCOTUS has commented on this in the past.

I'm not a fan of open carry (of handguns) but I wouldn't go so far as to make it illegal. Broadly speaking, in the context of self defense, I think the practice is unwise and counterproductive. My personal opinion is that when it comes to handguns, concealed is far more practical. Open carry obviously advertises the presence of a gun, which might be a deterrent, but can draw unwanted and unkind attention as well. This is the polar opposite of the purpose of carrying a weapon for self defense. Concealed carry is simple and practical in every place where it's legal to possess a firearm. It fulfills the basic need for self defense and ought to be the default self-defense right, IMO. I favor legal concealed carry everywhere[1], and probably federally-mandated national reciprocity for state-issued permits (same as a driver's license).

Persons exercising their right to open carry are often doing it as a part of exercising their right to assembly and free speech. They're carrying for the express purpose of being seen carrying. The guys who carry AR15s into Starbucks aren't doing so because they're actually worried about being attacked, they're doing it to get on the news and draw attention to their 2A advocacy. I think they're dumb, but being dumb in public shouldn't be a crime unless it creates a hazard to other people and their property.

I don't think banning open carry of long guns should pass Constitutional review, since the core of the right is to keep and bear arms. The 2A doesn't actually say anything about self-defense (or deer hunting, or Olympic competition, or recreation) although SCOTUS has ruled that those rights are implied and protected. If there's any meaning or teeth to the Amendment that preserves the right of armed resistance to tyranny, the people who keep the arms have got to be able to load them, carry them outside their homes, and freely assemble with other people doing the same.

I understand there are people who don't think any of that should be legal, but their remedy is also right there in the Constitution: amend or repeal the 2nd Amendment.



[1] with some limited and notable exceptions, e.g. sterile areas of airports, courthouses etc - locations where security is present and actually has a duty to protect the unarmed people inside
Click to expand...
By this logic I should be able to own jet fighters and nuclear weapons.
 
I live in an open-carry state and I've never seen it, not once. Most gun owners have enough common sense not to draw that kind of attention to themselves, nor do they want it. I suspect most businesses wouldn't allow it. Open-carry isn't practical for everyday use in a modern society, unless you are a rancher and have to fend off things like cyotes and what not, but you probably would be using shot guns and rifles. Again, open carry isn't practical.
 
The reason I prefer (strongly) CCW (concealed carry weapons) permits is that at least some level of training and education has been documented.
This will at least give some basic training and education to those seeking self-defense weapons. "Well Regulated" means good training so any citizen seeking a gun should demonstrate a basic proficiency with that weapon and an understanding of the laws in their state. For example, you can't point your gun in threatening manner at anyone. You can't carry the gun at a school or post office. You should try to diffuse the situation and preferably withdraw from a hostile interaction if possible.
 


I carry in condition 3 (as shown in the video). The odds I will ever need to discharge my pistol are very low. When I carry 380 or 9mm it is in condition 3. Most of the time I carry a 38 special revolver.
 
BLADEMDA said:


I carry in condition 3 (as shown in the video). The odds I will ever need to discharge my pistol are very low. When I carry 380 or 9mm it is in condition 3. Most of the time I carry a 38 special revolver.
Click to expand...

I don’t say this disrespectfully, but I’ve never understood condition 3 carry. My own training and tactics dictate that if my gun is coming out, I need to go to work right now and I don’t need any other distractions. Whats your plan if you’re in close, physically fighting, and it’s escalated to lethal force? In these scenarios, you are unlikely to have both hands available at the wrong time.

My handguns are condition 1 at all times (I only own striker fire pistols without thumb safeties). Draw, fire, reholster drills have been drilled into me over years and thousands upon thousands of exercises and are second nature.

If you are committed to condition 3, I would hope that you train extensively with draw/rack drills to the point that you can’t draw without racking. Remember, vapor lock, auditory shutdown, loss of peripheral vision, and loss of dexterity in lethal scenarios are VERY real even for those who are good at stress management.

To the original point…. I find open carry to be tactically ignorant. I would much rather take a step back and evaluate what’s in front of me before taking action. Open carry would put a spotlight on me that I don’t want and dramatically reduce my ability to complete the OODA loop…
 
FiremedicMike said:
I don’t say this disrespectfully, but I’ve never understood condition 3 carry. My own training and tactics dictate that if my gun is coming out, I need to go to work right now and I don’t need any other distractions. Whats your plan if you’re in close, physically fighting, and it’s escalated to lethal force? In these scenarios, you are unlikely to have both hands available at the wrong time.

My handguns are condition 1 at all times (I only own striker fire pistols without thumb safeties). Draw, fire, reholster drills have been drilled into me over years and thousands upon thousands of exercises and are second nature.

If you are committed to condition 3, I would hope that you train extensively with draw/rack drills to the point that you can’t draw without racking. Remember, vapor lock, auditory shutdown, loss of peripheral vision, and loss of dexterity in lethal scenarios are VERY real even for those who are good at stress management.

To the original point…. I find open carry to be tactically ignorant. I would much rather take a step back and evaluate what’s in front of me before taking action. Open carry would put a spotlight on me that I don’t want and dramatically reduce my ability to complete the OODA loop…
Click to expand...
Us non gun folk zealot folk don't know what any of that crap means but it sounds like you know what you are doing. People who open carry look like dorks.
 
Arch Guillotti said:
Us non gun folk zealot folk don't know what any of that crap means but it sounds like you know what you are doing. People who open carry look like dorks.
Click to expand...
He mentioned condition 3 so I rolled with it. Condition 3 is loaded mag, nothing in the chamber, so you have to rack it to fire. Condition 1 is loaded mag and 1 in the chamber.. pull it out, pull the trigger, bang..

Sorry, lol
 
Arch Guillotti said:
Us non gun folk zealot folk don't know what any of that crap means but it sounds like you know what you are doing. People who open carry look like dorks.
Click to expand...

Many of them are more interested in what their gun is saying to others about them, than in having a useful weapon for self defense. It's an act of speech and demonstration to a large degree. Part of a costume in a performance.

While there's something to be said for publicly exercising a right simply to exercise it, many/most of us (people who carry some or all of the time) think they're dorks too. There are circumstances where it's practical, but most of those circumstances aren't out in public where it draws attention.

A good number of them are obnoxious dorks too, thinking they're advocates for 2A and carry rights, but actually doing far more damage than aid to the cause. The Starbucks open carry meets, complete with slung tacticol AR15s, are a great example of that.
 
While I can only speak for myself I prefer safety over readiness. The odds I will ever need to use my firearm against another person are very low, so low that I prefer safety over readiness. For me that means condition 3 carry (no bullet in the chamber). If the IDF recommends condition 3 for most of its units that is good enough for me. I am sure there are plenty of experienced gun owners who choose to carry in Condition 1 but that isn't me.
Most of the time when I carry a firearm I have a revolver (I own quite a few).

 
BLADEMDA said:
The reason I prefer (strongly) CCW (concealed carry weapons) permits is that at least some level of training and education has been documented.
This will at least give some basic training and education to those seeking self-defense weapons. "Well Regulated" means good training so any citizen seeking a gun should demonstrate a basic proficiency with that weapon and an understanding of the laws in their state. For example, you can't point your gun in threatening manner at anyone. You can't carry the gun at a school or post office. You should try to diffuse the situation and preferably withdraw from a hostile interaction if possible.
Click to expand...
You mention "basic training". Would you let an anesthesiologist with basic training maybe 5 hours total intubate your child?
 
PpfSuxTube said:
You mention "basic training". Would you let an anesthesiologist with basic training maybe 5 hours total intubate your child?
Click to expand...

Not exactly an apples to apples comparison, but also invalid because an anesthesiologist has thousands of hours of experience. Maybe you mean to say an anesthesia resident with 5 hours of experience?

5 hours is sufficient for an adult to learn how to safety handle and shoot a firearm. More is needed for proficiency, but the basics can be taught in less time. 5 hours is more than the vast majority of service members receive because most never use a firearm again after basic training.
 
PpfSuxTube said:
You mention "basic training". Would you let an anesthesiologist with basic training maybe 5 hours total intubate your child?
Click to expand...
No one has a constitutionally enumerated civil right to intubate my child.
 

Course Name: Introduction to Handgun Course (HI)​

Course Brief: This 4 Hour class is designed to teach the student the basic knowledge and attitudes necessary for selecting, owning, and using the pistol of their choice safely and effectively. Topics covered include: Safe gun handling, weapon selection, firearm nomenclature and manipulation, ammunition options and applications, storage & maintenance, fundamentals of pistol shooting including, grip options, stance options, sighting fundamentals, and trigger control. This class will qualify students to apply for a Florida Concealed Weapon or Firearm License.

Course Level: Introductory

Cost: $150

Length: 4 Hours

Ammunition Required: 75-100 rounds

Equipment Required: None. Handgun, and Eye & Ear Protection Rental are Included in the Course Fees

If you don't have a handgun, handgun rental is provided at no additional cost and you will have the opportunity to try multiple guns including revolvers and semi-automatic pistols. If you will be using the range's rental guns you must purchase your ammunition at the range as they only allow their ammunition to be shot through their guns. The ammunition is sold in preset packages of 75-100 rounds which you can purchase when you check in for class.
 
My wife has taken the basic handgun course twice and she told me that her plan is to take it a third time soon. I encourage her to practice with her pistol at the range once per year and carry a small, lightweight revolver for self defense. CCW is not just about being legal but rather being safe with whatever firearm you choose to use.
 
Last edited:

My wife Carries a 22 Magnum Smith and Wesson revolver for self defense. This was an expensive pistol but it is very lightweight (11.4 ounces) and shoots a 22 magnum load rather than a 38 special making it easier for a woman to handle the gun more effectively. This pistol fits into her purse and she can practice with it.
 
lynxdefense.com

Ruger SP101 Review | Is this the best 357 Magnum Revolver?

The Ruger SP101 is a fantastic reveolver offering. If you are in the marketing for a decent size pistol with a lot of function look no further.
lynxdefense.com lynxdefense.com

I typically Carry and practice with 38 and 38 special caliber rounds even with my 357 magnum pistols. The Ruger Pistols are built like tanks but heavy guns. I own several of them. The SP101 is one of my favorite close range handguns.

I like 9mm rounds as well and own HK, Beretta etc in 9mm. My aim with the 357 and 45 caliber rounds just isn't good enough to use those guns for Concealed Carry but they can stop a raging Meth maniac in his/her tracks.

If all you need or want is home defense then a shot gun or pistol would be adequate. Still, you need some practice time with the weapon so you know how to use it properly and effectively in a crisis.
 
arkgal said:
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison, but also invalid because an anesthesiologist has thousands of hours of experience. Maybe you mean to say an anesthesia resident with 5 hours of experience?

5 hours is sufficient for an adult to learn how to safety handle and shoot a firearm. More is needed for proficiency, but the basics can be taught in less time. 5 hours is more than the vast majority of service members receive because most never use a firearm again after basic training.
Click to expand...
Yes i meant anesthesia resident. 5 hours in the OR. Would you let them intubate your baby who has epiglottitis? Simple question. Yes no.
 
PpfSuxTube said:
Yes i meant anesthesia resident. 5 hours in the OR. Would you let them intubate your baby who has epiglottitis? Simple question. Yes no.
Click to expand...
Apples vs oranges comparison. What does a Neurosurgeon resecting a brain tumor have to do with basic firearms training for self-defense? Nothing. The average person is not training to become a Navy Seal or Special Forces team member. He/She wants to use and own a simple firearm safely. This is a constitutional Right and many are choosing to exercise it.
 
PpfSuxTube said:
What do you think you can hit in a crisis?
Click to expand...
Nobody knows for certain how they will react in a crisis. I am very certain that I would hit my target at 5 feet or less even in a stressed out situation.
The vast majority of firearm situations do not end with a bullet being fired from the gun. The reason I carry a revolver is that I know it will go "bang" every time I pull the trigger and there is no slide to rack. I also never expect to fire my gun at an actual human being. For home defense I have many choices available to me besides a snub nose revolver. The revolver I use at home is much bigger than my carry weapon and it would allow me to get to my safe for my other firearms which are much more deadly/accurate.
 
BLADEMDA said:
Apples vs oranges comparison. What does a Neurosurgeon resecting a brain tumor have to do with basic firearms training for self-defense? Nothing. The average person is not training to become a Navy Seal or Special Forces team member. He/She wants to use and own a simple firearm safely. This is a constitutional Right and many are choosing to exercise it.
Click to expand...
So you won't answer the question
 
PpfSuxTube said:
What do you think you can hit in a crisis?
Click to expand...
Well, statistically speaking..

Gun owners are at a much much higher risk of suicide, homicide, accidental shootings, shooting their spouse, and being shot themselves in the event of a robbery

So, in a crisis, they would probably be shooting themselves or a loved one
 
PpfSuxTube said:
You mention "basic training". Would you let an anesthesiologist with basic training maybe 5 hours total intubate your child?
Click to expand...
I have no dog in this fight. I don't own guns. I plan on taking a firearm class. I may want to own a gun in the home in the future when kids are out the house and I am old just for added protection.

But these comparisons adds little and just distracts from threads. What if I said, "basic training should mean 4 years of gun school and then 3-7 years of gun residencies to own different forms of guns". Similar to what you said just on the opposite end of craziness.
 
Guillemot said:
I see open carry as a necessity for preservation of our constitutional rights. There are those that prefer small arms, and for them concealed carry may be suitable. If that’s what they want to do I’m not trying to stop them. For those like myself, however, it would be unnecessarily confining to my wardrobe to try to conceal an automatic rifle, multiple magazines of ammunition, and other bulky accessories. If they want me to conceal my “back up” side arm, then whatever, but if Im actually out and about, I definitely want the capacity to lay down defensive suppressive fire. For that you need a lot of ammo and firearm with the right thermal and recoil characteristics to deliver it accurately and rapidly. A hand gun wont work for that purpose.
Click to expand...
What kind of country are you living in if you need automatic rifles, multiple magazines of ammunition to go out? Somalia?
 
I live in a rural area of a permit less carry state. It’s common in hunting season to see firearms carried openly, but really only in those circumstances, like getting fuel for side by sides or ATVs before going hunting. Times are of course changing, but generally speaking if you are open carrying an AR or a pistol on your hip in public places, it’s considered bad manners.
 
BLADEMDA said:

Gun Ownership by State 2025

Discover population, economy, health, and more with the most comprehensive global statistics at your fingertips.
worldpopulationreview.com worldpopulationreview.com
Click to expand...
www.cdc.gov

Firearm Mortality

Map of deaths by firearms per 100,000 total population for each state
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov

Surprise surprise... states with the highest gun ownership also have the highest gun related deaths..
 
UscGhost said:
Well, statistically speaking..

Gun owners are at a much much higher risk of suicide, homicide, accidental shootings, shooting their spouse, and being shot themselves in the event of a robbery

So, in a crisis, they would probably be shooting themselves or a loved one
Click to expand...
This is why I don't understand the mentality of needing to own a weapon for self-defense. I have a child, and even with properly securing a gun and ammunition (which render it useless in a home invasion scenario where quick access is needed), I would never feel comfortable having a handgun in my home, and certainly not a loaded concealed carry weapon. And guns don't scare me. I grew up with guns and know how to use them safely. Hunting is a religion where I'm from. I can't justify the risk, given I have a child.

And to your point, my friend had a shotgun in his house a few years ago. I don't remember the backstory about how he obtained it, but he was messing with it and didn't know it was loaded, and somehow it had a "hair trigger" and fired, putting a hole in his wall. I think the more likely scenario is he didn't know wtf he was doing and was careless to make sure it wasn't loaded. I know of a teenager who had his whole life ahead of him but was handed a rifle or shotgun at a friend's house, and assuming it wasn't loaded, pointed it at a friend and pulled the trigger. The gun discharged, killing his friend. He was prosecuted for manslaughter. People act stupid when it comes to guns.

Given the current state of affairs in the trans community, thanks to the Trump administration, many trans women want to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms as a means of protection. I think this is a really bad idea. As a mental health professional, I know this population is at a much higher risk of attempting suicide, and a self-inflicted gunshot to the face/head guarantees an almost 100% chance of a successful suicide. I've also seen three patients in my bedside nursing career who missed the brain but blew their face off, and that wasn't pretty either. I also know that without proper training, a trans woman's gun is more likely to be used against her by the assailant attempting the crime, and that if the weapon is not used in a situation that clearly justifies lethal force, they could face charges. I'm a pretty vocal critic of this population owning guns for self-defense.

I think that, generally speaking, guns for self-defense are a bad idea. I can understand firearm ownership for hunting and sports shooting.
 
BLADEMDA said:

Course Name: Introduction to Handgun Course (HI)​

Course Brief: This 4 Hour class is designed to teach the student the basic knowledge and attitudes necessary for selecting, owning, and using the pistol of their choice safely and effectively. Topics covered include: Safe gun handling, weapon selection, firearm nomenclature and manipulation, ammunition options and applications, storage & maintenance, fundamentals of pistol shooting including, grip options, stance options, sighting fundamentals, and trigger control. This class will qualify students to apply for a Florida Concealed Weapon or Firearm License.

Course Level: Introductory

Cost: $150

Length: 4 Hours

Ammunition Required: 75-100 rounds

Equipment Required: None. Handgun, and Eye & Ear Protection Rental are Included in the Course Fees

If you don't have a handgun, handgun rental is provided at no additional cost and you will have the opportunity to try multiple guns including revolvers and semi-automatic pistols. If you will be using the range's rental guns you must purchase your ammunition at the range as they only allow their ammunition to be shot through their guns. The ammunition is sold in preset packages of 75-100 rounds which you can purchase when you check in for class.
Click to expand...

Well they used to teach this stuff in schools. Now you can get suspended for drawing a gun.
 
emergentmd said:
I have no dog in this fight. I don't own guns. I plan on taking a firearm class. I may want to own a gun in the home in the future when kids are out the house and I am old just for added protection.

But these comparisons adds little and just distracts from threads. What if I said, "basic training should mean 4 years of gun school and then 3-7 years of gun residencies to own different forms of guns". Similar to what you said just on the opposite end of craziness.
Click to expand...
Buddy


Only about three in five U.S. firearm owners have received any formal gun training, according to a new study from the University of Washington.

Did you know this?

That's 10s of millions of gun owners have absolutely no formal training. If anything a day 5 resident has more experience...
 
PpfSuxTube said:
Buddy


Only about three in five U.S. firearm owners have received any formal gun training, according to a new study from the University of Washington.

Did you know this?

That's 10s of millions of gun owners have absolutely no formal training. If anything a day 5 resident has more experience...
Click to expand...

No formal training doesn’t mean 0 training.



www.pewresearch.org

Views of gun safety and the key responsibilities of gun owners

Just as reasons for owning guns and using them in daily life vary, so do the ways in which gun owners store their guns and the extent to which they see
www.pewresearch.org www.pewresearch.org

“7/10 have taken a firearms safety course”
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Open Anesthesia Cities
Replies
11
Views
2K
aneftp
A
D
Surgeons manning two open heart rooms at once.
Replies
13
Views
2K
coffeebythelake
coffeebythelake
P
Opening chests
2
Replies
85
Views
6K
chessknt
chessknt
S
How long after non complicated vaginal birth is it safe to perform an open tubal ligation?
Replies
29
Views
3K
Maz777
M
patriot6
Open pediatric fellowship positions for fall
Replies
3
Views
2K
OneTyme
OneTyme
Top