How would you design a CCW qual?

[grandpapeepap]

Reagan really screwed the pooch on us with that one didnt he, damn actors

 

[Gawernator]

Reagan really screwed the pooch on us with that one didnt he, damn actors

Idk why boomers glaze Reagan so much

 

[grandpapeepap]

Many motorcycle racers I've raced with have never had a M1 license or ridden on a public street, yep. My best friend started racing at 4 years old and is now like 29, never had a street bike. lol

I have friends who do the same thing, one was even in a major accident and almost lost his foot. CHP just said "i wont write a ticket about the lack of m1, you probably learned your lesson" He did not

 

[Gawernator]

I have friends who do the same thing, one was even in a major accident and almost lost his foot. CHP just said "i wont write a ticket about the lack of m1, you probably learned your lesson" He did not

I meant that they would never have that interaction because they have literally only ridden on private property, not public streets.

 

[grandpapeepap]

I meant that they would never have that interaction because they have literally only ridden on private property, not public streets.

well im glad the people you rode with were smarter than the people I did. progress, you love to see it

 

[ReaperCustom45]

I mean we have age restrictions on firearms ownership when 2A says "the right of the people" not "adults".

A lot of folks like to compare guns to cars; to drive a car you have to pass a licensing test. There's additional requirements for those 70+. [required] insurance has a tiered pricing based on age and gender.


I often echo what you're saying when discussing firearms with friends and family. But in reality, I can't think of anything that I'm an absolutist on.

And I can yell all day about freedom's and rights but I just don't trust people to exercise responsibly and especially when it risks the safety and rights of my family, myself and other responsible gun owners. I far more value practicality over virtue signaling because I believe that's what will best protect innocent bystanders and the rights of responsible gun owners.

A driver's license isn't a constitutional right, therefore not a good comparison. And I get what you're saying, I worked at a gun store for years and saw plenty of idiots that really shouldn't be in possession of a gun, not because they were a criminal, but some people you can just tell are plain immature or stupid. That's what you get though, like I said you can't pick and choose who gets rights. It's all or nothing. Otherwise you get into dangerous situations where only certain people are allowed to exercise them and the majority are denied their rights. Look at how California was before they were forced to become a "shall issue" state, there were some counties where you'd only get a carry permit if you were rich, famous, or well connected to whatever corrupt douche was issuing permits. Agreeing to limitations and conditions on our rights is how we ended up where we are now, with blatantly unconstitutional laws that do absolutely nothing against criminals, but punish, hinder, and screw over law abiding citizens. Say you do agree with stricter training rules for a carry permit, the people you don't want carrying will more than likely just carry without a permit. That's exactly what happens right now, I can't tell you how many people admit they carry without a permit while at gun stores.

 

[Bobalover209]

Incorrect.

Ninth Circuit Invalidates California’s Urban Open-Carry Ban in Baird v. Bonta - Law Offices of Snell & Wilmer

By V.R. Bohman, Derek Flint, and Cameron J. Schlagel On January 2, 2026, the Ninth Circuit held that California’s near-statewide prohibition on open carry — applicable in counties with populations over 200,000 and covering roughly 95% of Californians — violates the Second Amendment under the...

www.swlaw.com

The Ninth Circuit held that the open carry of firearms is clearly protected by the Second Amendment. According to the panel, the protection of open carry is supported by Founding-era and Reconstruction-era history distinguishing the permissibility of open carry from occasional bans on concealed carry. Applying Bruen, the panel concluded this is a “straightforward” case (using Bruen’s terminology): California’s categorical ban on open carry in populous counties lacks any “distinctly similar” historical analogue addressing a comparable societal problem, thus defeating the State’s defense under the default historical inquiry without resort to a “nuanced” analogical approach.

Maybe I'm not understanding it correctly, but as CRPA described it, and how I am reading that excerpt you provided, it still does not support permitless open carry. The court merely said it's straight forward that CA cannot restrict open carry to only less populated counties. They indicated the issue is only with allowing it in small populated areas, their issue is not with needing a permit to do so.

 

[Gawernator]

Maybe I'm not understanding it correctly, but as CRPA described it, and how I am reading that excerpt you provided, it still does not support permitless open carry. The court merely said it's straight forward that CA cannot restrict open carry to only less populated counties. They indicated the issue is only with allowing it in small populated areas, their issue is not with needing a permit to do so.

A recent ruling from a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit concluded that California’s ban on the open carry of firearms in counties with populations of 200,000 or more people is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

 

[ReaperCustom45]

Maybe I'm not understanding it correctly, but as CRPA described it, and how I am reading that excerpt you provided, it still does not support permitless open carry. The court merely said it's straight forward that CA cannot restrict open carry to only less populated counties. They indicated the issue is only with allowing it in small populated areas, their issue is not with needing a permit to do so.

That is my understanding as well. They can still require a permit for it, but they can't outright ban it like it is in most areas.

 

[Gawernator]

That is my understanding as well. They can still require a permit for it, but they can't outright ban it like it is in most areas.

Currently no such permit exists however, so the ruling would grant open carry for all if it wasn't vacated.

 

[Bobalover209]

A recent ruling from a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit concluded that California’s ban on the open carry of firearms in counties with populations of 200,000 or more people is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

Again, if overruled, the only thing that would change is all counties in CA regardless of population size must offer a permit process for open carry to normal citizens. It does not say a permit for open carry is unconstitutional.

To reiterate, the court is saying CA's ban on open carry in greater populated counties (95% of CA) is unconstitutional.

 

[ReaperCustom45]

Currently no such permit exists however, so the ruling would grant open carry for all if it wasn't vacated.

My guess is they would either add it to the CCW permit, or create another separate permit for open carry. California isn't just going to allow permitless carry of any kind.

 

[Bobalover209]

Currently no such permit exists however, so the ruling would grant open carry for all if it wasn't vacated.

There is a open carry permit for counties under 200,000 population size. They would merely just have to have every county offer an open carry permit.

 

[Bobalover209]

My guess is they would either add it to the CCW permit, or create another separate permit for open carry. California isn't just going to allow permitless carry of any kind.

I agree, and I think they'll make it separate and more difficult to get than a CCW.

 

[Gawernator]

My guess is they would either add it to the CCW permit, or create another separate permit for open carry. California isn't just going to allow permitless carry of any kind.

This is something that will be settled by a higher court one day

 

[Gawernator]

There is a open carry permit for counties under 200,000 population size. They would merely just have to have every county offer an open carry permit.

Until that gets challenged too

 

[ReaperCustom45]

This is something that will be settled by a higher court one day

Maybe, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Supreme Court has been turning down a lot of 2A cases. They seemingly do not want to rule on some cases if they know they'd have to rule in favor of 2A rights.

 

[Bobalover209]

Until that gets challenged too

I'm sure it will be, but that's not the issue being contended with this court case. The only part the court ruled unconstitutional is the lack of an open carry permit state wide.

 

[grandpapeepap]

They should relook at US v Miller and check out the poor arguments used in that case

 

[UserName12345]

I say no qualification only because it’s a constitutional right that we should be allowed to carry. Now if the person doesn’t take the time to train to be efficient with their firearm then they should bare the consequences of their actions or lack thereof.

I know of more people then I care to count who couldn’t