ccw legal advice (lawyers and LEOs please)

[fightingquaker13]

Per Pincus's advice I am moving this thread here.

I was able to get my Fl. ccw without taking the class, just by showing an old hunters safey card. Any vetran or judge can do the same. Is this a good idea legally? What I mean is, if we get in a shoot, particularly, if God help us collateral damage occurs, would having classes help us out? Would something like Gunsight or Thunder Ranch be a liabilty (in terms of a perceived "gunfighter" mentality)?
I'd like to hear from lawyers and LEOs, or anyone with direct experience. I don't want to go out and drop $85 plus on nonsense, but a little cya never goes amiss. I thought maybe my amount of rangetime might help, but for obvious reasons, I try to pay for as much of my gun stuff in cash as possible. I'm not suggesting classes are nonsense, just don't want to retake the basic if not a good idea.
fightingquaker13

[cookie62]

I have always been told the more training you can show the court the better off you are. Some instuctors will even testify in your defense. The more documentation you can show the better off you will be.

my .0245634 cents worth

[saltydogbk]

While training is good, just what part of shall not infringe do you not understand?  If I need "training" to get a ccw, why do you not need to own property to vote?

[tombogan03884]

While training is good, just what part of shall not infringe do you not understand?  If I need "training" to get a ccw, why do you not need to own property to vote?

I understand and agree with what you are saying, BUT (there's that word  ) I think you are missing His point. While I may be wrong, my understanding of his post is that it is aimed at "mind set" and the fact that hunters and soldiers are trained with a different one than would be appropriate for an SD situation. While all 3 require safe gun handling skills, the mind set of soldier and hunter are aimed at KILLING, while the SD shooter's focus is on removing the threat, soldiers and hunters are justified in taking a shot at a fleeing "target" while an SD shooter would wind up in prison.
That being said, the more professional training one gets, the better informed they are, it shows an intent to inform yourself as to the proper conduct and responsibilities.
I would start with Ayoob's Lethal force institute which involves little shooting as it is geared toward the LEGALITIES of SD.

[Rob Pincus]

Guys:

There is a RKBA discussion. It is NOT HERE.

We're not going to discourage people from being responsibly armed in this area.

 Carry on... but stay on topic.

-RJP

[Sponsor]

[ellis4538]

Not going to give advise but doesn't FL. issue out of state CCW's with just some proof of shooting history (NRA classification or something)?  IMHO what Ohio requires could be better!

FWIW

Richard

[tombogan03884]

Not going to give advise but doesn't FL. issue out of state CCW's with just some proof of shooting history (NRA classification or something)?  IMHO what Ohio requires could be better!

FWIW

Richard

I believe that CCW regulations are aimed more toward  "safe handling" than actual USE, because use is relatively rare compared to the number of people who carry.

[fightingquaker13]

Thanks for the responses, but Pincus is right. This wasnt a question about politics, just what is prudent to help yourself AFTER the shooting. This is why I'd asked for some input from LEOS and lawyers, defense and DA's that deal with this end of it.
Fighingquaker1

[tombogan03884]

Thanks for the responses, but Pincus is right. This wasnt a question about politics, just what is prudent to help yourself AFTER the shooting. This is why I'd asked for some input from LEOS and lawyers, defense and DA's that deal with this end of it.
Fighingquaker1

It wasn't an answer about politics.
It was directed at the mindset of the people making the regulations , while only dozens will be defending their lives in public, hundreds or thousands will be carrying.

[pioneer]

While training is good, just what part of shall not infringe do you not understand?  If I need "training" to get a ccw, why do you not need to own property to vote?

Then don't take the training.  In the beginning, you did have to own property and be white to vote, but that part of the Constitution has been changed too. 

To answer the question, tactical training is very much an asset in the event you ever need to use deadly force.  In this case, training is more than marksmanship.  The valuable lessons learned at professional schools includes when to shoot, or perhaps just as importantly, when NOT to shoot.   There is training that teaches you how to shoot, and there is training that teaches you how to fight.  To those who have never had pro training, you don't know what you don't know.  I highly recommend it.