In Florida and Virginia just to name two states, an applicant can qualify for a Permit by completing the NRA Home Firearm Safety course which doesn’t teach how to aim a firearm. The course is 4-hours in duration and students are not required to take an exam.
In Virginia, a quadriplegic who is blind can qualify for a Permit. Same for military veterans of other countries; China for example.
The above is a small sample.
Prerequisite: Be 18 years of age, not currently incarcerated, not adjudicated incompetent
Unfortunately every State has each own requirements… or has no requirements at all.
The NRA Home Firearm Safety course is no-live-ammo course… and for me this one shouldn’t be taken under consideration for CCW permit.
There’re a lot of laws, privileges and rules that sometimes don’t match. We cannot disallow blind person to carry a firearm, even it sounds dangerous.
I’m resident of Illinois so I can use our curriculum as a reference. Is it perfect one? Definitely not.
We have to attend two days (total 16hrs). Below you can find the whole curriculum.
In my opinion, there is too much talking, too less of shooting.
I would like student to use their own handguns during presentation and train with them, not only listen, watch and remember. The qualification (#6) should be preceded by live fire training.
What if they do not currently own a handgun?
What if they don’t have their own gun with concealment holster?
Can you define the term “concealable firearm” as it will be used in this context, please?
And yes, these are absolutely things that need to be addressed if something like this were to ever be implemented
So far the Facilities running the courses in my location have rental handguns and holsters.
As mentioned above.
This is a common term defined as:
A concealed firearm / concealable firearm is any firearm, carried on or about a person hidden from the ordinary view of another person.
IL Firearm Concealed Carry Act says:
Concealed firearm means a loaded or unloaded handgun carried on or about a person completely or mostly concealed from view of the public or on or about a person within a vehicle.
IMHO, if it’s going to be “government” mandated, why not add some discipline and patriotism to the mix ( as long as we’re mandating ),
1 year mandatory all inclusive military service. Let’s not get our panties in a bunch!
Let’s get rid of “White Rage” Miley and get back MacArthur, Patton, Marshall and the like, we need warriors not wimps!
So “government” mandated handgun training for civilians, a joke, right?
Again, what’s the “prerequisite” for gun ownership in a free country with a well established “Constitution” and “Bill of Rights?”
Just consider every illegal that recently entered this country ILLEGALLY was handed a bus pass, a library card, a drivers license, a home, free healthcare insurance and citizenship under a different flag and they will turn their new found “governmentally mandated training on you, the citizens”.
I just can’t believe we are sitting here allowing a full scale invasion of our country! Every AMERICAN that died for this country, died in vain! I did not serve this country so people could overthrow a Supreme Court decision by violence! Don’t kid yourself, a mob outside YOUR home is a prerequisite for violence! What? Do I not speak truth, to the DHS warnings? Did we not experience LOVE in 2020, I know she was HOT, but seriously? I can do without the love!
Our military is dwindling, our nationalism is on the decline, and I surely haven’t seen a well disciplined young person in 25 years!
I think it became a necessity after 1948 that Isreal impose mandatory service for all it’s “CITIZENS”. Let’s review what a citizen is, a legally recognized subject or national of a state or commonwealth, either NATIVE or NATURALIZED! ( Legally )
Unfortunately, by the time you and I are gone, there will be NO citizens of this land, you either fight for your country or you become a slave to whom ever owns it. Gee, now there’s an idea! Can you spell DOOMED TO REPEAT.
They want to talk Jim Crow, how about Stalin, Lenin and Trotsky or Fidel and Che, they seem to be the heroes of the coming generation! Good luck with that!
But like my dad used to say, while you’re living under this roof, or as soon as you get your own country…
No the government should not be involved with my “shall not be infringed” portion of my life under this flag!
This is a good curriculum. I do disagree with any mandates though. Also I would add a class on pre-attack indicators, verbal deescalation, and criminal psychology intro.
I have talked about this in a couple of different threads but I’ll try to put all my thoughts together here.
The 2A should be preventing the government from setting requirements to allow citizens to keep and bear arms. You need a new constitutional amendment if you want to change that. But the government could mandate firearms safety and handling training as long as they don’t tie it to possession and carry.
They could mandate that all students in public schools receive firearms training. In kindergarten or first grade this could be don’t touch run and tell an adult training. In junior high this could be hunter safety like training. In high school it could be more advanced hands on training.
The government could also learn from the lessons we see in Ukraine where not having a trained and armed citizenry is forcing them to almost completely rely on foreign assistance to repel an invader. In light of this the government could mandate firearms training for all able bodied citizens. It might even be wise to provide those citizens with military grade weapons ( not the similarly looking AR15 variants many of us own) like some other countries do.
The government could also institute National Constitutional Carry to ensure everyones 2A rights are protected. Then they could offer an enhanced license with training requirements. The license could offer enhanced benifits such as the ability to carry in government owned buildings and at events held on public lands.
If we could apply Firearm Classes into school level education, that curriculum could be much smaller, limited to theory with SIRT pistols.
Then I would keep “mandatory” (yes I know, most doesn’t like this word, but to be honest, I don’t know how to name it differently, keeping the main idea intact) shooting class before applying for permit.
I believe every new concealed carrier can afford few hours and +/- $50 . 
So, you amend your requirements to
Not require use of one’s own gun
Require the use of a facility that rents “concealable firearms” in quantity sufficient for the required training
Require the use of a facility that rents concealment holsters for their rental “concealable firearms”, in quantity sufficient for the required training and also wearable and concealable safely and effectively by all who attend
But you didn’t answer the question. “concealed firearm” is very different from “concealable firearm”.
Are you saying that one of the mandatory requirements will be that the person must rent a gun to use for passing the qualification, and rent a holster, and pass a subjective evaluation by the instructor on whether or not the firearm is “concealed” per state law, while they are taking their mandatory training?
Does all this emphasis on concealment mean that you do NOT believe a permit should be necessary for open carry?
Or is there an entirely different mandatory training class (longer than the 2 days, 16 hours you are starting with) in order to be granted the privilege of open carry?
What about long gun (rifle/shotgun) carry? How would you regulate that?
I may be confused, but your post outlining the curriculum was a lot longer than “a few hours” (16 hours to be exact) and my experience tells me there is no way a two day class, which requires renting a gun and renting a holster and paying for ammo, is going to be +/- $50
Not to mention time off work/child care/etc to allow people days off to be granted this privilege. This is absolutely a cost.
Can you clarify?
Keep in mind that not only are we not going to get firearm classes into grade school curriculum, but, it would be literally decades until all adults in the country (…who attended school in the US) had been through that curriculum. Can’t assume anybody who is already 18 years or older right now will have taken this future dated school curriculum
Sorry I’m lost right now… either you don’t understand simple sentences… or I’m not clear enough (so I can be sorry for that, I’m doing my best).
If you don’t know the meaning of using “/”, I’m more than happy to explain → “/” is used to note that there is a connection between two words or phrases in a sentence. In that particular sentence used by me, it meant → these are the same, interchangeable .
If you believe government mandated handgun training must be the prerequisite for a CONCEALED CARRY PERMIT, what is the curriculum you suggest?
Yes, you are confused… but I’m guessing you are doing everything to be confused.
I’m not going to explain twice the same things. I don’t have a time for this.
Please read and understand. There is difference between 16hrs of curriculum posted first, and $50 for just shooting class after Firearm Class is applied into school program, posted later.
I’m sorry, but I don’t catch the meaning of this…
Anyway… I was trying to answer the OP question… and you are doing everything to only negate others posts.
I know, we discuss… but I feel like Father answering kid’s neverending question: But why? 
You haven’t actually explained it, and you have used undefined terms and contradicted yourself, but I can appreciate that you don’t have time to sort it out
It’s common for laws to be passed without anybody, including their authors, knowing what they mean, after all. Which is but one reason I oppose their creation in the first place
NFA stamp required, 90 day max turnaround time, if atf doesn’t respond within 90 days, the dates receipt of application works as if it were an approved stamp, and is only invalid upon a denial response delivered via courier who positively identities the denial was served
I understand I’m a little too pro RKBA for most gun owners. I’m used to getting friction for it, no worries.
Commonly used explanation usually works the best.
I’m not going to create new definition of “concealed firearm” and “concealable firearm” if they have been used regularly for decades.
No, it doesn’t.
We are taking about laws here, definitions and are critically important.
Plus, there is no common definition for concealable firearm. Concealed and concealable are very different things.
Should we reference the “commonly used explanation” for assault weapon, assault rifle, assault style pistol, high capacity magazine, sniper rifle, military style rifle, when writing and enforcing laws? I should hope not
Definitions matter, a lot, and the person suggesting a law should define what the definition of a key term is
Sorry, I cannot help you then. You have to interpret those terms however you like.
For me it was clear, that’s why I used them. Actually the curriculum presented by me contained terminology taken from IL Firearm Concealed Carry Act.
I hope you realize we are just regular people, responsible gun owners, not a Lawmakers.
If you really need the definition that satisfies you - you can always call out @MikeBKY who hopefully will be able to help you out.