Training held against you?

In this month’s Concealed Carry there is an article about prosecutors CCW training against you if you end up being tried for a self defense case. The thought is that you must be blood thirsty or want to harm someone if you train.

I think the exact opposite way. If you train you are being a responsible gun owner. With training you are more accurate so there is less chance of collateral damage. Also, CC classes teach you not only to be aware but also that a handgun is for DEFENSE only. Like anything you are serious about you need to train.

What are your thoughts?



Anti gun prosecutors always look at gun owners as if we are the criminals when they need to look at the facts of what happened. Self defense training is for self defense we want to protect ourselves and our family . Not go dueling like in the wild West


Prosecutors can and will attempt to use anything, or any lack of thing, against you.

I’m not a lawyer but I’m pretty sure there is literally no decision you can make that is guaranteed to never be argued against you.

Training is good. Being trained is good. Being trained makes you less likely to need to defend yourself in the first place, more likely to win the ‘fight’ [act of self-defense] if you must defend yourself, leads to the best possible fact pattern for your attorney to work with after the fact, and demonstrates that you realized the importance and responsibility that comes with carrying a gun and educated and prepared yourself accordingly.


If what you say is true you are thinking like a responsible gun owner. If what you say they say is true they are thinking like criminals.


“Here Here Nathan !”
**WHEN you are still alive after a self defense ‘incident’. (Good show by the way!)
**WHEN you are able to call in your USCCA Mouth piece and begin defending yourself (again)
**When you are able to go home and hug your loved one’s and count your blessing’s
you took the initiative to Train-up, Range-up, become one w/ your weapon(s), You are still on this side of the grass because you probably saw through your Situational Awareness the threat before it saw you and by God you did something about it and DEFENDED YOURSELF, “They” can call you Blood thirsty, Violent anything they want (and WILL do so) you can take to the bank everyday there after you utilized your God given right to Carry a firearm and put a Skell(s) in the ground and ‘they’ will NEVER harm another Innocent ever again.
In today’s climate WE are the Criminals, WE carry guns (Legally) (and ‘they’ HATE that!)
They hate that we are not beholding to them for everything with a passion that borders on Insanity. These Woke Socialist-Marxists want us cowed, beaten down little Sheeple.
The only guns to be had are the ones they possess (arming the IRS is a perfect example)
When the World rights itself in the coming months and we are all FREE once again from the TYRANNY and OPPRESSION this administration inflicted on us the last (4) years we will enjoy unfettered FREEDOM each and every AMERICAN deserves we can toast the Founding Fathers for their Ultimate sacrifices and foresight to create a world for us that is Heaven on Earth.

God Bless America!
Where We Go 1 We Go All !
Mi dos pesos
(too mucho?) :crazy_face:


You probably already know this but the “high noon” gun fight is movie hype. IIRC it only happened a few times. Most of the time one guy would bushwhack the other to settle the score. It does make good drama though to watch.


That’s what I was thinking too


You both hungry? :rofl:


True. I read they prosecuted and hung a woman for being victim of rape. It was in Iran, but how far behind are NYC, Houston, Minneapolis, considering recent precedent?

I was talking online to someone who expressed a view that armed equals to looking for a fight. This hoplophobic view is far from harmless if a juror harbors it on a self-defense case, criminal or civil. The responsibly armed community should engage these people in discussion and try to educate them, and counter MSM propaganda, but… I am afraid the only cure comes from personal encounter with violent criminals. These days there is no shortage of that.


That was posted year ago, but worth to watch again…

And I still say, if somebody is questioning my training and education that means he/she is not educated enough… :fu:


I wear a seat belt because I know my wife is looking for an accident!:joy::rofl::joy::rofl::joy::smiling_face_with_tear:


I unsubscribed and stop ever clicking on their videos when they went so far as to say “stop training” as a clickbait title to get your view when the message is not to stop training



You don’t HAVE to be hungry to want Bacon Brother…


Amen on the bacon!!


I may be in real trouble if training is held aganst me after serving 22 years in the armed forces and my ccw training


I qualified for a Maryland CC permit years ago as a business owner. In MD you previously had to provide a good reason but now it has become a shall issue state. Not sure how long that will last, but…

I trained, and qualified technically but I was not satisfied with the range performance as I really had a time being consistent with the small 9mm I had at the time. I hit at 87% which may be passing but it only takes one missed shot to kill an innocent so I decided to get another model pistol and train. When I hit 100% next time, and with good center mass, I got my permit.

You would like to think that training would provide a more positive outcome in court but sadly it seems it does not.


I haven’t read the article yet, so forgive any ignorance.

Lawyer: I’d like to call Mr. SWAT officer as my next witness. Mr. SWAT, how often do you train with your side arm, long gun, tactics, and response?

Mr. SWAT: all the time, sir (or ma’am).

Lawyer: Isn’t it true that you do this so you can be more effective at killing other people?

Mr. SWAT: why no sir. We train to preserve life.

Lawyer: I’d like to call the trainer for the local police department as my next witness. Mr. Trainer, how often do you train law enforcement officers?

Mr. Trainer: It’s my full time job. So, I would estimate 40 hours a week or more.

Mr. Lawyer: And isn’t it true that you train cops to effectively kill people so they can literally get away with murder?

Mr. Trainer: No sir! I train officers so they can be safe on the job and preserve life.

Mr. Lawyer: How many hours does a police officer need to train in order, in your expert opinion, to be proficient (or qualify) with a side arm?

Mr. Trainer: X number of hours.

Mr. Lawyer: Do you ever have officers that choose to train over and above this minimum standard?

Mr. Trainer: Yes we do.

Mr. Lawyer: and they do that so they can more effectively kill people, isn’t that correct?

Mr. Trainer: No. Our officers seek to preserve life, protect themselves, and protect the public.

Then the defendant gets on the stand and responds to similar questions in a similar fashion (or the lawyer states this in his closing arguments).

And it’s also your attorney’s job to pick a jury that isn’t so anti-cop or so stupid that they cannot or will not follow that line of thinking.


I hate click bait as much as anyone. There are many who are much worse. I dropped the Armed Scholar for just that reason.

I see this as a get a good lawyer cue!


And you also had to sit through that lovely interview with a state police officer, I surmise. Good times! Good on you for going through all of that. I would think that very process could be used by a capable lawyer as evidence that you value human life so much that you would go through such a process to be legally in a place to protect life-especially since you could actually carry inside your place of business without a permit. (If that law hasn’t changed as well.)