Agreed, there is no proof of a need for stricter training/requirements, and there is no blood in the streets either.

Having said that, there is barely 1% (290k was the last number I saw) of the population in shall issue and constitutional states actually carrying.

Statistically speaking, it is extremely unlikely that 99.5% (yes I made that up) of us will ever have to use our weapon. Compound that by those that go to places were gun buster signs (criminal enhancement) are put up, and choose to comply, they wont have their weapon anyway, where they are slightly more likely to encounter a need.

And even then we still are blessed by the bias media and Brady Bunch to have the pleasure of reading in the news of some nitwit that has a CC and did something epically stupid and mad us all look bad (which would have been eliminated by stricter requirements - although you can't fix stupid).

NDs in public, lost weapon, unjustified use or display, ect. It's still less than 1% of those that carry are convicted of a crime of some sort. Lower percentage than LEOs, judges and lawyers, and polar opposite of politicians.

I suppose if there were closer to 10% - 15% of the population carrying, then we might, might see more of that need for training or requirements.