As a Certified Firearms Instructor, (USAF and NRA), I'd like to comment on a couple of posts I've seen on this last page. First, I fully agree that any training for a CHP in this state "SHOULD" require hands on, bullets down range, live fire training. HOWEVER, right now, the state does not require this, and as such, if someone refuses to shoot, by law, they don't have to. Yes, they are stupid IMHO to refuse such training, but without a state requirement, they have a right to deny it.

I just signed on to teach for a group out of FL, that doesn't require live fire. At first it churrned my gut, but after speaking with the company owner, I could see his point in not requiring it. He said that initially they did require range time, but after about a half dozen students had called to ask why he was putting a higher restriction than the state required, he dropped it as a requirement, but still offers the live fire at no additional costs. From both a legal and business stand point, I can agree with this, yet still as an instructor I'm still not happy with it. Both the Air Force and NRA require live fire to complete their training, and I still have not fully come to grips with signing a document that will allow someone to obtain a CHP, when I don't know that they can hit the broad side of a barn. Time will tell, I guess.

The second point I'd like to address is that some believe that any requirement for training is an impingment on their 2nd amendment rights. While I can understand where you are coming from, I could not disagree with you more. In the days where sons and daughters learned from their parents, how to shoot at an early age, and everyone knew how to shoot and handle firearms safely, the requirement for training would have been rediculous. However, in this day&age, the vast majority of people have never handled a real firearm before. For the past several decades, most of "Civilized Folk" have relied on police for personal protection. We have lost that access to Home Training.

I spend a great deal of time in WY, and yes, they do allow permitless concealed carry. The reason for this was to protect farmer and ranchers who open carry on their land, and then throw on a coat when the weather turns, and they head into town. This was the basis for the law in WY, however they still have a permit that has a slightly tougher requirement than CO.

The fact of the matter is that knowledge is power. The more you know about concealed carry and the laws of the states you carry in, the less likely you are to screw up. Take a look at George Zimmerman in FL. While this case is not yet put to rest, it's pretty clear that he was treading deadly close to a fine line of Florida Statues governing use of force. Unless you want to be the next George Zimmerman, you need to know the laws of the state you carry in, and the pitfalls they contain.

For instance, did you know that under the Colorado Revised Statutes, you can perform a Citizen's Arrest? Did you also know that you MUST Witness the crime in question? Whats more, did you know that if you are holding a suspect at gunpoint, waiting for the cops to arrive, IF you have the individual move from one place to another, that you have just commited First Degree Kidnapping? Thats a real fine line between doing what you think is right to becomming a criminal yourself.

So for those who believe that training requirements are a pinch on their rights, stop and think about it for a moment. Maybe its not because the state wants to keep you from carrying, maybe they just don't want to see good people get on the wrong side of the law. IMHO, Colorado should do like Utah and actually require people to take a course in the relavent laws before issuing a permit.