Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Certified Gun Trainer Faces 186-Count Indictment

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by clearconscience, Feb 26, 2011.

  1. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Just thought I would post some news from my neck of the woods.

    And I think all states should have to do a CHL class like Kentucky does with actually range time and proven decent accruacy.


    Certified Gun Trainer Faces 186-Count Indictment - Louisville News Story - WLKY Louisville

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. -- A man certified in Kentucky to teach people gun safety has been named in a 186-count indictment.

    Authorities said Henry Pruitt signed off on concealed carry permits even though his students were not adequately trained.

    Some people even got their permit without ever firing a shot.

    That's just one key part of the training that Pruitt is accused of skipping.

    The gun range is the final step in eight hours of training needed to qualify for a concealed carry permit in the commonwealth.

    The course includes classroom instruction with a two-hour video covering legal issues, among other things.

    Pruitt, a Mount Washington native, was charged with providing incomplete training to 93 people. And since he took their money for that training, he was also charged with 93 counts of theft by deception.

    Four of his former students said Pruitt did not take them to the gun range. They are required to shoot 20 times at a target 21 feet away, hitting the target at least 11 times.

    Pauline Tomes was one of the people who didn't make it to the range. She said she didn't know of the requirements, she just wanted to have protection.

    Kentucky State Police Trooper Bruce Reeves said, so far, they have uncovered this happening in Bullitt and Jefferson counties.

    Reeves also said the the people who did not get the complete training will have their licenses revoked.

    Those who had their licenses revoked must pay and go through the training again, but the state will waive $60 in processing fees.

    Police said there might be more people who got ripped off by Pruitt. Last month, he was named in a 30-count indictment.

    He is due to be arraigned on the Jefferson County charges Monday afternoon.
     
  2. gunnails

    gunnails Hillsboro Active Member

    Messages:
    752
    Likes Received:
    210
    The law is the law and what this guy did was wrong.

    I think every state should not require a CHL and allow whom ever is legal to own a gun to carry it when ever and in whatever fashion they want.

    Like Alaska.
     
  3. trainsktg

    trainsktg Portland OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,663
    Likes Received:
    798
    As said above, I don't agree with carry permits in the first place, but the law is the law and this guy obviously broke it.

    Keith
     
  4. chemist

    chemist Beaverton OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,620
    Likes Received:
    644
    The law is the law, alright - and we don't require citizens to have even a passing acquaintance with logic or reason to permit them their First Amendment rights. We don't have to keep our homes locked to be entitled to Fourth Amendment rights. You don't need a familiarity with the law to be entitled to your Fifth Amendment rights....
     
  5. HahnsXD

    HahnsXD Battle Ground WA Active Member

    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    69
    Ridiculous, law or not, the second amendment is very clear. Although what he did was very stupid.
     
  6. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Well I like the fact that people have to show they can use a firearm responsibly before getting a CHL.

    But I think the state should allow them to just take the shooting portion of the class over instead of paying and doing the entire thing over.

    A lot of you think they should just get a permit and I agree to some extent, but it's those idiots that get a permit being incompetent and drawing fire, no pun intended, by people that are against the 2nd amendment.
     
  7. One-Eyed Ross

    One-Eyed Ross Winlock, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,367
    Likes Received:
    752
    Well, sure, let's have a training requirement here in Washington. I know, we'll have a training class every day with a blue moon in Curlew, and charge $2500.00. That's a "reasonable" fee, don't you think? (Yes, I took the idea to the extreme, and for those unaware, a blue moon is the second full moon in a month, which is a rare thing).

    The whole point with "mandatory" training is that the State can, and will (see Washington D.C. and Chicago for examples) make it as difficult and impossible to get as they can. If you want to trust politicians with YOUR rights, go ahead, but please, leave mine alone.
     
  8. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Kentucky has never made it hard to get or carry guns. In fact they are always trying to make the freedom of firearms easier to attain. Kentucky has some of the highest guns sales in the country.
    And you guys from the Lib states want to complain about KY rules and laws. Yeah KY makes you take a class like OR, but with a shooting session. But KY doesn't make it hard to carry your gun, or keep you from carrying in the city, or want to persecute everyone who does.

    But good luck with that, at least you don't have to shoot during a class. How's that supressor law going again?

    States with the most guns - The Daily Beast
     
  9. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Supressor law in WA that is.
     
  10. orygun

    orygun West Linn Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    3,774
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Back in the early ages of "Shall Issue" here in Oregon (1990), we had to demonstrate firearms proficiency. We were required to bring a .22 caliber handgun to the class. You could share a gun with another classmate. I don't remember what the requirement was, but I still have the target. The class I took was held at teh Johnson Creek Gun Club and was very reasonably priced. (cost less than the fees for the permit)
    Now the class is much more about the legality (which is good) but much less about actual hands on with a firearm (which is bad). Not sure when it changed.
     
  11. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    I took my class in OR in 2002 and it was held by an ex-LEO and he basically told us war stories for 45min then asked everyone why they wanted a CHL. Class done. Got nothing out of it other than wasting an hour and spending the money to get a paper card that says I took the class.

    aka. Joke.
     
  12. HahnsXD

    HahnsXD Battle Ground WA Active Member

    Messages:
    382
    Likes Received:
    69
    You should demonstrate that you can speak responsibly before being granted your 1st amendment right.
     
  13. Redcap

    Redcap Lewis County, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    2,731
    Agreed.
     
  14. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Yeah and murderers let out of prison should be able to have guns, child molesters should be able to be teachers and boy scout troop leaders, and suspected terrorist should get to have jobs flying airplanes.
     
  15. Bazooka Joe

    Bazooka Joe Lower Yakima Valley Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    305
    This is not a logical refutation of the arguments preceding. You are implying in the quoted text that when someone has been accused of wrong-doing they should no longer have the right to continue participating in activities related to their wrong doing. But you are using that argument in support of the idea that people who have done no wrong should be precluded from an activity until they can prove that they will do no wrong.
     
  16. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Maybe true.
    But I would rather have someone show their profiency before going out and doing something stupid, then giving an idiot a gun and a license to carry one and then when they F up try to hinder all gun owners.

    You people all make the same dumb argument. You think we should just give everyone rights and not have someone tells us what we can and cannot do. But that's not the world we live in, especially in OR and WA.
    Your argument hold no context in todays times.

    Unfortunately we have to protect our rights by controlling the people without common sense.
    If you refuse to believe that this is the way you will continue to see our rights fail by the hands of people who think we shouldn't have any.
    Unless we're ready for a revolution. But that's not the case.

    But I commend you for fighting "the man"
     
  17. Nwcid

    Nwcid Yakima and N of Spokane Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,593
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Yes they should. Because of those people are really that dangerous WHY are they out on the loose in public in the first place?

    If the crimes people have committed are so bad that we can not "trust" them with life in society why are they in it? Why are they not still in jail or some institution or dead?

    That is the TRUE underlying problem. We make "rules" to follow so that "bad" people can not cause more "problems" the flaw in this logic is that these "bad" people have already PROVEN they don't follow the "rules (law)". Ultimately only people who are not "bad" people, ie willing to follow the laws are effected and those are NOT the people that need to be "stopped" from causing problems...........


    Absolutely that is the difference between a right and a privilege. It is a privilege to drive a car. It is a right to self defense and protection of your family, and a gun is included in that (since this is a gun topic).
     
  18. CavVet

    CavVet Seattle Member

    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    14
    I remember my Grandmothers stories about the poll taxes and literacy tests to try and prevent them from voting.

    My government has proven themselves not nearly trustworthy enough to set standards in return for some license to carry or vote, etc, as they have a proven track record of abusing their powers in the past.

    I grew up with guns, I have carried a concealed pistol most of my life, years before I probably should have, but without issue nonetheless. They can ban it, place any restraint on it they please, I wont dance to poll tax music, especially with self defense.
     
  19. CavVet

    CavVet Seattle Member

    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    14

    I think you may need to read the Declaration of Independence again.

    We dont give anyone rights by our law of the land. My rights are endowed by my Creator.

    The Bill of Rights is not approving of anything for me, instead a restriction of power on the government.
     
  20. clearconscience

    clearconscience Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,593
    Likes Received:
    7,152
    Yeah tell that to Obama, pelosi, and the brady's.

    What you want or are entitled to by your creator doesn't mean anything to the gov't.

    They care nothing about you or your rights.

    And they run this country.

    Sad, but true.
    The constitution is fading away, Sir.