nalanbar changes to js-initial-proposal

[nalanbar]

This adds CCW, and by necessity, a second type of network: specialized.
This catchall covers networks that exist to provide endorsements to
your standard shooter license.

[jonstokes]

This should be based not on master, but on js-initial-proposal. That way I'm only merging your topic branch into my js-initial-proposal branch.

Also, I like this idea of specialized networks, but let's take a step back first, because it adds complexity.

From what I understand on reading this, you want the ability to add another kind of optional network membership that grants extra privileges.

I could see where we may end up with this, in the long run, but in the short term I'd rather just try to keep it simple, and if there are capabilities that shooters should have then they should all go in the same bucket (i.e the regular shooter network).

[jonstokes]

On the topic of concealed carry, here is one thing that I've thought of that I should probably add to my own document.

A particular shooter network may not want to permit members to carry concealed. The reason is that this increases everyone's risk of liability. If members are carrying concealed and they're involved in a defensive gun use (DGU), and that DGU is somehow ruled illegal or not legit, then everyone ends up losing their licenses. It also increases the training requirement, because for effective CCW you need to think about things like recognizing a threat, de-escalation, and other skills.

So I think we should let the networks say to people, "you cannot join if you have a CCW, and if you get a CCW then you lose your membership." This way, non-CCW-friendly networks are available for people who are concerned about cowboy syndrome, and CCW-friendly networks can be created with more stringent training requirements.

To implement this, we'd just need to make a rule that shooter networks can access CCW permit records, and that LEOs are required to notify all shooter networks in when a new CCW is issued.

[nalanbar]

Like I said, still learning git. Sorry!
Defensive gun use has special grey areas, and my concern is that without
some kind of provision for removing at least some responsibility for the
licensing shooter network we could end up with someone who is VERY unlucky
losing their ability to defend themselves if needed. Someone in a high
crime area, perhaps.
I envision specialized networks being larger, with governing bodies, and
very, very strict rules. The reason I want to limit their liability to
cases where negligence is at fault is because I see them endorsing the
licenses from many standard shooter networks. Seems silly to have 100,000
people lose their CCW license because someone was a dummy. The
specialization allows them to provide for more complete training and
services.
We also haven't touched on things like collectors and automatic weapons. We
would need this to be inclusive if it is to be the basis of larger reforms.
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:44 PM Jon Stokes notifications@github.com wrote:

This should be based not on master, but on js-initial-proposal. That way
I'm only merging your topic branch into my js-initial-proposal branch.

Also, I like this idea of specialized networks, but let's take a step back
first, because it adds complexity.

From what I understand on reading this, you want the ability to add
another kind of optional network membership that grants extra privileges.

I could see where we may end up with this, in the long run, but in the
short term I'd rather just try to keep it simple, and if there are
capabilities that shooters should have then they should all go in the same
bucket (i.e the regular shooter network).

—
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#6 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AANBk4hriFW1lF2dk0ioeh6pVT7-2Rbxks5qOIVTgaJpZM4I7Tdt
.

[jonstokes]

Why don't we do this: before we get into a specific proposal for how to address the gaps, let's enumerate them in an issue thread. So, we'd cover special collections, full auto, CCW, and other issues.

Then once we've delineated all the gaps and problems, we can work backwards to the solution (which may well be specialized networks... we should just be clear on the problems we're solving, first).