• The content of this course is CRITICAL to any person who carries a gun. Law Enforcement people should ALSO attend so that they can see what the Public sees as their rights to self defense and the situations that arise on the street. Uniform officers have little or no “Civilian”experience with shooting situations while “Out of uniform”. And when they do, they are “Acknowledged as Knowing the law”. (Which may or may not be accurate).

    The main thing is to realize that “The Law is NOT your friend” with respect to Police, District Attorneys, Commonwealth Attorneys, and Judges. When the shooting stops, everyone is a Monday Morning Quarterback. And you need to have a game plan to handle the pundits, press, police and so called public interests.

  • If we are all required to be aware of this information, in order to exercise our 2nd Amendment rights, why should there be a $125 barrier that all citizens must pass in order for the information to be available. Seems we all have a right to this information, doesn’t it?

    • James, until you can convince the Commonwealth government to prepare and provide you and all other citizens with a useful and comprehensible description of the law of self-defense at taxpayer expense (good luck with that), you are stuck paying a private source, for example, us here at NFLI, to assemble and distribute that otherwise inaccessible information. In the information vacuum that currently exists, we make no apologies for offering this important and necessary service at a very reasonable price. If your point is that it is of dubious constitutionality for the Commonwealth’s courts to create such a complex matrix of legal principles, and for you to have to pay a private source to bring you up to speed on them, you are onto something. Unfortunately, complex societies with complex problems (like ours) breed complex laws and legal systems. And for a very long time, the citizenry has put up with the legal information deficit that creates without making sufficient noise about it to motivate meaningful change to the system. It may not be a good way to govern, but it is the one you are currently subject to. So, at bottom, until the system gets reformed/overhauled, if you want to hear the music, you’re gonna have to pay the band. Steve

  • The government has no specific individual duty to protect anyone from anyone or anything. Yet too many erroneously remind us that only government and it’s agents, are the only ones that can and should protect us.

    Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), provides the perfect example to dispel that claim, despite the dozens, if not hundreds of other lower court decisions that have held the same legal opinion for years before the aforementioned 2005 Supreme court opinion.


Comments are closed.