Should there be mandatory training before you can purchase a firearm?

[rightwinger]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

I think that a "one time" basic safety class or proof of military service, in conjunction with the purchase of a firearm would be sufficient. Such a class should be limited to: the proper handling of your choice of firearm, ensuring the weapon is unloaded when cleaning the weapon, its safe and secure storage when children are present in the home and not actively involved in learning gun safety by the gun's owner, the state and local ordinances regarding your weapon and one hour range time with a rented firearm from the range. Any additional time is on your own, but once a month is recommended, but not mandatory. The price of the safety class should fall on the purchaser and not be cost prohibitive.

Again, a solution seeking a problem.

The vast majority of gun deaths are gang bangers ir drug dealers. You think they will care? Really?

A majority of the rest is from suicide. You think training them will change anything?

The remaining few are statistically insignificant. So there really is no problem except for sensationalism

I also am aware that 2/3 of gun deaths are related to suicides and that criminal gangs and an assortment of various criminals make up most of the others, however, I see nothing wrong with a one time safety class. There are people out there that buy a handgun, put some bullets in it, set it on a night stand or on a shelf in the closet and may or may not have kids in the house and think that "now" they are safe. You don't just buy a car and hop out onto the road. You go through a driving school or are taught by your family, then take a test. Again, no harm in a one time safety class.

Many states require training for a hunting license

If you are shooting in a public area, some safety training can prevent a tragedy

Most gun owners take safety very, very seriously. But the careless few can cause trouble

 

[rightwinger]

There are no qualifications in the Constitution to the individual right to keep and bear arms.

It says so right in the Bill of Rights. It says that because it is necessary for the security of a free state the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Stupid Moon Bats have a hard time understanding what the words "shall not be infringed" means. They think it means that the right can be infringed, the stupid shithheads.

If you have tests and background checks administered by the filthy ass corrupt government before you get a right then it is really not a right, is it?

By your own reasoning, A blind person should be allowed to get a drivers license. Would you want a blind person to own a gun?

How much of a stretch is it for a blind person to own a gun from someone severely mentally ill owning one. Trump gave his blessing to the latter.

Exactly why is it that you think being blind invalidates someone's rights?

OK...that one is funny

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry but the only permission I need to own a firearm is in the Bill of Rights. Nothing about having to meet some stupid bureaucrat's idea of if I am worthy or not.

That's what makes you a gun nut. Safety of others means nothing to you

That is what makes you an asshole. The Bill of Rights means nothing to you.

Sorry but the only permission I need to own a firearm is in the Bill of Rights. Nothing about having to meet some stupid bureaucrat's idea of if I am worthy or not.

That's what makes you a gun nut. Safety of others means nothing to you

That is what makes you an asshole. The Bill of Rights means nothing to you.

Would you want a gun owner, who knows nothing about gun safety, living next door?

Who cares?

When they are negligent and shoot someone, they will go to jail!

What if they went to jail before they accidentally shoots you? Wouldn’t that be even better?

Unfortunately, we don't send people to jail for crimes they haven't committed yet. You should stop watching Tom Cruise movies and get some fresh air.

 

[Crepitus]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

Would they be willing to remove some of the current restrictions on the types of guns and accessories in exchange for the training? My guess is no, they would want more restrictions plus the training.

What restrictions? There really aren't any.

 

[Crepitus]

All our rights have reasonable limits .

Shall not be infringed....the Founders were explicit on that

a well regulated militia.

yep they were.

The amendment does not say that a militia has the right to keep and bear arms, however. It says the people do. Basically it is a compound sentence in which because the first part is true (a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state), the second part is true (the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed). It does not specify that the militia is a requirement for someone to have the right to bear arms.

Creative parsing.

So why are they mentioned in the same sentence then?

 

[Crepitus]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

I have no problem with training. The NRA offers a fabulous set of training videos on DVD. Make an expert out of you. But as guns are a god-given right, so should be the training. Every American by dint of his tax dollars should have a portion of that go into government-paid guns and training. You should get tax credits for added training. Kids ought to get college credit for gun training. Time to put down their idiot-cellphones and start learning firearm skills and discipline. Time to build a stronger, safer, better-prepared America with disciplined, moral, responsible people again instead of all of the sick, pathetic, weenie psychos the Left has produced!

Lol, guns are a god given right?

What planet are you from anyway?

 

[Kondor3]

Mandatory training on any firearm being transferred into one's possession? ( sale, gift, inheritance, whatever )...

Yes.

Absolutely.

Time to put Gun Ownership on a par with Drivers Licenses.

Different categories of license for different categories of vehicles... ditto for firearms.

Different levels of training for different categories of vehicles... ditto for firearms.

But mandate it on the Federal level; leave it to the States to execute (or face denial of Federal funding); with the Feds auditing & monitoring.

The States have had far too long to get it right, and they haven't; besides, America needs consistency from one jurisdiction to another.

 

[Lakhota]

Should there be mandatory training before you can purchase a firearm?

Yes - including mental and education tests.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Question. Do you believe that someone who has never used a firearm should be allowed to purchase one without any kind of training? If you do, then you are a fool. Guns are dangerous in the hands of the incompetent. A short class on gun safety does not infringe the rights of anyone.

The internet is dangerous in the hands of the incompetent. Sign off immediately!

 

[OKTexas]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

I think that a "one time" basic safety class or proof of military service, in conjunction with the purchase of a firearm would be sufficient. Such a class should be limited to: the proper handling of your choice of firearm, ensuring the weapon is unloaded when cleaning the weapon, its safe and secure storage when children are present in the home and not actively involved in learning gun safety by the gun's owner, the state and local ordinances regarding your weapon and one hour range time with a rented firearm from the range. Any additional time is on your own, but once a month is recommended, but not mandatory. The price of the safety class should fall on the purchaser and not be cost prohibitive.

Again, a solution seeking a problem.

The vast majority of gun deaths are gang bangers ir drug dealers. You think they will care? Really?

A majority of the rest is from suicide. You think training them will change anything?

The remaining few are statistically insignificant. So there really is no problem except for sensationalism

I also am aware that 2/3 of gun deaths are related to suicides and that criminal gangs and an assortment of various criminals make up most of the others, however, I see nothing wrong with a one time safety class. There are people out there that buy a handgun, put some bullets in it, set it on a night stand or on a shelf in the closet and may or may not have kids in the house and think that "now" they are safe. You don't just buy a car and hop out onto the road. You go through a driving school or are taught by your family, then take a test. Again, no harm in a one time safety class.

Many states require training for a hunting license

If you are shooting in a public area, some safety training can prevent a tragedy

Most gun owners take safety very, very seriously. But the careless few can cause trouble

And a training class won't change that. Careless people are, well, careless.


.

 

[westwall]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

I too am totally a 2nd Amendment supporter, but there are some people who truly are too stupid to own guns. They just are. No amount of training will ever make them safe with them. I think if there is a training "requirement" there needs to be a benefit that go's with it. Like a nation wide CCW, or immunity from lawsuits if you are forced to use your firearm in defense of self.

 

[Crepitus]

Lets mandate education before you vote.

As soon as the first uneducated voter accidentally votes himself or someone else in the head we will get right on it.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Founding fuckers had no problem infringing the right to fly a helicopter. (Unless it’s armed, then it would be considered a weapon, perfectly in order to use without any restrictions)

That's because there's no such thing as a "right to fly a helicopter", Mensa Boy.

And why is that? How come?
How come that we decided to require some sort of training to get to use helicopters, cars and airplanes?

Is it perhaps because they weren’t around at the time? No one could foresee this?

Well, perhaps - just maybe - if the founding fathers knew we would use guns to blow kids to pieces they would actually have entered “but you DO need some training first”.

Guns couldn’t blow kids up in 1776?

Ok, now your just stupid. You realize you could own a canon back then, right? Were the founding fathers unaware of that as well?

No only that, but you could own cannons too!

 

[Flash]

Mandatory training on any firearm being transferred into one's possession? ( sale, gift, inheritance, whatever )...

Yes.

Absolutely.

Time to put Gun Ownership on a par with Drivers Licenses.

Different categories of license for different categories of vehicles... ditto for firearms.

Different levels of training for different categories of vehicles... ditto for firearms.

But mandate it on the Federal level; leave it to the States to execute (or face denial of Federal funding); with the Feds auditing & monitoring.

The States have had far too long to get it right, and they haven't; besides, America needs consistency from one jurisdiction to another.

No Moon Bat you are confused.

It is time to adhere to the Bill of Rights. Fuck gun control.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Neither are guns.

What’s the point?

You said use of internet should require training, I guess you won’t object to the same principle regarding guns. We’re on the same page.

Just for you. I want to simply restrict your right. Everyone else is doing just fine.

Oh. I guess the founding corpses didn’t know I was coming along. Either.

Maybe they just figured we wouldn't allow droolers like you to run around loose, pretending to be competent adults.

And where they right?

Try that sentence again after you learn to write!

 

[ErikViking]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

Why, I bought a gun and shells when I was 11 years old, already knew how to use it, got my own later that month. Already had my drivers license when I took drivers ED, just did it for the insurance credit. Driving isn't a constitutional right.


.

Why isn’t driving a constitutional right? Why is it that we aren’t free to move from point A to point B freely?

You are. There's a difference between the right to move around, and the non-existent right to a specific means of doing so.

Alright, that’s just semantics -

You said use of internet should require training, I guess you won’t object to the same principle regarding guns. We’re on the same page.

Just for you. I want to simply restrict your right. Everyone else is doing just fine.

Oh. I guess the founding corpses didn’t know I was coming along. Either.

Maybe they just figured we wouldn't allow droolers like you to run around loose, pretending to be competent adults.

And where they right?

Try that sentence again after you learn to write!

“and were they right?”

 

[Old Rocks]

Think about it. This is not a gun rights issue. It all about safety. Would you really want your neighbor having a gun and no clue how to use it safely, or even hit what he's aiming at? We require drivers to take a driving test and get a license. Why should guns be any different?

BTW, I am totally pro 2nd amendment. I just want the ones who own those guns to know what they are doing.

I absolutely agree with that. I grew up in a home where everyone hunted. It was part of one's income. Our gun training started at a very early age. You simply did not touch or play with a gun in the house, or anywhere else. All guns were to be regarded as loaded, even with the action opened. To treat them otherwise brought instant punishment. I have been a gun owner for over 60 years, long guns and hand guns. Every time I read about a gun 'accident', I find that someone was criminally negligent. But almost never does the law actually punish the miscreants.

An auto is almost a necessity in today's environment, but, for most, a gun is not. To require mandatory standards of proven competence of an auto but not a firearm is ridiculous.

 

[Kondor3]

...No Moon Bat you are confused. It is time to adhere to the Bill of Rights. Fuck gun control.

Thank you for your insightful feedback, Princess; however, mandatory training is coming, and sooner than you think.

When it DOES come, you will obey the laws of the United States, just like everybody else; piss-and-moan all you like.

 

[Crepitus]

That would be an infringement

Would you consider it an infringement to require a driving test before you can operate a vehicle?

An infringement of what? Driving isn't a right.

Furthermore, you don't require a license to operate a vehicle. You require a license to operate one ON PUBLIC ROADS. And most places still require a permit to carry a weapon in public places, so there you go.

It’s really easier then that C.

You are not required to have a license unless you drive a car on a tax payer funded highway.

So, if we take this to it’s logical conclusion, only those using a gun at a tax payer funded shooting range must have a license.

Until you take it outta your house onto the taxpayer funded sidewalk.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Question. Do you believe that someone who has never used a firearm should be allowed to purchase one without any kind of training? If you do, then you are a fool. Guns are dangerous in the hands of the incompetent. A short class on gun safety does not infringe the rights of anyone.

You can buy a car without any training. They are dangerous. They Kill.

What’s you point exactly? Saying someone is a fool is not an answer.

Do I think? Yes. You?

So, do you think anyone should be allowed to buy a gun? Even if doing so would make them a danger to others? We're talking about a short gun safety class here. That's all. How could anyone have a problem with this? It doesn't even need to be a graded test. Just show them how to safely use it.

Dude, you are looking for a solution to a non existent problem.

Most gun deaths are the result of:

A. Criminal activity. And if you think criminals give a rip about laws, then I can’t help ya Son.

B. Suicide. If someone is hellbent on killing themselves, you think that training will stop them? Really?

C. The rest have almost zero statistical relevance. And even with these, you would save only a insignificant number that it’s nearly zero.

Thanks

So, you're saying my sisters death is not statistically relevant? It's relevant to me. It's relevant to her mother, her father, her brother and sisters, aunts and uncles, cousins. The simple fact is that hundreds of people die each year due to carelessness with guns. Proper training would reduce that number. If it saved just a single life, it would be worth it. It might have saved my sisters life.

I ask, again. Why would anyone have a problem with demonstrating basic safety and competency, before buying a firearm?

So we don't require doctors to demonstrate basic safety and competency but how many people do they kill by making errors in medication?