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

[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.

What will happen is places will make the class cost $400 and make you wait 2-3 months to take it after scheduling said class.

You simply can't trust a gun control nut.

Sounds reasonable to me. If the class costs that much, there will be plenty of certified teachers to teach the class. I see that you do not trust capitalism. That is capitalisms glory, the ability to fill a profitable void quickly.

 

[ErikViking]

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.

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.

I’m still using the drivers license as a parallel. If it was a crime to be running around with a gun without proper training people would be sent to jail for that crime. Before they managed to accidentally shoot someone.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Show me in the Bill of Rights where it says the government cannot infringe upon your right to drive a car.

I can show in the Bill of Rights where it says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infirnged.

Do you understand the difference? Probably not.

Would you allow someone who is mentally retarded to own a gun? Would you allow a blind person to own a gun? Would you allow someone with anger management issues, who drinks too much, to own a gun? If not, you are infringing their rights. BTW, I'm still waiting to hear how requiring a free class on gun safety is an infringement on the 2nd amendment.

I know at least one retarded individual that is not only responsible, but a very good shot. Should he be even more vulnerable to criminals than anybody else?

There are also many who cannot function on his level. Should they have a gun?

Back to the difference between "this is a good idea" and "therefore, the government must be the one to handle it".

Who said anything about the government handling it? It could be handled at the state level, or even locally. All we need is a law stating that one be required to take a course on gun safety. You get a certificate to show when you purchase your gun. I find it amazing that anyone would have a problem with this.

Any government control is an infringement, dumbass!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I didnt call it a poll tax. I said it would be basically doing the same thing.

Right, you're still wrong.

I don't think the government would be performing the training so you'd have to go to a local gun range, or perhaps the NRA can train you, often these classes are free/cheap. A private business would make the profit, not the government.

This is nothing "like" a poll tax that people of color were subjected to you poor, poor victim.

1. You can own a gun, as long as you have training

2. You can vote as long as you have the funds to pay a tax

3. You can marry as long as you marry members of the opposite sex

Hmmmmmmmm

You can drive a car as long as you are licensed and insured?

Poll taxes are unconstitutional, believe it or not your third point is well...pointless since very few people care who you marry.

Has nothing to do with require firearms training to buy a gun which considering gun control laws in the past or currently in the books wouldn't appear to be unconstitutional at all.

I drive two regularly, neither are insured and my license is not required. Are you really that stupid you can’t read my post?

What's the matter, they don't let you off the funny farm?

Poll taxes are known as a hindering a right. There must be, according to the Supreme Court NO HINDERING ACCESS TO A RIGHT

It;s not a poll tax, I disagree with the premise.

That's because you are a dumbass! You disagree with what you don't understand.

 

[Kondor3]

...Any government control is an infringement, dumbass!

Regulating the Militia, well, is not an infringement, it is a Constitutional requirement.

And here we are dealing with the weaponry of the Militia As A Whole - the citizenry of the Republic.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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?

Minority Report is your favorite movie of all time, isn't it? Dumbass!

 

[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

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


.

All ya gotta do is put bullets in and pull the trigger ...how hard is that?

Who needs training?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That is what makes you an asshole. The Bill of Rights 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?

Let's execute you for being a menace to the average IQ level. Surely getting you out of the gene pool would get us back to 100.

Can’t hardly remember the last time someone suggested eugenics.

That's even further proof that you are simply a dumbass.

 

[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.

Walking?
That would get me from A to B? Yeah right. It would take me at least two days. An hour or two by car.

Cars aren’t regulated - it’s just a question about proper training.

 

[rightwinger]

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.

The Bill of Rights requires training

How else do we regulate our militias?

 

[RWNJ]

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

Driving isn't a right, it's a privilege

Must be nice, living in a world that is black and white. All I'm saying is that a gun owner should be able to demonstrate minimum competency with a firearm before owning one. Otherwise, they are a danger to themselves as well as others. These gun safety classes are free. It doesn't cost anything. Simply go to a local gun range, take the class, and get a certificate. How is that any kind of infringement on the 2nd amendment?

Is gun ownership a right? Is driving a right? You just didn't like my answer and yes it's black and white. You cannot infringe on the right to bear arms

Would you give a gun to a small child? No. You wouldn't. Isn't that an infringement on the 2nd amendment? By your reasoning it is. Also, by my reasoning, it is not an infringement to require someone to demonstrate a minimum proficiency and knowledge of gun safety before owning one. I'm not talking about a government agency determining whether you can own a gun or not. This can be done on a local basis. Like I said. Pass a gun safety course and get your gun. If you cannot pass such a test, and it's not difficult to do so, then you should not own a firearm. You call it infringement. I call it public safety. BTW, look up the FBI statistics for accidental shootings. Might change your mind. Every one of those shootings was preventable.

If that is true, who would enforce this requirement, if not a government agency?

Dumbass!

We wouldn't need government enforcement. Get your training certificate and take it to a gun shop. Local law enforcement can police the gun sellers, and that would be strictly limited to making sure they do not sell to anyone who has not had a gun safety course.

 

[ErikViking]

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?

We only require a college degree. I wasn’t thinking the gun education to be that extensive, more in the line of... well a drivers license?

 

[RWNJ]

All right. Listen up, you clowns. The choice is between letting anyone buy a gun, and having a minimal requirement of taking a free gun safety class. That's it. Do you really want unqualified people running around with deadly weapons?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

Now you have done it! Liberals will be out in force on election day trying to vote themselves or someone else in the head.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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?

We only require a college degree. I wasn’t thinking the gun education to be that extensive, more in the line of... well a drivers license?

I have two college degrees. Does that mean I can prescribe medication? Dumbass!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

All right. Listen up, you clowns. The choice is between letting anyone buy a gun, and having a minimal requirement of taking a free gun safety class. That's it. Do you really want unqualified people running around with deadly weapons?

That's the way we have always done it around here.

 

[ErikViking]

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.

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?

Minority Report is your favorite movie of all time, isn't it? Dumbass!

I’m still using the drivers license as a parallel. If it was a crime to be running around with a gun without proper training people would be sent to jail for that crime. Before they managed to accidentally shoot someone.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

Walking?
That would get me from A to B? Yeah right. It would take me at least two days. An hour or two by car.

Cars aren’t regulated - it’s just a question about proper training.

Cars aren't regulated?

Wow! What a dumbass you are!

 

[ErikViking]

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?

Let's execute you for being a menace to the average IQ level. Surely getting you out of the gene pool would get us back to 100.

Can’t hardly remember the last time someone suggested eugenics.

That's even further proof that you are simply a dumbass.

Oh, you say smart people discus eugenics on a regular basis?

 

[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.

Walking?
That would get me from A to B? Yeah right. It would take me at least two days. An hour or two by car.

Cars aren’t regulated - it’s just a question about proper training.

Cars aren't regulated?

Wow! What a dumbass you are!

How is car purchase regulated?