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

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.

Who gives you that training certificate? Who sets the standards you have to meet? My God, man! Wake the fuck up!

 

[rightwinger]

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!

If you log in to USMB early in the morning, you can buy a Chinese degree from the university of your choice

 

[ErikViking]

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!

I don’t know - it would depend on your line of education, wouldn’t it?

 

[whitehall]

Who gets to certify the "mandatory training"? Would an 80 year old person in a crime infested area have to shell out $100 or $200 or even $500 for "training" when they could figure out how to load and aim a shotgun or a .22 in five minutes?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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?

Yes, we do. We are trying to figure out how to clean up the gene pool by eliminating dumbasses.

 

[Kondor3]

[ ...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?

Yep.

Commodity-caliber context-specific training.

Gotta pass the Rules-of-the-Road -type written exam to get ANY kind of firearms license.

Gotta take one Rules-of-the-Road -type refresher class and subsequent exam once every 6 or 8 or 10 years.

Gotta take specialized training for specific categories of weapons...

For the basics...

Pistols 101...

Rifles and Shotguns 101...

< basic background check and periodic updates re: criminal convictions and specific mental health diagnoses or treatments or hospitalizations >​

For more sophisticated stuff...

High-rate-of-fire Weapons 201

High-rate-of-fire Weapons 202​

< deep background check, more hoops to jump through, more frequent renewals and auditing >
​

Every firearm is centrally registered...

Every transaction ( sale, gift, inheritance, etc. ) is centrally vetted by AI and approved or rejected; with an ability to appeal.

Upon felony conviction, advent of dangerous mental health condition, or indictment for crimes of violence, you lose your guns.

With full compensation or pre-approved transfer to a recipient of your choice, or temporary storage before resorting to such a process.

If you're indicted, and you're cleared, you get 'em back, and the interim seizure and storage are expunged.

 

[ErikViking]

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?

Yes, we do. We are trying to figure out how to clean up the gene pool by eliminating dumbasses.

Never mind, I just recalled where that was put into practice.

 

[RWNJ]

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.

People should be allowed to own any non military firearm. I don't believe in any other restrictions...Other than knowing how to use them safely. Are you saying that gun safety classes should not be required? Do you honestly believe that anyone should be allowed to own a firearm, even if they are a danger to themselves and others? Is that what you want?

I had a 12 ga. shotgun when I was in the Navy. That makes it a military firearm. Are you sure you want to go there? Dumbass!

A shotgun is not a military weapon, dumbass!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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!

I don’t know - it would depend on your line of education, wouldn’t it?

How about my daughter who has a degree in biology and is an Army officer. Can she prescribe meds for her soldiers?

 

[Zander]

Should people be forced to pass a civics test before voting?

 

[Kondor3]

Who gets to certify the "mandatory training"? Would an 80 year old person in a crime infested area have to shell out $100 or $200 or even $500 for "training" when they could figure out how to load and aim a shotgun or a .22 in five minutes?

The price to be paid for necessary Firearms Control.

If someone applies for and is granted a hardship waiver, they get the training for free.

 

[2aguy]

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.

No...it is absolutely a gun Rights issue......the Europeans use training requirements....extreme requirements to keep people from even attempting to own guns....

Is a thousand pages of rules, regulations and other requirements the kind of safety training you want? If you allow this...then the anti gunners will increase training requirements to the point that only the rich and conected will be able to own guns...

Getting a gun legally in Europe may be hard, but terrorists have little trouble

In contrast with the free-firing United States, Europe is generally seen as a haven from serious gun violence. Here in Denmark, handguns and semiautomatic rifles are all but banned. Hunting rifles are legally available only to those with squeaky-clean backgrounds who have passed a rigorous exam covering everything from gun safety to the mating habits of Denmark’s wildlife.

“There’s a book about 1,000 pages thick,” said Tonni Rigby, one of only two licensed firearms dealers in Copenhagen. “You have to know all of it.”


But if you want an illicit assault rifle, such as the one used by a 22-year-old to rake a Copenhagen cafe with 28 bullets on Saturday, all it takes are a few connections and some cash.

“It’s very easy to get such a weapon,” said Hans Jorgen Bonnichsen, a former operations director for the Danish security service PET. “It’s not only a problem for Denmark. It’s a problem for all of Europe.”

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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?

Yes, we do. We are trying to figure out how to clean up the gene pool by eliminating dumbasses.

Never mind, I just recalled where that was put into practice.

Congratulations! Maybe the dumbass shell is beginning to crack!

 

[Kondor3]

Should people be forced to pass a civics test before voting?

Generally speaking, you walking in-and-out of a voting booth does not take human life.

Besides... if you want to graduate school, you're stuck taking a Constitution Test anyway, right?

 

[ErikViking]

[ ...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?

Yep.

Commodity-caliber context-specific training.

Gotta pass the Rules-of-the-Road -type written exam to get ANY kind of firearms license.

Gotta take one Rules-of-the-Road -type refresher class and subsequent exam once every 6 or 8 or 10 years.

Gotta take specialized training for specific categories of weapons...

For the basics...

Pistols 101...

Rifles and Shotguns 101...

< basic background check and periodic updates re: criminal convictions and specific mental health diagnoses or treatments or hospitalizations >​

For more sophisticated stuff...

High-rate-of-fire Weapons 201

High-rate-of-fire Weapons 202​

< deep background check, more hoops to jump through, more frequent renewals and auditing >
​

Every firearms is centrally registered...

Every transaction ( sale, gift, inheritance, etc. ) is centrally vetted by AI and approved or rejected; with an ability to appeal.

Upon felony conviction, advent of dangerous mental health condition, or indictment for crimes of violence, you lose your guns.

With full compensation or pre-approved transfer to a recipient of your choice, or temporary storage before resorting to such a process.

If you're indicted, and you're cleared, you get 'em back, and the interim seizure and storage are expunged.

Well, all right, that sound a bit too complicated...

 

[2aguy]

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.

God help me, but I agree with you.

Yes...you agree with infringing on the Right to own and carry a gun...this is what you already believe, not a surprise...

 

[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.

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

I've already said this once today but don't be stupider than you have to be.

 

[2aguy]

Who gets to certify the "mandatory training"? Would an 80 year old person in a crime infested area have to shell out $100 or $200 or even $500 for "training" when they could figure out how to load and aim a shotgun or a .22 in five minutes?

The price to be paid for necessary Firearms Control.

If someone applies for and is granted a hardship waiver, they get the training for free.

we have plenty of firearm control...what we need is democrat control...they are the ones constantly releasing violent gun criminal from jail..the ones doing the killing...and then they use the criminals they let out of jail who murder people as the excuse to demand more gun control.....

 

[ErikViking]

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!

I don’t know - it would depend on your line of education, wouldn’t it?

How about my daughter who has a degree in biology and is an Army officer. Can she prescribe meds for her soldiers?

Perhaps if you tell her that you are sorry and that you really would like to be a better father you could ask her yourself?

 

[2aguy]

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.

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.

You have the same stance on voter ID ?

You can get voter I.D. for free....... and you can't be barred from voting .... a training requirement takes time, money and in Europe they use it to keep the poor and middle class from owning guns.