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

[Pop23]

See folks, there should be training before use of the interwebs

Because it is lethal?

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.

Nope, I’m sure they would have said, as the rest of us are saying.............

WTF?

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

Should a returning soldier who may have PTSD have a gun, how would you know unless he told you of his suffering? Just assume?

Should a rape victim, suffering mental distress, be denied a gun?

I've met soldiers with PTSD. I would not trust some them with a gun. With good reason. As far as the rape victim goes, if she is not the type to shoot first and ask questions later, and passed a basic gun safety course, I see no problem with them owning a gun.

Has it occurred to you at all the incredible arrogance implicit in you sitting there, pronouncing on whether or not YOU would "have a problem with" or trust someone with a gun, just as if you have some inherent right to pass those judgements and demand that other people come to you for them?

 

[Pop23]

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.

Let’s look at this closer and apply it to purchasing a gun.

In the case of a helicopter, one does not need to register or license it in order to buy it. True Story.

In the case of buying a gun. One MUST have a license after passing a background check.

I’m not seeing his point. You?

 

[g5000]

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.

And then what will happen is someone will start a class which costs $50.

 

[ErikViking]

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”.

 

[Pop23]

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.

And then what will happen is someone will start a class which costs $50.

And we can’t ask people to spend that much for a State ID to exercise their right to vote.

Interesting, ain’t it?

 

[Cecilie1200]

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)

See folks, there should be training before use of the interwebs

Because it is lethal?

You are clear evidence that it's making the general population dumber. That's never a safe thing.

 

[Pop23]

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”.

You don’t read well, do you?

 

[Papageorgio]

That would be an infringement

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

Driving is a privilege not a right.

 

[Doc1]

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.

And then what will happen is someone will start a class which costs $50.

If it were allowed to be Market controlled that would happen, what if the Feds mandated costs?

 

[Pop23]

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?

 

[ErikViking]

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)

See folks, there should be training before use of the interwebs

Because it is lethal?

You are clear evidence that it's making the general population dumber. That's never a safe thing.

I would most certainly agree with the last sentence.

Luckily the average citizen has been able to recognize changes in the society over the last 300 years, so there is some hope.

 

[Cecilie1200]

See folks, there should be training before use of the interwebs

Because it is lethal?

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.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Let’s look at this closer and apply it to purchasing a gun.

In the case of a helicopter, one does not need to register or license it in order to buy it. True Story.

In the case of buying a gun. One MUST have a license after passing a background check.

I’m not seeing his point. You?

Sure. It's clearly visible on the top of his head. You only THOUGHT that was a dunce cap.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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”.

Really? You really need me to explain to you why some things are inherent human rights, and other things aren't? If you don't even have THAT rudimentary knowledge, you have no business trying to participate in this discussion, and should stop interrupting the grown-ups.

No, it has nothing to do with what did or didn't exist at the time. Basic rights transcend details of technology.

"We" haven't used guns to blow kids, or anyone else, to pieces. I have no idea about YOU, but I'm wondering if the FBI doesn't want to pay a visit to your trailer.

 

[ErikViking]

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?

Oh, how could any one forget the school shooting scenes from Little House...

Or how kids went to school with cannons hidden in their black coats to take revenge on their bullying schoolmates.

Nothing’s changed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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)

See folks, there should be training before use of the interwebs

Because it is lethal?

You are clear evidence that it's making the general population dumber. That's never a safe thing.

I would most certainly agree with the last sentence.

Luckily the average citizen has been able to recognize changes in the society over the last 300 years, so there is some hope.

Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that the reason you're agreeing with my last sentence is because you completely misunderstood it?

 

[ErikViking]

Because it is lethal?

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?

 

[tycho1572]

I wouldn’t have a problem with being required to take a gun safety course before purchasing a firearm.