Why 2nd Amendment supporters who support mandatory training are wrong….

[Unkotare]

Driving is not a Constitutional right, is it?

Just a question.

 

[Blues Man]

Be unreasonable but be sure not to complain when you get unreasonable in return.

Owning a firearm is not unreasonable. But you and your ilk want to hold people who have not committed any crimes responsible for the bad acts of others.

 

[martybegan]

Are Driver's licenses harder to get in Michigan than Ohio?

You've nothing but paranoia and ignorance driving your opinion.

Are you saying you want to make getting a CC permit as easy as getting a driver's license?

 

[Dadoalex]

Owning a firearm is not unreasonable. But you and your ilk want to hold people who have not committed any crimes responsible for the bad acts of others.

Your unreasonable opposition to reasonable gun control means you ARE responsible for the bad acts of others.

Want a firearm for your home, I'm ll for it.
Want to carry a concealed firearm after training, cool.
But
Want to strap 4 guns to your waist and parade around wal Mart threatening everyone who sees you?
Want to own a dozen AR and another dozen Glocks?

Then be prepared to the blowback.
Reason is met with reason.
Extremism will be met with extremism.

It really is that simple.

 

[Dadoalex]

Are you saying you want to make getting a CC permit as easy as getting a driver's license?

Apparently you're in the middle of an LSD trip.

So, when you wake up...

No. I want the standards the same for every state.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your unreasonable opposition to reasonable gun control

Gun control which violates the constitution is not reasonable.
It really is that simple.

means you ARE responsible for the bad acts of others.

Mindless nonsense.
It really is that simple.

 

[Foxfyre]

You have freedom of Religion, but you can’t sacrifice Virgins at midnight and claim Religious Freedom.
Before you can open a church, or attend that church you will have to pass a government created test that shows the government that you know the tenets of your religion to the satisfaction of the government.....
You have the right to peaceably assemble. But the jurisdiction you are at may require you to take certain precautions and get enough Porta Johns to maintain sanitation in the crowd.
You have the Right to assemble but first you must pass a test showing you know all of the municiple codes related to assembling in public....



Yes...you have the Right to an attorney but first you must pass a test on the history and related laws that give you that Right to make sure you understand the Right.....

This is why what you are saying is dumb......

You gave me something to think about. I was one who thought general basic instruction in hand gun safety was not unreasonable for a concealed carry permit. But given how unethical and politically manipulative the Democrats have become in their interpretation and application of law you may be right. They would make a safety test so unreasonable most could never hope to pass it.

At the same time I do believe in the interest of public safety it is not unreasonable to have some instruction in proper handling of all firearms. Perhaps a required high school course or, if the student didn't want to give up other courses for that, the students could take the excellent NRA gun safety course and receive high school credit upon completion?

 

[martybegan]

Apparently you're in the middle of an LSD trip.

So, when you wake up...

No. I want the standards the same for every state.

You want the standards to be like NYC, which is basically lets make it so hard to get any type of permit people give up.

Stop lying.

 

[M14 Shooter]

You want the standards to be like NYC, which is basically lets make it so hard to get any type of permit people give up.
Stop lying.

If they thought they could do so w/o getting their asses handed to them in the next election, they would federalize California's gun laws.
In a second.

 

[SavannahMann]

Gun control which violates the constitution is not reasonable.
It really is that simple.

Mindless nonsense.
It really is that simple.

Why is it not a violation of the First Amendment to require a permit to hold an event? The First Amendment says you may peaceably Assemble. But the Supreme Court has upheld the requirement for permits and minimum standards. Security. Sanitation. And the rest.

The Constitution does not set those limits. Yet the Courts have upheld these limits as Constitutional.

Limits on free speech are well established. Limits on Freedom of the Press are also well established. Why is it illegal to Libel or Slander? Isn’t that free speech?

Why is it only the Second where any restrictions are intolerable?

 

[Grau]

Your unreasonable opposition to reasonable gun control means you ARE responsible for the bad acts of others.

Want a firearm for your home, I'm ll for it.
Want to carry a concealed firearm after training, cool.
But
Want to strap 4 guns to your waist and parade around wal Mart threatening everyone who sees you?
Want to own a dozen AR and another dozen Glocks?

Then be prepared to the blowback.
Reason is met with reason.
Extremism will be met with extremism.

It really is that simple.

We already have thousands of reasonable gun control laws but I hope you'll agree that criminals, by definition, do not obey laws.

What are some new laws you have in mind?

Thanks,

 

[Grau]

Why is it not a violation of the First Amendment to require a permit to hold an event? The First Amendment says you may peaceably Assemble. But the Supreme Court has upheld the requirement for permits and minimum standards. Security. Sanitation. And the rest.

The Constitution does not set those limits. Yet the Courts have upheld these limits as Constitutional.

Limits on free speech are well established. Limits on Freedom of the Press are also well established. Why is it illegal to Libel or Slander? Isn’t that free speech?

Why is it only the Second where any restrictions are intolerable?

If you have bought a firearm recently, you must have encountered several existing restrictions on guns.

Have you ever tried to buy a gun before?

Thanks,

 

[2aguy]

You gave me something to think about. I was one who thought general basic instruction in hand gun safety was not unreasonable for a concealed carry permit. But given how unethical and politically manipulative the Democrats have become in their interpretation and application of law you may be right. They would make a safety test so unreasonable most could never hope to pass it.

At the same time I do believe in the interest of public safety it is not unreasonable to have some instruction in proper handling of all firearms. Perhaps a required high school course or, if the student didn't want to give up other courses for that, the students could take the excellent NRA gun safety course and receive high school credit upon completion?

They can put out public safety adds about getting training if you carry a gun......PSAs would be fine...but mandatory training? No.

 

[SavannahMann]

If you have bought a firearm recently, you must have encountered several existing restrictions on guns.

Have you ever tried to buy a gun before?

Thanks,

I own several. The last time I filled out a form, handed over my CCW credential, and watched as the guy behind the counter copied the card and attached it to the form. He entered the card number on the form as authorization number. I walked out with my purchase five minutes later.

It was about as difficult as getting a fishing license. And far less complicated than getting a hunting license and a tag for a game animal. For that I had to attend a class for Hunter safety.

Why is it unreasonable to expect the person who wishes to carry in public to attend a similar class as the Hunters attend?

And for Range Standards I suggested 25 yards, two hits out of three shots in the target. Slow fire and not timed.

 

[2aguy]

Why is it not a violation of the First Amendment to require a permit to hold an event? The First Amendment says you may peaceably Assemble. But the Supreme Court has upheld the requirement for permits and minimum standards. Security. Sanitation. And the rest.

The Constitution does not set those limits. Yet the Courts have upheld these limits as Constitutional.

Limits on free speech are well established. Limits on Freedom of the Press are also well established. Why is it illegal to Libel or Slander? Isn’t that free speech?

Why is it only the Second where any restrictions are intolerable?

Because holding an event on public land simply becomes a matter of access for multiple parties at the same time.....the permit simply points out that at that point in time, you are the party that can use the public space....there is no tax, there is no test.....if you require police protection, traffice diversion....then you pay a fee to cover those costs.....but it is not a test on the municipal code before you are allowed to get the permit.

Carrying a gun hurts no one.....as someone else pointed out, we have laws about when you can fire the gun.....that is all the limitation we need.

As I have shown with the mandatory training in New Jersey, the requirements are excessive and arbitrary and solely intended to prevent people from exercising their Right......that is unConstitutional.

 

[2aguy]

I own several. The last time I filled out a form, handed over my CCW credential, and watched as the guy behind the counter copied the card and attached it to the form. He entered the card number on the form as authorization number. I walked out with my purchase five minutes later.

It was about as difficult as getting a fishing license. And far less complicated than getting a hunting license and a tag for a game animal. For that I had to attend a class for Hunter safety.

Why is it unreasonable to expect the person who wishes to carry in public to attend a similar class as the Hunters attend?

And for Range Standards I suggested 25 yards, two hits out of three shots in the target. Slow fire and not timed.

75 feet is way beyond what is considered legal self defense distance...if you are engaging someone that far out, you are more than likely going to be arrested.

 

[Unkotare]

75 feet is way beyond what is considered legal self defense distance...if you are engaging someone that far out, you are more than likely going to be arrested.

And more than likely going to miss.

 

[Foxfyre]

They can put out public safety adds about getting training if you carry a gun......PSAs would be fine...but mandatory training? No.

I am not saying there should be mandatory training. I am saying there should be mandatory safety education as would be the case in getting most other licenses. A high school or NRA (or any other certified org) class in gun safety would do it. And would not be unreasonable as all students would take the course and the Democrats would have to make it passable by pretty much everybody.

It may seem intuitive to us that reasonable safety means you always assume a gun is loaded, you don't point even an empty firearm at any living thing, be certain of what you are shooting at before you shoot, keep firearms away from small children, etc. But many who have never been taught don't think about such things until it is too late. And too many might never see or hear a PSA.

The PSAs could be good reminders of the safety rules and could suggest that firearm owners get training in how to use them competently and safely.

 

[Blues Man]

Your unreasonable opposition to reasonable gun control means you ARE responsible for the bad acts of others.

Want a firearm for your home, I'm ll for it.
Want to carry a concealed firearm after training, cool.
But
Want to strap 4 guns to your waist and parade around wal Mart threatening everyone who sees you?
Want to own a dozen AR and another dozen Glocks?

Then be prepared to the blowback.
Reason is met with reason.
Extremism will be met with extremism.

It really is that simple.

You have yet to define what you think is "reasonable".

Open and concealed carry are both regulate by individual states. I do happen to believe that if I can legally buy a gun under federal gun laws that I should be able to buy a gun in any state and carry that gun in any state.

And it doesn't matter how many guns a law abiding person owns.

An AR 15 is just an ordinary semiautomatic rifle no different from all the other semiautomatic rifles that you people don't call "assault" weapons.

The fact of the matter is you people don't want to enforce the gun laws we already have on the books.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I am not saying there should be mandatory training. I am saying there should be mandatory safety education as would be the case in getting most other licenses. A high school or NRA (or any other certified org) class in gun safety would do it. And would not be unreasonable as all students would take the course and the Democrats would have to make it passable by pretty much everybody.

It may seem intuitive to us that reasonable safety means you always assume a gun is loaded, you don't point even an empty firearm at any living thing, be certain of what you are shooting at before you shoot, keep firearms away from small children, etc. But many who have never been taught don't think about such things until it is too late. And too many might never see or hear a PSA.

The PSAs could be good reminders of the safety rules and could suggest that firearm owners get training in how to use them competently and safely.

Great idea! Why don't you pay to have the PSAs made and then pay the media to show them? Don't waste my tax dollars on that bullshit!