Firearm Safety

[SR1911SHOOTER]

I know I am going to get a ton of flack over this, but it is something I feel strongly
about.
People are dying because they do not understand the difference between a real gun
and a toy gun.
People are dying because they do not understand what a firearm can do. Or, they
cannot tell the difference between a real gun or a toy.

I am a firm believer that anybody purchasing a firearm for the first time MUST
be able to prove that they have completed a course in firearm safety.
Does not matter if they cannot hit the broad side of a barn from the inside,
but they must understand that they do not to point a gun at somebody or thing that they do not want to
destroy. And, they must be able to recognize the difference between a real and toy firearm.



This is my opinion, and I am entitled to it by that Amendment right above the
2ND amendment, which I firmly believe in.
Please give your opinions, but realize, I do not intend to start a war over this.
I gave my opinion and will respect yours, but will not rebut any replies, insults or
slurs.
Blackie


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/28/charges-filed-after-youtube-gun-stunt-gone-wrong-leaves-boyfriend-dead.html

 

[WAYNO]

I cannot imagine this discussion will end up anywhere good.

I disagree with the OP.

Folks must be responsible for their own actions. And they must pay for the consequences. If there are few consequences, folks will continue to do stupid and bad things.

Giving the government the responsibility to decide what training I must receive before I have "Rights"? And what happens when the next executive order is, folks must have a minimum of x-more-years training, at a cost of x-amount per class, before they can be considered to have a government issued and revocable gun permit? Some folks may never be able to afford the training. Remember, the government will be setting the standards.

And while we are at it, what about without x-years of government-indoctrination schooling, and without passing the test to make sure you're thinking right, you cannot exercise any 1st Amendment Rights?

 

[JFB]

I am NOT responding to your proposal BUT to the linked article

when a 22YO has his PREGNANT 19YO wife, while thier other child is watching, shoot him at point blank into the chest with a 50 Desert Eagle, holding a Funk&Wagnal to stop the bullet, while talking about having many more babies....while tragic, I better not say what I am thinking

 

[GunnyGene]

I know I am going to get a ton of flack over this, but it is something I feel strongly
about.
People are dying because they do not understand the difference between a real gun
and a toy gun.
People are dying because they do not understand what a firearm can do. Or, they
cannot tell the difference between a real gun or a toy.

I am a firm believer that anybody purchasing a firearm for the first time MUST
be able to prove that they have completed a course in firearm safety.
Does not matter if they cannot hit the broad side of a barn from the inside,
but they must understand that they do not to point a gun at somebody or thing that they do not want to
destroy. And, they must be able to recognize the difference between a real and toy firearm.



This is my opinion, and I am entitled to it by that Amendment right above the
2ND amendment, which I firmly believe in.
Please give your opinions, but realize, I do not intend to start a war over this.
I gave my opinion and will respect yours, but will not rebut any replies, insults or
slurs.
Blackie


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/28/charges-filed-after-youtube-gun-stunt-gone-wrong-leaves-boyfriend-dead.html

I don't have a problem with your position. The question is whether new owners will take advantage of the multitude of training venues that are available at usually considerable cost - often more than the cost of the firearm. Back in the day, that training was handled by daddy or another relative, or the military, school programs, etc.

These days you've got to spring a couple hundred for a private business 4 hour beginners safety/legal class in many States, due to State laws. That is what I have a problem with.

 

[Bob Wright]

This is what I have a problem with:

I am a firm believer that anybody purchasing a firearm for the first time MUST
be able to prove that they have completed a course in firearm safety.
Does not matter if they cannot hit the broad side of a barn from the inside,
but they must understand that they do not to point a gun at somebody or thing that they do not want to
destroy. And, they must be able to recognize the difference between a real and toy firearm.

Administered by whom? State, local, US Government? And at what cost? $100, $500, $!,000?

The National Rifle Association has offered such information, and the Ten Commandments of Gun Safety are printed in nearly all gun magazines, and included with the purchase of every firearm from dealers. My dealer even has a large placard displayed with the gun safety rules.

Nobody, nobody, should ever point a gun, toy or real, at another person without the intention of likely firing at that person.

Bob Wright

 

[win1894s]

I am NOT responding to your proposal BUT to the linked article

when a 22YO has his PREGNANT 19YO wife, while thier other child is watching, shoot him at point blank into the chest with a 50 Desert Eagle, holding a Funk&Wagnal to stop the bullet, while talking about having many more babies....while tragic, I better not say what I am thinking

You can't fix stupid. All the classes in the world would not of helped. Jmo

 

[Rancher Will]

Add my ounce of Flack to the ton of Flack. I cannot agree that requiring any restriction to the right of possessing a gun, safety classes, or any other restriction falls into the trap of violation of the God Given Right of anyone to own a weapon. It is an individual responsibility to possess, handle, and use anything in a responsible way, not the right of any government law to restrict possession.

The Anti Gunners use the fallacious argument that any restriction of anything they disapprove of is demanded "if it saves even one life". This opens the door to permitting Democrats, and any other tyrants to restrict anything they disapprove of any time they want. Singling out guns is for any restriction is a trap and a clear violation of our rights.

 

[pisgah]

What you propose sounds good -- until you consider that even with every legal driver in the US being trained and examined before receiving a license to drive, the roads are still full of boneheads killing themselves and thousands of blameless innocents every year. Add to that, there is not even a Constitutionally-guaranteed right to drive, but even the worst offenders eventually have their licenses reissued after suspension.

 

[blackhawknj]

You need a driver's license to operate a motor vehicle-not to own one.
How about requiring consumers of alcohol and controlled substances to register, take classes on the dangers of intoxication-especially operating motor vehicles- sign a legally binding document acknowledging they have taken the classes and accept their responsibility.

 

[EddieON]

I know I am going to get a ton of flack over this, but it is something I feel strongly
about.
People are dying because they do not understand the difference between a real gun
and a toy gun.
People are dying because they do not understand what a firearm can do. Or, they
cannot tell the difference between a real gun or a toy.

I am a firm believer that anybody purchasing a firearm for the first time MUST
be able to prove that they have completed a course in firearm safety.
Does not matter if they cannot hit the broad side of a barn from the inside,
but they must understand that they do not to point a gun at somebody or thing that they do not want to
destroy. And, they must be able to recognize the difference between a real and toy firearm.



This is my opinion, and I am entitled to it by that Amendment right above the
2ND amendment, which I firmly believe in.
Please give your opinions, but realize, I do not intend to start a war over this.
I gave my opinion and will respect yours, but will not rebut any replies, insults or
slurs.
Blackie


http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/06/28/charges-filed-after-youtube-gun-stunt-gone-wrong-leaves-boyfriend-dead.html

I have no problem with your position or proposal. The difficulty comes in getting a standard safety course that all states agree to and will uphold. Then there is the question of cost.
No simple answer I'm afraid.

 

[Bob Wright]

You need a driver's license to operate a motor vehicle-not to own one.
How about requiring consumers of alcohol and controlled substances to register, take classes on the dangers of intoxication-especially operating motor vehicles- sign a legally binding document acknowledging they have taken the classes and accept their responsibility.

In most states it is illegal to sell an automobile to someone that does not have a driver's license.

Bob Wright

 

[Tom W]

I have been handling firearms since I was probably 8 or so. It's been a few years. If I bought one that I wasn't too familiar with I'd make sure that I knew someone who was, and could safely instruct me on it's use and care. I know that I have now, or at least very limited experience with the AR rifles, as most of my rifles have been single shots. Should I get a wild hair and buy one, you can bet I'd head right to my buddy's house or my oldest son's house to make sure I know how to use and take care of it. I do this because I believe I'm responsible, not because of a government mandate. And as stated before, no one should point a firearm at another unless you expect to kill him.

 

[Mus408]

No need for all this... the gov't will very soon require warnings stamped on ALL bullet casings!

 

[daveg.inkc]

Guns are not toys. I grew up in 60's. Every boy I knew had toy guns and some even shot plastic bullets. Plus Grandfathers both kept loaded rifles at hand. Now I have 4 grandchildren and they are not having any toy guns. Rugers<Yes. No bit of warnings would have saved guy with book for a vest. He would have done a stunt on wheels or something equally stupid

 

[protoolman]

I disagree . If you aren't smart enough to pass the test which other constitutional rights should you be disallowed?
Bob, which states require you to have a drivers license tobuy a car? I've been trained in the laws of three states and none required any such thing. In most states a kid could potentially own a car registered in his name. As well as operate it on private property. I can say I have never been asked if I had a license when buying a car.

 

[Bob Wright]

I disagree . If you aren't smart enough to pass the test which other constitutional rights should you be disallowed?
Bob, which states require you to have a drivers license tobuy a car? I've been trained in the laws of three states and none required any such thing. In most states a kid could potentially own a car registered in his name. As well as operate it on private property. I can say I have never been asked if I had a license when buying a car.

This from watching Judge Judy.

Bob Wright

 

[Big Old Boy]

How about a saw or knife or hammer should they all have to have a training course to operate said tools?

 

[Colonialgirl]

How about a course in Amendment ONE before you can spout off or hold a job on a news paper; How about before you can post a comment?
WHY give the government an opening or ANY means of controlling your second amendment right?

 

[kmoore]

I barrow this some one else. "You cannot fix stupid". Everyone on this form reading this will hear or see news stories until the end of their lives about people doing stupid things(usually also illegal) and hurting themselves and others. I doubt any firearms person would ever let their child go outside and point a toy gun at other people or remove the red tip but, many moms do allow that.

 

[blume357]

I was of the opinion for all of my life so far that 'the people' should not be required to prove anything to own or carry a gun.... until recently, now I am beginning to change... two reasons... a friend I have great respect for thinks the other way.... and I just finished my 2nd round at the Sig Sauer Academy (I've also spent close on to two weeks at Front Sight out in Nevada). Someone on this list a few years back said that if one is going to carry a gun they need to be trained and trained well and the re-trained. This kind of stuck with me.* So, now I starting to think that gun ownership should required mandatory training and the 'right' to carry a gun should required even more. Now to explain what I think is the 'solution' to this with out restricting what few freedoms we still have... I think most if not all of this training should no only be required by the government but given for 'free' ... in public schools through out a young person's life and even into adult hood and beyond.

And to follow up on Colonial Girl's comment about the 1st amendment... YES! I think that journalist should no only be required to be tested but they should have to have a permit too!

*According to the experts I am now better trained in firearm safety and usage that the average law enforcement officer.

 

[Colonialgirl]

I was of the opinion for all of my life so far that 'the people' should not be required to prove anything to own or carry a gun.... until recently, now I am beginning to change... two reasons... a friend I have great respect for thinks the other way.... and I just finished my 2nd round at the Sig Sauer Academy (I've also spent close on to two weeks at Front Sight out in Nevada). Someone on this list a few years back said that if one is going to carry a gun they need to be trained and trained well and the re-trained. This kind of stuck with me.* So, now I starting to think that gun ownership should required mandatory training and the 'right' to carry a gun should required even more. Now to explain what I think is the 'solution' to this with out restricting what few freedoms we still have... I think most if not all of this training should no only be required by the government but given for 'free' ... in public schools through out a young person's life and even into adult hood and beyond.

And to follow up on Colonial Girl's comment about the 1st amendment... YES! I think that journalist should no only be required to be tested but they should have to have a permit too!

*According to the experts I am now better trained in firearm safety and usage that the average law enforcement officer.

WHAT part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" Do you NOT understand?
Once you begin putting such requirements on a GOD GIVEN NATURAL RIGHT you open the door for more and more "regulations for safety" which are nothing more than Government control. LOOK at driving an automobile and the test for you license, then look at the morons who kill themselves and others while driving, not to mention the damage they inflict.
I didn't need any expensive "training" to teach me firearm safety and usage and given the number of incidental innocent casualties of police shootings, being better qualified is NOT difficult.

 

[contender]

I fully agree that the Second Amendment should NOT be opened up to any form of mandatory training. As noted above, and often, once the government steps in,,, problems occur.
Here are a few things to ponder.

If I'm correct,,, ALL states require a Hunter Safety course before a person can purchase a hunting license. And,, the States offer this class for FREE. Part of that class, (I'm an instructor,) has firearm safety. It USED to be that Hunter Safety classes were part of a PE class in schools. Kids were taught some firearm safety there,,, even if they never purchased a hunting license, or any firearms.
I'd be all for them to have Hunter Safety & even a Firearm Safety class as part of school classes,,, even mandatory. I mean,,, they make them take other classes that are worthless,,, so why not teach them something that may save a few lives. We already send our kids to school to learn stuff that USED to be taught at home,,, why not add a good class to the mix?
But mandatory classes before buying or owning a firearm,,, No.

As noted,, a lot is already done,, voluntarily by gun makers & gun shops to include gun safety rules & such. Plus,,, as noted,,, there are MANY ways a person can get safety training.

But forced regulation? NO.

I also taught SCUBA diving for over 20 years. The scuba industry is "self regulating" in that dive shops won't fill air tanks w/o a certification card. And some won't sell any of the life support equipment w/o a C-card. We haven't had to have the government step in to force rules & regulations upon us,,, because we do our "due-diligence" to try & make it a safe sport. And it is not a guaranteed right to be a scuba diver.

Will stupid stuff happen? Yes. But like noted above,, people take drivers education, yet, daily many people die from stupid action by other drivers. (I almost got hit, head on, monday, by a guy who turned into my lane, a 4 lane, ONE WAY. He made an illegal right turn, into traffic. I had a TOO close of a call.)

So, I respectfully disagree with any form of forced training to buy a firearm. Too many legal reasons, and too many logical reasons to the discussions of forced training.
Simply put; "You can't fix stupid." (Thanks Ron White for the comment.)

 

[Montelores]

This kind of stuck with me.* So, now I starting to think that gun ownership should required mandatory [sic] training and the 'right' to carry a gun should required [sic] even more. Now to explain what I think is the 'solution' to this with out restricting what few freedoms we still have... I think most if not all of this training should no only be required by the government but given for 'free' ... in public schools through out a young person's life and even into adult hood and beyond.

"Mandatory" and "free" when used in regard to the government.

What could possibly go wrong?

:wink:

Monty

 

[JFB]

If “society”, which includes parents with children in schools, are so worried about their child upsetting a transgender, homosexual, illegal residence that the school criteria is changed to suite.

One would THINK, the same parents would be concern that another child might kill their own due to careless use of a firearm, they would also INSIST firearm safety be taught

 

[Taterman]

If “society”, which includes parents with children in schools, are so worried about their child upsetting a transgender, homosexual, illegal residence that the school criteria is changed to suite.

One would THINK, the same parents would be concern that another child might kill their own due to careless use of a firearm, they would also INSIST firearm safety be taught

And taught for free, in grade school. Instead, they are indoctrinated that guns are evil.

 

[Gaffer]

Not to change the subject all that much but if we could only vote after passing a test on the US Constitution would probably make some big changes in our nation and the common sense that seems to be lacking nationwide. I am amazed at the stupidity of so many. Go to any gun forum and you will see statements that boogle the mind.

 

[powder smoke]

Got here late but none the less I CAN NOT DISAGREE WITH THE OP'S POST MORE!

What is it you do not understand about OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?
God given right of self defense does not require you to jump thru hoops. nuf said. ps

 

[mohavesam]

Opinions... Each one is only based upon one's experiences. Nothing else.

If one is "smart enough" to own a handgun, then one should be "smart enough" to own personal injury insurance and prove a lawyer on retainer.
Just common sense, and to be clear - the lack of either should never be legislated to impair a civil right.

 

[GP100]

Got here late but none the less I CAN NOT DISAGREE WITH THE OP'S POST MORE!

What is it you do not understand about OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS?
God given right of self defense does not require you to jump thru hoops. nuf said. ps

I agree with this statement..

Remember, When a Government has the power to give you a right to something, they also have the power to take it away..

Look at Australia or England for this lesson.. And learn it well.. Those that do not learn from history, are doomed to repeat it..

 

[Goldstar225]

First let's distinguish between a right and a privilege. Driving is a privilege, freedom of speech is a right.

If we're going down this slope why not require proof of taking a class and passing a test before exercising any right, whether it be free speech, religion, the vote, firearms, the fourth amendment. How much control do you want to GIVE to the government?

I agree that people with no experience with guns SHOULD get training, it should not be government mandated or controlled. I also believe that before I vote, I should gather information on each candidate and make an informed choice. I would object to a mandate that I take a government approved class or pass a test before I exercise that right.