[Tackleberry1]

Owners manuals are available for free online. There is no reason for a gun owner to load a weapon they are not familiar with.

Tack

[robertb6112]

That's why it's always a good habit to do research on a gun before you buy it. And no matter what always make sure a weapons clear and safe no matter if it's been sitting around for years in a safe. It's better to be safe then sorry.

[SatoriNoir]

Originally Posted by Moby

The gun owner needs training PRIOR to loading a gun.

I'm a firm believer in doing informed research before making any kind of purchase that constantly involves possible life-threatening risks.

For example, I would never recommend anyone new to motorcyling to go straight away and buy a racing bike before knowing even the most basic understanding and functions of how to ride one.

[Vincine]

Originally Posted by Moby

The gun owner needs training PRIOR to loading a gun.

Sounds to me like the STORE owner could use some training.

[Chainfire]

It would have violated the man's Constitutional rights to require him to know how to operate the gun before buying it. The seller had no responsibility for regulating the sale either. Neither did the shop owner have any responsibity to assist him in decocking it. Giving the man advice about how to decock the gun over the phone probably opened the shop owner up to litigation if the thing had gone off and winged another idiot. If the shop owner allowed the guy in the store with the loaded and cocked weapon, he was as big a fool as the buyer.

If being an idiot was legal justification for denying a person the right to own a firearm, then far fewer people would own then own today. If you don't believe that, I suggest you visit an unregulated public range. Our local "public range" is worse than Dodge City, on cowboy payday.

No firearm regulation folks, remember?

[danf_fl]

I am not saying that training is mandatory.
I am not saying that every buyer needs a certificate "Firearms Trained".

But there is money to be made if people don't read the manual.

[winds-of-change]

Originally Posted by kytowboater

I've never been asked if I knew how to operate a gun I've purchased.

I think they can tell by the way a person talks and handles a gun if they are familiar with firearms or if they know very little.

[Vincine]

Originally Posted by winds-of-change

I think they can tell by the way a person talks and handles a gun if they are familiar with firearms or if they know very little.

Whether they care is another story.

[Shannon1976]

Originally Posted by winds-of-change

I think they can tell by the way a person talks and handles a gun if they are familiar with firearms or if they know very little.

I agree but sometimes people are more interested in making $$ than safety.
Sad

[Chainfire]

Originally Posted by winds-of-change

I think they can tell by the way a person talks and handles a gun if they are familiar with firearms or if they know very little.

So, is it your judgement that the seller should somehow evaluate every potential buyer before closing the deal? If so, just what criteria would you suggest he or she use? Would it be fair to make a snap judgement about a buyer? The only thing the buyer should ever have to provide is the necesary legal paperwork.

I believe that, once the buyer has met the legal requirement to buy, it is all the buyers responsibility, not the sellers. Otherwise, every FFL would have his or her own method of making the determination, and would then be responsible for the firearm after the sell. That would be an awful system.