Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Training & Safety > Mandatory Training?

View Poll Results: Do you support mandatory training for carry licensure?
Yes 31 35.63%
No 56 64.37%
Voters: 87. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-19-2011, 06:04 PM   #211
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: avon lake,ohio
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
In that situation, your right to freedom of speech/religion would have to come second to the victims right to live.

If it helps, i hear we taste very much like chicken...think WickerMan.
and there for my right to not be killed by an untrained shooter.....
__________________
M1AG30 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 06:17 PM   #212
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5731 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M1AG30 View Post
and there for my right to not be killed by an untrained shooter.....
Seems like more of a stretch to me. I do see your point, but i don't agree.
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-19-2011, 07:22 PM   #213
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ArizonaLawman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Florence,AZ
Posts: 463
Liked 3 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M1AG30 View Post
So as i read your statements and multiple others.... NO Law shall impinge the rights granted in the Constitution......

And by this then were i to practice a religion where human sacrifce was an accepted part of a religious rite or cerimony then I should be able to sacrifice a human being?


I know its a little off the main topic but it relates......
I think the word you're looking for is "infringe". And the phraseology would be "infringe upon".

If you were to practice a religion where human sacrifice was an accepted part of the rite or ceremony, I'd tend to think you were a bit of a whacko...but that's just me. Murder is illegal. Assisted suicide is illegal. It follows that the killing of another person without a self defense situation in existence, human sacrifice, though cloaked in "religion" would still be illegal. So, your stance holds no water.

We aren't talking about religious freedom here, we are talking about the Second Ammendment.

If you want to talk about the First...here goes:

The Free Exercise Clause is the accompanying clause with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause together read:

“ Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... ”

In 1878, the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the extent of the Free Exercise Clause in Reynolds v. United States, as related to the prosecution of polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld Reynolds' conviction for bigamy, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as human sacrifice. The Court said (at page 162): "Congress cannot pass a law for the government of the Territory which shall prohibit the free exercise of religion. The first amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids such legislation." Of federal territorial laws, the Court said: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."

Congress cannot make a law to ESTABLISH a state religion. Since the act of murder (not defensive killing) is already illegal, human sacrifice regardless of religion would be illegal. So you can BELIEVE it is okay to sacrifice humans according to your belief system, you just can't do it.

Apples and oranges.

So...what was your point?

I reccomend training. Absolutely. Says so right there in my post. From personal experience....I have run into a BUNCH of people (good people) who are so inept with a firearm, it scares me to have been around them. But, I can't fix stupid. But I CAN teach safe gun handling. Then again, there are some macho-types who think they know it all, and won't listen anyway, so mandatory training would do them no good. All it WOULD do is give someone power to say....you didn't perform up to MY standards...therefore, I am not passing, you and YOU can't own the gun. Sounds a lot like the voting restrictions placed on blacks in the south doesn't it????? A black man had to be able to "read" in order to vote. However....the registrars would hand them something to read in LATIN. See the connection?

In the end, I hate more and more government encroachment into my life. Mandating training as an economic barrier to people getting armed sucks, and I don't believe it should be mandated.

Hoops have to be jumped through and that sucks.

I believe that every kid should learn to ride a horse, build a cook fore, and shoot a gun. That's just me.
__________________
"If you take your hands off the back of my cruiser one more time...I will make your birth certificate a worthless document!"
ArizonaLawman is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 05:08 PM   #214
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,510
Liked 2442 Times on 1391 Posts
Likes Given: 1910

Default

YES I support RKBA, and the 2nd Amendment.

Since public school for all children is already mandatory,

why not simply insert gun safety into the program?

This would cause no mandatory imposition.

Because the 2nd thing I support after the 2nd Amendment,

is not being "swept" by noobs with loaded glocks,

be they LE or not.

__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 05:24 PM   #215
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,900
Liked 2056 Times on 827 Posts
Likes Given: 2706

Default

You could make mandatory gun safety taught in schools as long as the parents have an opt-out option. Also as long as it does not become a requirement for exercising a right.

__________________
opaww is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 06:49 PM   #216
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
ArizonaLawman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Florence,AZ
Posts: 463
Liked 3 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by therewolf View Post
YES I support RKBA, and the 2nd Amendment.

Since public school for all children is already mandatory,

why not simply insert gun safety into the program?

This would cause no mandatory imposition.

Because the 2nd thing I support after the 2nd Amendment,

is not being "swept" by noobs with loaded glocks,

be they LE or not.
Hellfire...noobs and so-called "I know what I am doin" types....doesn't matter, I don't want to be swept by ANYONE...even if they only have a pellet gun. I frown on that in all ways.
__________________
"If you take your hands off the back of my cruiser one more time...I will make your birth certificate a worthless document!"
ArizonaLawman is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 09:21 PM   #217
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jonbouy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Bloomington,Illinois
Posts: 24
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts
Likes Given: 2

Default Training

I think if the government requires training from someone else (not a government agency ie state police etc) that knows how to train it can be a good thing. For example if it is required that you take a Basic Pistol course from the NRA or another accredited organization that's not all bad. And I am talking about people who don't have experience. The problem is it isn't long before they start to require training as if a citizen practicing concealed carry were in law enforcement. LEO's insert themselves in potential situations that can turn ugly in a hurry. I don't do that. I am not looking to shoot 30 feet away either.
I know there is room for lots of discussion on what I have said. I feel requirements can quickly get out of hand, just like someone who does not know the basic safety rules or have any experience can. I guess I feel, 'basic' requirements and as said in an earlier post, previous experience should count, it's a plus, but it must be monitored or it will get crazy like almost anything the government mandates.

__________________
jonbouy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 10:14 PM   #218
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,900
Liked 2056 Times on 827 Posts
Likes Given: 2706

Default

I think mandatory classes before anyone can type on any board; forum, Blog, or web site would be a good thing. Along with mandatory classes for free speech.

What do you all think? If we make some mandatory class for one then should we not make it for all rights?

__________________
opaww is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2011, 11:27 PM   #219
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,900
Liked 2056 Times on 827 Posts
Likes Given: 2706

Default

I have seen people who regardless of training are still stupid. No amount of mandatory training will get rid of stupidity. One can learn and rid ones self of ignorance but stupidity goes all the way to the bone. We see stupidity almost everyday in our country, everything from stupidity with firearms to stupidity with cars.

You cannot train out stupidity, no matter the amount of training and classroom time. The only way to get rid of stupid is for nature to take its course. Don’t let them bread is another way. As with any anti-gun/anti rights issues, mandatory class to exercise this right is an infringement on that right. Once you travel down the road of infringement you will always walk that road.

The Second Amendment did not say Shall not Infringe,

“Except for,”

“But”

“Acceptable”

“Reasonable”

“For public safety”

Do I think training is needed? Yes I do and train when ever I feel the need to do so, but it is my choice and not anyone else’s in this world to decide when and what training I need nor who is qualified to give me training.

opaww

P.S. even the best trained person will always have a brain fart.

__________________
opaww is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2011, 02:16 PM   #220
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,510
Liked 2442 Times on 1391 Posts
Likes Given: 1910

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by opaww View Post
I think mandatory classes before anyone can type on any board; forum, Blog, or web site would be a good thing. Along with mandatory classes for free speech.

What do you all think? If we make some mandatory class for one then should we not make it for all rights?
Yeah, see I'm not worried about somebody pumping a round of 9mm

keyboard into my kidney as they exercise their free speech and say

"oops!". That can happen at a LGS or range, with a gun.

People say stupid and bad things within earshot all the time,

so far, not a ghost of a chance of that having a ballistic

effect on my center mass.

Now, Opaww, did you mean "let them breed", or "give them bread", as in feed them?
__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Mandatory Grad Student Health Insurance! mesinge2 Politics, Religion and Controversy 2 04-25-2011 03:57 PM
New York: Mandatory long-gun registration? bkt Legal and Activism 7 03-03-2011 02:29 AM
Mandatory Arabic Classes Coming to Mansfield Bigcountry02 Politics, Religion and Controversy 7 02-09-2011 06:55 PM
California Democrat proposes mandatory gun registration opaww Legal and Activism 11 04-09-2010 04:22 PM