would you support a requirement of...
so, yesterday I was at the gun store, buying my umpteenth gun. I'm a CCW permit holder, and a military veteran. I'd like to think that I have the training and understanding to be safe with weapons, and could probably pick up any weapon system and be safe with it, even if it's one that I've never fired before.
however, when I was at the gun store, what I saw and heard was somewhat scarey. the questions people were asking, the comments they were making, the way they were handling weapons... it all screamed one thing to me; that the gun store was full of first time gun buyers who had no idea how to be safe, no experience with weapons, no training, and most likely, have never been to the range to even fire a weapon.
Good for them for deciding to go out and arm themselves.
but its also scarey to think that all these people are buying weapons with no idea on how to safely handle them.
Question, would you be ok with a new requirement for gun owners -- one to show that you've had SOME kind of weapons training, before buying a weapon? i.e. a DD214 to show prior military experience which means you've had weapons training, or a "diploma" from some type of NRA approved weapons handling class? or would this be viewed as more restrictive oppressive rules that make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to buy weapons?
It is a bit un-settleing to say the least :(
But no to more requirements- boat is bein rocked enuff---
More requirement to obtain a CCL? MABE but thats another discussion-
While it SOUNDS reasonable to require people have some training/experience before buying, it is a can of worms. Many will equate it to driver's licenses. Training/experience/test required to get a license. First off buying or driving a car is not a Constiutionally protected RIGHT. Second of all, no license required to buy a car. You may have NEVER even been in a car and you can buy as many as you want. AND any DB with a set of keys can drive. No license or insurance required. Millions of illegal aliens do it every day.
We have made way too many concessions that are "reasonable". The left NEVER makes concessions, they just crawl in a hole ad plan for the next round of concessions by us. Screw that. The line has been drawn. Not one more concession!
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is granted by our CREATOR and guaranteed by the CONSTITUTION! Who the hell to these people think they are to play GOD and take the rights that are GOD GIVEN?
Agreed on the can of worms...no more requirements...
I would like to think, however, that inexperienced shooters would take it upon themselves to seek proper training...hey, a guy can dream, right? ;)
In general I would have to say no.
A requirement is a very slippery slope...
I do however, offer anyone willing and new to firearms to provided them
training on the safe use of them. I have had several takers on the offer.
Although I agree that people should and we as gun advocates should
strongly urge that new and existing gun owners get training. I cannot
endorse a requirement for training.
FYI, I am also a Vet, Navy, when on active duty I was qualified on the M1911,
M-14, M-60 and M-2. I shoot competitively (well I try, and not as much as I
would like to) and I am an avid hunter. But I still try to learn as much as I
can about firearms, their safety and proper use.
Learning is a journey not a destination. (damn now I sound like a leftie...LOL)
I think that dealers should be required to show basic handling when selling a gun. Things like how to insert and remove a mag, how to rack the slide to show an empty chamber. They should also be required to hand the buyer a copy of the 4 rules of gun safety. (Every gun is loaded. Point only at something you are willing to destroy. Be sure of your target and what is behind it. Finger off the trigger until your sights are on target.) And they should always offer information about a local club that teaches the basics.
I think once the background check is complete that is all that should be required. Lets face it...a lot of people have defended themselves with a gun they have never shot before. Not very smart. But it happens all the time.
I agree with the above posters. We are supposed to be able to walk into a gun store and walk out with a gun. But that has it's own set of problems........:cool:
I have been thinking about this for a while. And it is alot more involved than
what I am going to state here.
But what I would like to see is a General Photo ID with a magnetic ID strip,
not RFID'd. That ID would have a picture of the person, with basic info
printed on the front. Then a gun shop, liquor store, polling place etc.
Could scan the card, and would be able to check a gov't DB that would clear
that individual to purchase guns or ammo (not a felon), alcohol or is listed as
a registered voter. The card itself would not have the info, it would be too
easy to copy, but would have an encripted code, possible protected with a
So in the example of a gun purchase, the buyer would hand the shop their
ID it would get swiped and the gun store would get a approved to purchase
or a denial. If approved (buyer is not a felon or adjudicated mentally ill) to
purchase then the bill of sale will be completed with Make, Model and SN,
and off goes the buy with their weapon. The bill of sale is not entered in to
the gov't DB only kept on site by the FFL holder just like the current 4473.
This would eliminate the 4473, waiting periods etc.
This would be a universal ID, replacing FOID (gotta love IL), CCW, DL's,
Voter registration cards. Etc. Etc. Etc...
Well, in Michigan I was told in hunters safety that a hunting license or hunters safety card would be required for a firearms purchase? But when I got my Mosin all my mom had to fill out was a 4473. I think that would be somewhat reasonable because I learned a lot about weapon handling in hunters safety
|All times are GMT. The time now is 10:29 AM.|
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.