Do you support mandatory training for gun ownership?

[Old Time Hunter]

Absolutely! Throw 'em in a pit with two bullets of different calibers and one single shot rolling block and a hungry, angry lion at the other side of the pit. If they figure it out and get the lion before it gets them, ther're trained.
Seriously though, today I was at Gander Mountain and a 40ish gentlman was interested in purchasing a handgun. He did not have a clue, not even as customers were damn near hitting the floor, as he waved the guns all over the place. I think a cursory test of some sort should be devised to even look at a gun and a formal class on basic gun safety before you can pick it up. If you can pass the cursory or demonstrate past experience, maybe you would not have to have the formal class.

 

[Soybomb]

Please quit trying to protect me.

Its really quite scary to see nearly 25% of the votes here favoring or possibly favoring the ever creeping gun control we have. Every person thinking like that is one more nail in the coffin of the 2nd amendment. Don't think for a minute there will be a firearms collection day, its done slowly with creeping acceptance like those votes show. Everyone yells gun grabber and liberal, but there is just as much danger from gun owners.

 

[NineseveN]

Based on some of the responses in this thread, it would appear some THR members need mandatory training on the meaning of the word "infringement."

+1

Please quit trying to protect me.

Its really quite scary to see nearly 25% of the votes here favoring or possibly favoring the ever creeping gun control we have. Every person thinking like that is one more nail in the coffin of the 2nd amendment. Don't think for a minute there will be a firearms collection day, its done slowly with creeping acceptance like those votes show. Everyone yells gun grabber and liberal, but there is just as much danger from gun owners.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Elvis has just left the building. I second the notion that we don't need protected from problems that do not exist.

If you read that thread I linked earlier, you'll see that in states that have absolutely no training requirement for CCW, well, the streets do not run red with the blood spilled by untrained firearms users. If you're gonna advocate a solution, you need a problem first...there is no problem here besides some unsubstantiated fears...don't legislate me based on the boogie man that hides under your bed. :banghead:

 

[Old Dog]

No.

 

[Standing Wolf]

I'll support mandatory firearms training the week after the leftist extremists agree to government-mandated and -defined training before buying books and magazines, getting married, having abortions, voting, buying internet connections, et cetera.

 

[dartos]

Yes,
I have seen too many gun owners handleing firearms like a child,
I was at the range, two teens had a bullet lodge in the barrel, cheap 22 ammo, unsure what to do they looked down the barrel ( gun still loaded ),and pointed it all over the range.

I was also at the local gun shop, a prospective buyer wanted to look at a pistol, the two sales men handed the guy the pistol and he proceded to spin around the shop aiming it at the other customers, the sales guys said nothing to the guy about pointing a firearm at people, I left the shop pronto.

another time at a party some guy asked if I wanted to see his pistol, before I could say a word he pulled it out ( a beautiful chrome 45 ), I asked if it was loaded, he said " I don't know..I don't know how to check" (pull the slide, remove the mag... ) I showed him how to check (thank god it was unloaded) he was drunk as a skunk, I told him to put it away, scolded him for pulling it out in a room full of drunks and I left the party

I worked 9 years for the medical examiner, I've seen too many stupid deaths.

 

[c_yeager]

I support training for gun ownership exactly as much as I support government required education before one may practice a religion of their choice.

 

[Lupinus]

I think there should be mandatory sponsorship of militias and gun training by either your town or county. Just like it was at the time of the writing every town or county had a militia and different towns or counties did different levels of training. Some next to nothing other then very basic marksmanship while some did some pretty extensive training, as it says "A well regulated Militia" and in the talk of the time "well regulated" meant well trained. I think it should be mandatory for each town or county to provide Militia training to any who wish to participate. They can set their own standards but they should need to sponsor at least basic formation and marksmanship with rifle, pistol, and shot gun. And do away with any and all laws which hinder the formation of private militias extending off of the sponsored ones. Same basic concept as militias in the time of the founders, citizens train and when needed are called to arms.

Sorry if it is a little of track but we have gotten to far away from the militia ideals that the founders had in mind to keep this country free.

But to the original question should training be mandatory to own a gun, the answer is no it shouldn't.

 

[Stevie-Ray]

No

 

[Aguila Blanca]

No.

The Founding Fathers did not require mandatory training when they wrote the Constitution.

That pretty much says it all.

It isn't required by the Constitution. The 2nd Amendment says the right to keep and bear arms "shall not be infringed." A mandatory training requirement is an infringement.

No thank you.

So if the Constitution said you can't infringe on a person's right to practice medicine you would prefer an unlicensed doctor to a licensed doctor?

Total non sequitur. The Constitution does NOT say the government cannot infringe on the "right" to practice medicine, therefore your question/statement is meaningless.

 

[Leanwolf]

DARTOS - "Yes... I worked 9 years for the medical examiner, I've seen too many stupid deaths."
________________________________________________________________

Dartos, working for an M.E. for nine years, I'd bet you've seen far more people killed as a result of alcohol, than firearms accidents.

Therefore, don't you also think that every person who wants to ever take a drink of alcohol, should have to take a mandatory course from Big Brother & Big Nanny, on how to drink and be responsible with alcohol, before the Government would allow that person to take a drink or buy a bottle of booze?

Just wondering.

L.W.

 

[repo]

What I'd like to see is "gun ed." in schools, like "drivers ed." but a run down of gun safety. You do a little quiz at the end and get a certificate that enables you to purchase a firearm at 18 or 21. We already have a background check, so why not a written safety test. You have to pass a hunter ed. course to hunt in most places. You have to pass a drivers test to drive. A firearm is not much different from a car in my opinion. The days of personal responsibility seem to be drawing to an end, so I think mandatory safety training may be needed in the future. "Officer, you mean to say I can't drink a 40 ounce and shoot road signs from by buddie's car?"... "but nobody told me!".

I expect any legislation would get alot of extra negative crap tagged on, but as an idea I would support it.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

I have to say "NO" to this one. I am usually one of the more conservative ones on here when it comes to regulations. I believe in background checks, restrictions, etc but if you are legal able to buy and own I think how much training you receive is up to you. You are most likely to only hurt yourself anyway if you are not safe with a firearm. I am not a big fan of any law designed to "protect the stupid". Like seat belt laws for adults, restrictions on payday/title loan places, etc. I do not believe you can legislate personal responsibility or hold the hand of every person of questionable inteligence.

 

[repo]

WT - While there are still men like the founding fathers around, they have been padded out by a massive class of useless eaters suckling on the teat of "Big Nanny". The people who sue McDonalds because they are fat. The people who have zero personal responsibility and live in a fatasy land where they think real life is like TV and everything will resolve itself. The kind of people who dont have the initiative or common sense to learn safe weapons handilng and storage, and who add fuel to the fire of the antis statistics when their 3 year old finds a loaded weapon.

 

[Logan5]

People like to throw questions like these out there in the abstract, and ignore all the logistics behind it.
In the best of all possible worlds, every gun owner would have basic safety training.
But in this one, who's going to fund it? Who's going to develop and print the course materials, and decide on the curriculum? Who are the instructors going to be?
I'm an NRA basic pistol safety instructor right now, and since the course is mandatory for a pistol permit in my state, it ammounts to a tax on potential permit holders. Some instructors charge as little as they can get away with, and some charge as much as they can get away with. The State and Federal government do not subsidize the NRA to develop lesson plans and print course packs; that all comes out of membership dues and contributions. Mandatory training often ends up being a tax on RKBA advocates.

 

[mnrivrat]

I support mandatory dna testing to establish the biological father of every child so as not to confuse who is raising who's child.

I support the enforcement of our immigration laws .

I support a lot of things, but when you start talking about mandatory anything, you should give serious consideration to what that can mean. I don't support mandatory regulations on natural rights , including the right to keep and bare arms.

In a free soceity people should live and let live - lest someone decides to regulate the crap out of something they feel strongly about until they feel regulating is akin to infringment.

 

[justashooter]

trouble is, most of the people i've met who are certified "trainers" know less about guns than i do. guns of all kinds are a lifelong passion for me. i have designed, built, shot, and collected guns of all types for over 25 years. probably owned over 500 different guns (can't remember them all), and fired over half a million rounds. killed large and small game, shot competitively, carried a gun for 15 years, and never had an AD. "i'm the only one in this room professional enough..."

maybe they would let me CLEP this one? i doubt it. give some small brained guy a little power, and he won't know when to use it, thinking it is reqiored all of the time.

people who desire a liscence to teach are usually the individuals most in need of training, just like psychologists need "treatment", and police officers need "policing", and etc., those that can, do. those that can't, teach. those that can't teach, teach gym. once they are in a position like this, they cannot be taught a thing, because they know it all, and have a certificate that says so.

me, i don't know a thing except how little i know. learning all of the time. getting some lessons on foundry design in heavy steel application lately. by taking time to ask people who do know, i am becoming one of them. you can't learn anything from me, cause i got no creedentials, but you can shoot with me and build guns anytime.

 

[ARTiger]

No. Would work out about as well as the mandatory training we have for driving. Anybody feel safer on the roads?

I do think it's the responsibility of gun dealer to demonstrate how to work a gun being sold - if the person needs and/or asks for the demo.

But then again if Joe Shmuck who's never seen or shot a real gun before goes to WalMart and buys one in a box then shoots part of himself apart "learning" . . . oh well, Darwinism at work.

 

[Tom Servo]

My ideal solution, that you would have mandatory firearm training in highschool....but not for owning a firearm...just as a class everyone has to take to graduate

+10 to that. As Americans, we're SUPPOSED to know how to handle guns, and I guarantee that if you let an impressionable teenager fire a live weapon, he'll think twice about emulating some pop-culture figure who points it at people.

I don't know how many times I've taken new shooters out, and the first time they've fired, they've stopped and looked at the gun as if to say, "holy #$*%" with a grave look. Actually firing a gun gives you a real idea of its destructive power, and it teaches you that these are not things to screw around with or take lightly.

Besides, marksmanship teaches lessons about concentration, practice and hand-eye coordination. I also think they should bring back high-school driving education.

 

[cracked butt]

Absolutely not.

 

[Zen21Tao]

I encourage gun owners to seek and obtain instruction in firearm usage and maintain a steady amount of training but I DO NOT think that it should be required. Even the most basic and well intentioned requirements on gun ownership creates a slippery slope for stricter and stricter regulations that could (and if the gun grabbers had their way would) be used to achieve the same ends as an out right ban. Perhaps we should demand training in the english languange in order for people to speak freely. How about manditory training before a woman can have an abortion or manditory training before allowing someone to enter a church. Each day I am amazed at how people demand other rights be protected while letting the second amendment (which was designed to protect the other rights) get eroded away.

 

[Janitor]

Nope.

As several others have pointed out - manditory training is a solution to a problem that doesn't seem to exist. I'm sure that there have been a few mistakes out there, but traning is no magic shield against that. Check out the Rastanarc video again. I'm willing to bet that he's had some training. Probably far more than any manditory training course would cover. Unfortunately, no amount of training can make up for a lax mind.

Manditory anything wrt gun ownership/usage is just another toehold for the gun grabbers. Once we have a new law, it can be tightened up over time. Next step after manditory training classes could be a psychological exam to make sure you are balanced enough to own a gun. It could be an entry requirement to get into the class.

A license to own a gun (1 time and for all weapons) seems fair enough just as much as getting a license to drive a car.

I must have missed the part in the bill of rights that protects my right to have a drivers license.

/j

!!! Post # 1200!!! (I know - who the hec cares?)

 

[Princecookie]

NO

NO. For the simple reason that, the person or people in charge of this mandatory training could be very anti gun. They could make the requirements or qualifications so difficult that no one woule be able to posess a firearm.

 

[Thin Black Line]

"well organised" with Class 3 for All

 

[bill in IN]

I voted not sure. As usual, I have a problem with the question. I think everyone should have firearms training as part of their schooling. Instead of a lot of the "touchy feely" stufff that is taught in the elementary schools today i think that children would far more benefit from training in swimming, woodscraft, survival skills, personnal finance, firearms, and household safety.

If it were incorporated in everyones general education it would be to the benefit of us all and a worth undertaking. If not then I would say nay. I don't believe that this country was founded for the exceptions. Anything required to exercise a right should be the norm. (No permits to own or carry required - loss of a right would be noted retaining one would not) As it appears that we now have a defacto requirement for "papers" this could easily be done.