First of all, I'm not against giving firearms to people.
I've given a shotgun to my sister, and a revolver to my mother.
I made sure that both of them knew how to use them before I did so, and I'm not talking about a 30 minute talk, either.
Back to the questions though--how is someone buying a gun different from my loaning them a gun.
ANYONE (competent or not) can go buy a gun if they wish, as long as they are not legally disqualified for some reason. It's not necessarily a good idea, and I recommend to anyone who asks me that they take a basic firearm safety course or a rough equivalent when they purchase a firearm. (We're talking about people who have no experience with guns--remember the starting post?)
But, if they don't take a course and still choose to buy a gun, I don't have a problem with that, it's their legal right, and I'm not big on infringing on people's rights. EVEN when they may be doing something stupid. We know what I think is prudent, but that's not what the law says.
Now, you'll want to know if I support waiting periods or mandatory training. NOPE. Remember what I said about infringing on rights. That's a bad thing. Rights must be sacrosanct, untouchable. EVEN when people don't use them wisely. Otherwise they're not rights. They're priviliges which the [sarcasm] government in it's infinite wisdom and mercy parcels out at its discretion[/sarcasm].
But, you say, YOU'RE infringing on their rights by not loaning them a gun. Wrong again. They have the same rights as I do to purchase guns and the same rights I do to use/loan their property at their discretion. They chose not to exercise their right to purchase a firearm, and their lack of planning and deficiency of logical forethought doesn't inspire confidence in me that they will safely/legally use the firearm they want me to loan them. Therefore, unless I can give them an adequate training session at the end of which they can demonstrate through knowledge and gunhandling skills that my initial impression is incorrect, I'm not going to let them leave with one of my guns..
Is a dealer irresponsible if he sells a gun to a person who is clearly incompentent. Yes, in my opinion he is. Is he breaking the law? Not at all. But, that misses the point. IT IS NOT HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE THE FITNESS OF THE PURCHASER--ONLY THE LEGALITY OF THE TRANSACTION. I can't take that kind of a hands off approach. Remember--this post was about a family member or close friend. Unlike the dealer, I CARE about these people. In the same way I wouldn't toss the car keys to someone I know can't drive, I wouldn't give a loaded gun to a person I care about whom I knew to be completely untrained.
I hold myself to a higher standard than the person who is merely conducting a legal mercantile transaction. The fact that I may not be held legally responsible for the mayhem which may result from my ill-advised loan doesn't change the fact that I would still hold myself responsible.
Ok, my turn to ask a question. Does anyone know what the NRA considers to be the minimum course duration (hours) for training a person in Basic Firearm Safety? Does anyone know if actual range time is considered integral to this minimum course?