Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

For your consideration

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by DammitBoy, Nov 23, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,545
    Location:
    Georgia
    Not a good enough excuse.
     
  2. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,282
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    States have no right to infringe upon an enumerated constitutional right.

    There is no permission being requested or consent asked for in the proposal.
     
  3. Tcruse

    Tcruse Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    What would you think that a requirement to pass a "firearms safety, legal self defense use and qualification" test for a high school graduation. Just like a history or government course. Probably should be a college requirement also.
    Otherwise, anyone should be able to purchase and carry a firearm in locations not restricted by the property owner or by local governments.
    The current laws really do not do much in that people that do not pass the background test generally will get firearms illegally (stolen) if they really want them. Criminals will always have a way.
    I do like the current CCW license and renew requirements in that the legal use of deadly force is not well understood by many. Especially, worry when I see postings about "kill" rather than "stop the threat".
     
  4. Warp

    Warp Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2008
    Messages:
    9,545
    Location:
    Georgia
    Firearms Safety in school, yes, I would vote for that. Bring back Eddie Eagle, why not?

    Self defense and qualification? Don't know about that.
     
  5. Neverwinter

    Neverwinter Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,049
    You can't verify their knowledge of such without a test, and even then the test only validates that they understand the content, not necessarily that they will apply it appropriately.
     
  6. CZguy

    CZguy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    3,976
    Location:
    Missouri
    Well then......it's fortunate that I didn't offer it as an excuse, but more along the lines of a historical fact.
     
  7. ExTank

    ExTank Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Messages:
    358
    I'm not sure if this has already been said (don't want to wade through five pages of thread!) but I would resist a sweeping "nationalization" of the RKBA, because it places way too much power in an already run-amok federal government, and it would also place the RKBA at the whim of political fashion and expediency.

    Let it stay at the State level, since many states seem to be "growing a pair" when it comes to standing up to the federal government.

    And we'll always have Texas, the "Sanity Check" on out-of-control, European-style socialism and it's attendant anti-gun views.
     
  8. DammitBoy

    DammitBoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,282
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    ExTank, why should you have better 2nd amendment rights in one state than other citizens have in their state?

    States should have no say on your constitutional rights.
     
  9. Tcruse

    Tcruse Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2011
    Messages:
    535
    I was mostly thinking about "Stand your Ground" and "Castle" laws being covered. There seems to be a lot of different understandings of what these laws contain. Covering these in high school would not only set the ideas of "Self Defense" in the students but would probably also leak information to the parents.

    For qualification, I was thinking about something like a man size target (not necessarily looking like a person) at 8 yds using a .22LR pistol. A .22 rifle at 15 yrs and a 410 shot gun. Having shot each of these in high school would go a long way in removing the fear of guns and help these students become less fearful of getting ccw when they are adults. I also realize that probably "opt out" would be required to get past the expected objections.

    I think these laws are very important part of our current 2A implementations. Every time the application of these principals goes wrong it becomes a talking point to impose more restrictions. A recent example is the Zimmerman case.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page