Interesting "gun control" proposal

[johnthomas]

Not another inch

You read my mind, not one inch. Give an inch, they take a mile. Not no, hell no!!!!!!! These Democrats, socialists, communist, scum will not stop, ever. We stand our ground or perish. That is all there is to it. The time is coming when talkers will have to become doers. The time is coming when the sacrifices of our ancestors will be demanded of us for the future of our America.

[Jimi Jah]

If you fail in your training, no guns for you!

[bohoki]

step 1 treat each incident like a plane crash and try to find a solution that would have solved the previous incident

step 2 respect the rights of the innocent if solution proposed causes them difficulty try again

[drifts1]

I'm not completely against the idea of training for all. In fact the 2nd amendment alludes to it via the "well regulated" verbiage.

My concern is the government would find a way to screw it up.

[CandG]

I'm not completely against the idea of training for all. In fact the 2nd amendment alludes to it via the "well regulated" verbiage.

My concern is the government would find a way to screw it up.

Once a training requirement is in place, what's to keep them from making the training requirements obscenely difficult or impossible for people to pass?

A roster of safe handguns seemed like a good idea to some people at the time, too. "Only the really poorly-made handguns will go away", they said. "You'll still be able to get any quality modern handgun", they said.

[FrankMo]

If it's mandadory training, you will have to pay.

We teach reading and writing in school. Why not gun skills? Amendments are equal.

FrankMo

[Mitch]

I came across this and went into it assuming the worse but actually didn't think it was that bad. Curious what you guys think.

General idea is there are and will always be too many guns to confiscate so rather than trying to eliminate guns, require mandatory training (described as a state militia reserve of sorts).

What problem are you trying to solve?

[tuncas]

What problem are you trying to solve?

I'm not trying to solve any problem. I just read an article about someone else's proposal to solve what they think is a problem and I was wondering what everyone else here thought about the article.

Since you brought it up, I'll throw out what I see as two distinct and separate problems, but I won't propose any solutions to them.

1. We have a problem with radical Islamic terrorism

2. We have a problem with antis trying to place blame on gun owners and trying to legislate the 2nd amendment out of existence or severely water it down


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mitch]

I'm not trying to solve any problem.

There is no other legitimate purpose to legislation, especially legislation that potentially restricts the liberties of people.

The first question I always ask when anyone suggests a new law to me is, What problem are you trying to solve? Is this an important problem? Does the proposal in fact address the problem? What is the cost in liberty and treasure? Who pays?

Usually people can't even get past the first question.

I just read an article about someone else's proposal to solve what they think is a problem . . .

They never indicated the problem they were trying to solve with firearms mandatory training.

1. We have a problem with radical Islamic terrorism

2. We have a problem with antis trying to place blame on gun owners and trying to legislate the 2nd amendment out of existence or severely water it down

Neither one of those problems is addressed by mandatory firearms training.

[tuncas]

There is no other legitimate purpose to legislation, especially legislation that potentially restricts the liberties of people.



The first question I always ask when anyone suggests a new law to me is, What problem are you trying to solve? Is this an important problem? Does the proposal in fact address the problem? What is the cost in liberty and treasure? Who pays?



Usually people can't even get past the first question.





They never indicated the problem they were trying to solve with firearms mandatory training.







Neither one of those problems is addressed by mandatory firearms training.

I agree


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Unretarded]

One other thing. There is a big difference between a right and a privilege. Requiring training before getting a driver's license is fine as it is a privilege. Requiring training before getting a firearm is NOT fine as that is a right.

Once you go on the slippery slope of treating 2A rights as a privilege then there will be so many regulations that it will be almost impossible to own a firearm. X hours of training, licensing fees, administration fees, insurance requirements, restrictions on where and how to possess the firearm, psychological testing, etc., etc..

The whole country would be like NYC where it is almost impossible to purchase a handgun.

If you believe the right to unrestricted travel requires a license.....

[CandG]

If you believe the right to unrestricted travel requires a license.....

So pilots shouldn't need licenses, either?

I'm all good with requiring a license and insurance. Without those requirements, nobody would have either one. That becomes a MAJOR quality of life problem for everyone. Motorists, pedestrians, people who own houses next to roads. Might as well not require licenses or insurance for doctors while we're at it.

[dscoduc]

When the government requires news organizations and reporters to take honesty and ethics training before they can print a single article, maybe then we could talk about firearms training.

I believe the MSM has done far more damage to our country than any crazy person with a firearm...

[calif 15-22]

OP I give ya kudos for dropping in a "Interesting Gun Control Proposal" on a gun board where the only Gun Control tolerated is me controlling my gun.

Having said that . . .

Required Training. I have some questions for you:
1. Who will conduct the training? The State? The Feds?
2. Who will determine the training course? (See question #1)
3. Will the training be local? Will I have to travel 500 miles or more?
4. Will I have to bring my own weapon? How will I do that if I have to have the training before I buy?
5. What if I can't drive? Will there be public transportation to the training?
6. Will there be a test to determining if the training was adequate? What if I fail the test will I have to take the training again?

Just some of the many questions I would have to get behind your "interesting gun control proposal"

I have one for you though and I think this would actually work?

1. To buy and own a gun in America, you must be (a) an American Citizen born in this country OR (b) immigrated through the proper channels.

Possession of a firearm by other than an American Citizen is punishable by permanent deportation or incarceration.

[Mitch]

I have one for you though and I think this would actually work?

1. To buy and own a gun in America, you must be (a) an American Citizen born in this country OR (b) immigrated through the proper channels.

Possession of a firearm by other than an American Citizen is punishable by permanent deportation or incarceration.

Here's what's wrong with that: the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, including the Second Amendment, are not special privileges granted to Americans, they are universal human rights.