Thank you for making my point - what's available for dedicated, motivated persons vs the LCD training available for the masses....men who went through sniper school, were on Army pistol teams...
Infrastructure is quite different than swimming lessons and other forms of .gov waste.Well, around here the government builds most (but not all of the roads). The people don't build any.
A role of the people you mean?
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves in their separate, and individual capacities. In all that the people can individually do as well for themselves, government ought not to interfere. The desirable things which the individuals of a people can not do, or can not well do, for themselves, fall into two classes: those which have relation to wrongs, and those which have not. Each of these branch off into an infinite variety of subdivisions. The first that in relation to wrongs embraces all crimes, misdemeanors, and nonperformance of contracts. The other embraces all which, in its nature, and without wrong, requires combined action, as public roads and highways, public schools, charities, pauperism, orphanage, estates of the deceased, and the machinery of government itself. From this it appears that if all men were just, there still would be some, though not so much, need for government.
Lincoln, Abraham
The role of government is to do what the people are unable to do themselves
Much like they do today, where they even think for us?
Thank you for making my point - what's available for dedicated, motivated persons vs the LCD training available for the masses.
Nope. I was not trying to score a cheap rhetorical point.
Ok, then, WHY do you value additional training?Given my understanding of the founding documents and history of this country, my personal understanding of "Morality" and its role in history, I respectfully choose to "leave it" when framed as it has been here; and by that I specifically mean that I still value additional training for myself over time, yet disagree strongly with your stated "moral obligation" to do so.
That's the point I was making as well. This thread isn't about raising/imposing legal standards on people, rather it's about the self-imposed obligations that result from understanding the implications of owning/carrying a firearm.And speaking of "Morality" Tamara states:
Quote:
Isn't separating the "legal" from the "moral" one of the whole points of this thread?
The OP mentions mandated training (as it pertains to privately owned/carried firearms) to point out that even when required it is minimal and also to highlight the fact that if we all act responsibly that there's no need for state mandated training at all.I would say that even if this was not the OPs original intention, although read the first six words of the OP:
That's not in the original thesis. The original thesis states that government training as it applies to private ownership and carry of firearms is minimal and is oriented not towards enhancing the skill of the individual to handle difficult situations but is rather oriented towards preventing the individual from being a danger to others. It points out that the value of this particular type of training is limited but it does not state categorically that all government training is useless nor does it even go so far as to state that this particular type of government training is worthless.My only disagreement with the original thesis is that government training is worthless.
Hmm; government involvement shouldn't ever be necessary.
From this it appears that if all men were just, there still would be some, though not so much, need for government.
Why doesn't the .gov spend the time and money to train all soldiers and police to the level of Sniper School students and the AMU team then
My position is (and always has been) that moral, responsible people will step up & get the training they need, whether or not the state requires it.
If anyone could convince me otherwise, you've done a damn good job of coming close.
pax
If you read my post, I said .gov training is geared to LCD. Qualification scores are set up so that anyone should be able to pass. To fill quotas often standards must be lowered, and yet we still see barely passing scores regularly. Hopefully it will be enough. If it isn't we have huge sums of tax money to cover the lawsuits...Your argument seems a bit amorphous. First you say government is incapable of A. Then you seem to say while government is capable of A it sometimes doesn't succeed. Now you seem to be asking about a cost benefit analysis of A.
What point are you trying to make?
most common related words.moral obligation - an obligation arising out of considerations of right and wrong; "he did it out of a feeling of moral obligation"
Maybe I'm just living in the wrong era, But my understanding of moral obligation means an attempt to be a better more responsible person.no matter what skill is at hand driving, shooting, self defense or whatever you do.duty, obligation, responsibility - the social force that binds you to the courses of action demanded by that force; "we must instill a sense of duty in our children"; "every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty"- John D.Rockefeller Jr
I like that way of putting it.sakeneko said:...The right to keep and bear arms comes with the responsibility to know how to do so safely and effectively.
What markj is asking is that we lower our standards to his
Quote:
Originally Posted by markj
I dont understand this at all, are you saying that a person cannot save the life of a family member without high levels of training? Hog wash.
No, I'm saying that if your family member is more than three large steps away, you will need more skill than your "7 yards" standards.
Yes, we know you do. Some of us think you're fooling yourself. And in any case, that is a far lower standard than many of us are willing to accept.markj said:...I accept the training needed to achieve a CCW here in Iowa and feel for MOST folks is all that is needed...
Well then, let's just say that without a higher level of training one is at considerably greater risk of (1) being less effective, and (2) being a greater danger to himself and others.markj said:...to say or infer that without this higher level of training you will be useless shows a complete lack of understanding...
So do the responsible thing and take the time and trouble, and incur the expense, to get some adequate training beyond what may be legally required.markj said:...A gun is and can be a terrible thing, used wrongly or on the wrong person will lead to tragedy....
And you think all that will guarantee your safety? You're fooling yourself again.markj said:...Stay away from known bad places, shop at daytime, stay out of malls and other places where huge gatherings may be...
And a trained and educated brain is better than one that is not -- just as a sharp saw is better than a dull one.markj said:...Your brain is the best tool you have at your disposal.