i am all for mandatory hunting safety courses (...) there is no reason why you should not require any adult or minor to pass a basic test in order be able to use or own firearms (...) this means you would at least be able to read and write, and have gone through minimal training of safety/operation
Tread very carefully. We've had
that sort of setup before.
Tell me (without Google) how quickly you can answer these questions:
If the president does not wish to sign a bill, how many days is he allowed in which to return it to Congress for reconsideration?
In what year did the Congress gain the right to prohibit the migration of persons to the states?
The power of granting patents, that is, of securing to inventors the exclusive right to their discoveries, is given to Congress for the purpose of ____________
Correct answers to all of those questions were once required before one could vote.
In that spirit, here's the form that such a quiz would become if it were applied to buying guns. All answers must be correct, or no guns for you.
1) If the second half of a cartridge's name specifies case length, what is the case length of a .30-06?
2) Why are .357 and .38 Special cartridges compatible if they are different calibers?
3) Susan was convicted of possession of .58 ounces of marijuana and an unregistered NFA weapon in North Dakota. How long must she serve before she is eligible for parole?
4) Specify point blank range for the .25 Ackley Krag loading.
Sure, it would start out simple. Then, as all regulations do, it would get more and more stringent until we reached a point where the tests were similar to the questions above.
And wouldn't that be convenient? After all, it's not a
ban on guns at all, is it? It's just a basic test to ensure everyone's safety.
No thanks.
OK how about we forget the test,just have a 10-15min safety video and then we hold people responsible for negligent discharges.
I've been to a range that has that. It's death for business because experienced shooters find it inconvenient and patronizing. The manager even acknowledged this after we'd just had a lengthy talk about firearms history. I still had to sit through it; it was
policy.
Several other people were there, and two were obviously bored to tears. They watched the same video, then proceeded to violate three range rules and two cardinal gun safety rules. The video didn't stop them from behaving like ignoramii and placing others in danger.
What stopped them was having the range master put them out on their (metaphorical) butts.
Do we need to be vigilant and police our own? Yes. Do we need impediments like tests, pamphlets and videos? No. Those things, while seemingly innocent, will be an annoyance to good shooters and will be ignored by irresponsible ones.
I fully understand the OP's concerns, and I empathize. I've had the "you have failed to convince me that you have the proper mindset to handle firearms responsibly" conversation more times than I can count.
But it goes with the territory.
My answer is to teach a mandatory gun safety class in high school.
In 1996, I made that suggestion at a dinner party of academics that included several members of the state board of education. It was like something out of
Borat. The room went dead silent for about five seconds, then people started lambasting me. One person called me a sociopath for suggesting such a thing. Funny thing? He was a professor at GSU. Small world