Would you support mandatory firearm education?

I would not support mandatory firearm education in any way. I dont want the anti's to push their views on me, and I dont push my views on others...

That said, perhaps a firearm safety and hunters education course could be more available in every high school with a specific opt-out for those who were not interested, or were against firearms. Thats how it was when I was in school, which was some years ago.
 
Generally, I would support it. Seen too many dangerous new gun owners endanger other shooters at the range with unsafe gun handling, not to mention LEO's early in their POST training.
 
Ok I see everyones point in: (no it's my right, no regs) but none of our freedoms are absolute to begin with. Just like the 1st amendment you cannot yell fire in a crowded theatre because people could get hurt. The same should apply to the second. I repeal my opinion of mandatory for ownership. Now you can argue a chainsaw or a lawnmower or a car or a pointy stick is more dangerous than a gun, but that argument has no end and leads to no constructive outcome. I agree with the notion o having firearm SAFTEY mandatory in school. That meaning the basic safety of how to properly handle a firearm. I'm not talking about a self defense class. Just the basics on how guns operate and how not to kill little jimmy down the street.
 
I don't support infringing my rights.... I don't support infringing your rights. We have way to many gun laws to begin with. When you figure how to outlaw evil then we have a place to start.
 
Absolutely not. I do promote it but would never think of forcing it on anyone. This is why we have rights, to not be told what to do, by those who think they know better.
 
How would THAT be done ? ( IMO it would be a great public service)
Mandatory Firearms education ? in what school, grades, etc ?
Public or private schools ?

In my neck of the woods the education platform is a hornets nest of Libs and bleeding hearts (that was before Sandy Hook)

Some states teaching "Science" is outlawed and under fire..

thus it will NEVER happen.. it will be easier just to ban the guns
 
If it were implemented correctly I would.
If they added like a $2-5 tax to gun purchases to fund it so it wouldn't cost people directly, made sure that classes were widely available, and limited it to a couple sessions of a reasonable length.

That being said, I very much doubt that there will ever be any actual proposed legislation on the topic that I would agree with. By the time you turn it into a 40 page legal document written by a committee of blowhards and lawyers, even a good idea turns bad.
 
Start it in kindergarten, that way the video game influences about just blasting everything and hitting the reset button have less impact on the mentally vulnerable
 
While I strongly advocate that any firearms owner should seek and learn about the proper handeling of a firearm, I cannot endorse forcing it upon them.

Ultimately, the way I look at it is that an irresponsible individual is going to be irresponsible regardless of the what he or she has been taught. There is no gurantee that forcing firearms education upon the masses will reduce tragedies.

Someone who respects the firearm and is willing to spend just ten minutes on YouTube will have already done so as it is. It's like telling your child something is wrong and they shouldn't do something, but in the end, it's their decision to carry out whatever that something is even if they know it's wrong.

Morality and self accountability is something you cannot legislate no matter how much you try or wish that you could.
 
How about instead of a "mandatory" class it become something that is worth the persons time. For example you do not have to present a "certificate" to purchase a firearm, however if you do present said certificate you receive a $50 discount on the cost of the firearm, or maybe a $50 gift card, of course it could only be used on new gun sales and the $$ would have to come from somewhere, whether it be Pittman Robertson, NRA or the Manufacturer or a combination of them.

And if all kids learned safe gun handling from an early early age it would ruin the video game industry, hmm on second thought that just makes it better.
 
An elective public high school course with credit comparable to all other elective courses. Private schools should be encouraged to offer the same course, or their students should be allowed to attend the course in public schools.
 
Mausermold: Ok I see everyones point in: (no it's my right, no regs) but none of our freedoms are absolute to begin with. Just like the 1st amendment you cannot yell fire in a crowded theatre because people could get hurt. The same should apply to the second.
Click to expand...

It already does apply. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater because the undue harm it would cause by the people rushing for the doors. This limits the first to allow you to only do things that do not harm other people.

The second is limited likewise. While we have the right to keep and bear arms, we do not have the right to use those weapons unjustly to bring harm to other people.

The right is NOT absolute. You can't keep and bear an arm to kill someone.

As far as mandatory training, No. It is a right. People should be strongly encouraged to get training and know how to use weapons safely but we can't put a mandatory clause on a right.
 
Do you really want a bunch of politicans that hate guns and don't handle them safely to impose a firearm safety requirement?

Everytime you see Feinstein touch a gun she violates 3 of the 4 rules. Yeah I want her in charge at the department of firearm safety.
 
How about instead of a "mandatory" class it become something that is worth the persons time. For example you do not have to present a "certificate" to purchase a firearm, however if you do present said certificate you receive a $50 discount on the cost of the firearm, or maybe a $50 gift card, of course it could only be used on new gun sales and the $$ would have to come from somewhere, whether it be Pittman Robertson, NRA or the Manufacturer or a combination of them.
Click to expand...

Instead of a discount they could just waive $50 in taxes off the purchase. Or, if that wouldn't work, perhaps attach some sort of "safety tax" that could be used to fund gun safety training, and waived if you've taken the class.
That way there would be no restriction on gun ownership, people would be encouraged to take a safety class, and it would be at least partially funded.

Again, it would all depend on how (and by whom) it was implemented, but it does seem like it could work.
 
The antigun support of "gun training" is in adding a barrier to entry - stop casual browsers being able to buy a gun just because they have $500 (compounding the problem of there being too many people who own guns to ban them). I really don't think they otherwise want the next guy going postal to be faster and more effective, that kind of misses the point.

They oppose training being used in a non-barrier form as it compounds the problem (of guns) by normalizing gun ownership and use (see opposition to "Eddie Eagle" ).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top