I don't think that's even a question the 4th amendment provides for a citizen to be deprived of liberty by due process of law but depriving someone of a Right based on their behavior is not the same as placing a requirement that does nothing on a right
Is STATE MANDATED safety training really necessary?
- Thread starter Smoke
- Start date
I don't think that's even a question the 4th amendment provides for a citizen to be deprived of liberty by due process of law but depriving someone of a Right based on their behavior is not the same as placing a requirement that does nothing on a right
here's a question that I have asked a couple of times in this thread and so far no one has tried to answer it.
How do you account for states that don't require safety training to receive a permit? They don't seem to have any higher accident rates than states that do have a training requirement.
So what actual, measurable, benefit do we get from forcing people who don't want to take the class anyway to take the class?
Don't misunderstand I'm all for training but if you want it, it should be your responsibility to get it.
How would you like it if the State all of a sudden changed the training requirement to a week at Gunsite or Tactical Response?
How do you account for states that don't require safety training to receive a permit? They don't seem to have any higher accident rates than states that do have a training requirement.
So what actual, measurable, benefit do we get from forcing people who don't want to take the class anyway to take the class?
Don't misunderstand I'm all for training but if you want it, it should be your responsibility to get it.
How would you like it if the State all of a sudden changed the training requirement to a week at Gunsite or Tactical Response?
Yes, they can. However, the current scheme used by the BATFE to make criminals "prohibited people" is overly broad and does little to make the public more safe.
As a result of her conviction, Martha Stewart is now a prohibited person. Do you think she poses some sort of intrinsic threat if she were allowed to possess (which means have control of, not own) a firearm?
Yeah, I've seen some idiots too. 
At me friends range in Ardsley, NY.
About 10 years ago I was on the range right next to an NYPD officer, he was sure to tell me. He had his young son with him, maybe 8 yo. There was another guy further down the range.
We called a ceasefire, everyone stepped back, except you know who who was fiddlin' with his gun at the bench.
We finally got his attention, and we all proceeded down range to change our targets. This was at a small range with 25 yard target distance.
I and the other fellow were back at our positions but off the bench area where our guns lay, the officer was downrange with his kid. He comes back and immediately yells "range is hot!" Trouble was his kid was about 20 feet behind him.
Boy did he get ripped a new one.
my friend runs the range and said he never came back.
About 2 years ago I was in a new shop that caters mainly to LE, Blueline Tactical in Elmsford, NY Thought I'd stop in to see if anyone had traded in anything revolver..
Standing near the counter was an on-duty Capt of a local PD. He was checking out a new AR, then proceeded to sweep me with the muzzle. Well trained I suppose, eh?
I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
Maybe we should cut their arms off?
At me friends range in Ardsley, NY.
About 10 years ago I was on the range right next to an NYPD officer, he was sure to tell me. He had his young son with him, maybe 8 yo. There was another guy further down the range.
We called a ceasefire, everyone stepped back, except you know who who was fiddlin' with his gun at the bench.
We finally got his attention, and we all proceeded down range to change our targets. This was at a small range with 25 yard target distance.
I and the other fellow were back at our positions but off the bench area where our guns lay, the officer was downrange with his kid. He comes back and immediately yells "range is hot!" Trouble was his kid was about 20 feet behind him.
Boy did he get ripped a new one.
my friend runs the range and said he never came back.About 2 years ago I was in a new shop that caters mainly to LE, Blueline Tactical in Elmsford, NY Thought I'd stop in to see if anyone had traded in anything revolver..
Standing near the counter was an on-duty Capt of a local PD. He was checking out a new AR, then proceeded to sweep me with the muzzle. Well trained I suppose, eh?
I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
Maybe we should cut their arms off?
Last edited:
Even moreso, someone loses their rights, gun ownership as an example. Why release them from prison if they're such a danger to society?
schgsd
Member
It is my understanding that some time in the past tractor trailer drivers in my state got grandfathered with class A commercial drivers licenses. Because they could prove they had been driving commercially for whatever time period was decided upon. From that point on a newbie had to take the tests to get the same license.
Same deal? 18 or older go to a range and show an RSO you are aware of the basic safety rules for handling. Leave with a certificate you submit to your state. Charge a few bucks for the time. Could be a nice moneymaker for the clubs. Maybe $1 from every one goes in to the NRA.
kbm6893
Member
Because at least that person, if properly taught and tested, would have an idea about gun safety.
Yes, even trained people screw up. That's bad enough. But to out a deadly weapon in the hands of somebody sho has had a no training is a mistake.
Thats not necessarily true. People who dont want to learn wont learn. And people who think their bad habits are good, will keep doing it
Rastoff
US Veteran
You're right that those who don't want to learn probably won't learn a lot. However, they might pick up something. If they don't take the class, it's guaranteed they won't learn. While they may not pick up much, at least they've been exposed to the curriculum.
In my class, I've had several students show up with the, "I'm forced to be here so I'm here" attitude. They initially intended to just suffer through. Once the class got rolling, they became active participants. To a man, they've all thanked me for the class. A few have signed up for more training.
In my class, I've had several students show up with the, "I'm forced to be here so I'm here" attitude. They initially intended to just suffer through. Once the class got rolling, they became active participants. To a man, they've all thanked me for the class. A few have signed up for more training.
Yup. Im wishy washy. I dont think the government should impose, but i think everyone should take it.
No, I think you understand the difference between a good idea (training) and being forced to take training because the government thinks it's a good idea.
CowboyKen
Member
Does NOT answer Smoke's question, "How do you account for states that don't require safety training to receive a permit? They don't seem to have any higher accident rates than states that do have a training requirement."
Smoke knows why no one will answer this question. I will though. It is clearly and demonstrably because all that government mandated training does NOT have any appreciable positive result in terms of safety or anything else.
Clearly we don't need no stinkin' Govmt mandated training.
Ken
Thanks for saving me the trouble of typing that out
So why in the Hell are we mandating training?
It doesn't change anything
BATFE controls the law? Last I knew, they enforced 18 USC 922, passed by Congress. In answer to your question, yes. She has demonstrate a willingness to ignore the law for her personal gain. Who am I to decide that her willingness is innocent?
Last edited:
How do you account for states that don't have any training requirement?
Why don't they have higher accident rates?
What do I learn from a government mandated safety class that I can't learn from reading the manual?
CowboyKen
Member
Politics and control. Oh that is redundant, isn't it ?
I asked three distinct questions, this answers none of them.
1. How do you account for states that don't require safety training to receive a permit? They don't seem to have any higher accident rates than states that do have a training requirement.
2.(So) What actual, measurable, benefit do we get from forcing people who don't want to take the class anyway to take the class?
3. How would you like it if the State all of a sudden changed the training requirement to a week at Gunsite or Tactical Response?
I believe that the ATF administers the law and interprets it as well under the CFR.
So, you think that the goal is to keep firearms out of the hands of people who can't follow administrative rules, not so much to keep firearms out of the the hands of violent felons?
Your thought process is faulty, to say the least.
I truly do not see this as a political or constitutional issue. I'm probably one of the most pro gun people in the world, but training is prudent and necessary and not only a minimal amount of training.
A gun is a tool, a mechanical device. As are many tools and mechanical devices they are not intuitive in their operation, particularly semi autos. And they can be extremely deadly. I realize this is an extreme reach of an example and obviously not a constitutional right, but is it prudent to let a person attempt to fly a helicopter simply because he/she can afford and buys one? Hopefully people will get my point.
I have been an officer for over 36 years and in my early days I saw many older officers (prior to any semblance of state mandated training for LEO's) who were extremely dangerous with the weapons they carried. After the state mandated firearms qualification for all NC LEO's we would avoid some of these officers like the plague when on the range. Recognizing that some LEO's had no training and many are not "gun people" the state mandated that officers not only qualify but prior to the actual qualification on the range there be a classroom portion of the required training which dealt with safety, use of force and when the use of deadly force was justified and when it was not.
Today all NC officers have to complete an extensive firearms course and qualify to become officers and re-qualify annually to maintain their law enforcement certification. Even with this training, I am still not comfortable being around some officers when they remove their weapons from the holster.
While a long winded post, my point is that simply buying a gun and having no idea how to load it, how it operates, how to safely handle the gun, how to render the weapon safe for others and having little to no idea when to use it, whether the use is justified or legal or not is not prudent.
A gun is a tool, a mechanical device. As are many tools and mechanical devices they are not intuitive in their operation, particularly semi autos. And they can be extremely deadly. I realize this is an extreme reach of an example and obviously not a constitutional right, but is it prudent to let a person attempt to fly a helicopter simply because he/she can afford and buys one? Hopefully people will get my point.
I have been an officer for over 36 years and in my early days I saw many older officers (prior to any semblance of state mandated training for LEO's) who were extremely dangerous with the weapons they carried. After the state mandated firearms qualification for all NC LEO's we would avoid some of these officers like the plague when on the range. Recognizing that some LEO's had no training and many are not "gun people" the state mandated that officers not only qualify but prior to the actual qualification on the range there be a classroom portion of the required training which dealt with safety, use of force and when the use of deadly force was justified and when it was not.
Today all NC officers have to complete an extensive firearms course and qualify to become officers and re-qualify annually to maintain their law enforcement certification. Even with this training, I am still not comfortable being around some officers when they remove their weapons from the holster.
While a long winded post, my point is that simply buying a gun and having no idea how to load it, how it operates, how to safely handle the gun, how to render the weapon safe for others and having little to no idea when to use it, whether the use is justified or legal or not is not prudent.
Last edited:
