Is STATE MANDATED safety training really necessary?

[ladder13]

Should an overworked person who does not know how to handle a gun really be swinging one around? Yes constitutionally she has that right. Is it safe? Depends on her knowledge and upbringing. She could potentially use it and be charged with a crime because it wasnt legally justified. At that point a few bucks and time for training would be worth it.

Just providing a counterpoint

There is no absolute safety in the world.

Sort of reminds of the old Franklin quote about people giving up liberty to obtain temporary safety and getting neither.

As I get older I find myself drawn to the Libertarian side of most things, as long as I'm not harming anyone I'd like to be left alone.

Some were lamenting the last Congress as a do-nothing Congress in that they passed the fewest laws of any Congress in decades.
I saw that as a good thing.

 

[Yiogo]

I got some training from Uncle Sam and at a club when I joined. At that club qualifying is the norm.
In NH, you don't need a permit just a background check to buy a firearm.
Open carry is allowed without a permit but presently one is needed to carry concealed.

I've been swept an the local GS (training?) at the range by a trained instructor (training), during Basic (training) and at a train station in Paris by a French soldier (training) and at a public range (training?). Some of these people have had training some I don' know.

I don't think training courses make a whole lot of difference.

People just are not aware.

Yiogo

 

[Rastoff]

Should an overworked person who does not know how to handle a gun really be swinging one around? Yes constitutionally she has that right.

No, she does not have that right. The constitution guarantees our right to own firearms. It does not guarantee the right to muzzle others.


HOWEVER, I'm not convinced that training would resolve this kind of issue.

I realize that what I've posted here may seem contradictory, it's not. Even so, I'll say it again, training should not be mandated by the state. A conscientious gun owner will seek out training even if only to learn how to be safer.

 

[CowboyKen]

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.

Ken

That's not correct, Ken. The training I gave people when it was mandated by our AZ state very definitely DID have positive results in safety awareness. I've had many people say they felt they learned a lot & felt much more safe handling & shooting their guns.
Hank

So the training that you do is so much more effective then the training everyone else does that we are to believe that it overwhelms the fact that there are now many states that do not require any training at all and they have no higher incidents of "accidental and mistaken shootings" then Arizona has had with that mandated training? I am skeptical of this.

And as noted in the first page, in an indeterminate number of states , the accepted training is open ended enough to be essentially none.

And between all three catagories the rates of accidental and mistaken shootings are equally near zero. ...
...
Yes , many of the Instructors are good people , and can even teach useful skills. Such Instructor should have no trouble having clients who volentarily wish to train with them.

It seems that some states want to assert control and raise revenue and trainers like to make money doing training and like the idea that the state helps them fill their classes.

But all of this still does not have any appreciable positive result for anyone else.

Ken

 

[k22fan]

She had the money to buy the gun and ammo. […] They can't come up with another 50 bucks? And if they are THAT dead broke, how are they gonna get some private range time and ammo?

Reread what I wrote.

[…] Suppose grandpa gives her an old model 36 or 10 and takes her to the range. (sound familiar?) […]

Apparantly I should have also written "Additionally suppose grandpa gives here a good supply of his reloads, a holster and teachers her to handle guns safely."

Much to the dismay of those trying to fatten their wallets by charging for it, one does not need to buy a training class to learn safe gun handling. Even without guidance form family or friends that information is readily available in books and on line.

Only $50 for a training course? Maybe for a hunter safety course taught by volunteers with pamphlets supplied by the Department of Wildlife. I don't know about your state but Washington is desperately clawing for more money out of everything they see. I can guarantee you our entrenched Democrats will NEVER contribute funds for concealed carry training. Private courses run over $100. In my area the private instructors offer courses intended to be basic enough for a person handling a gun for the first time charge $175.

Perhaps you can not have empathy for the poor if you have never had to choose between necessities. Especially as young adults many people in this country struggle to pay the rent.

 

[Practical]

We don't require any training or licensing to become parents or have sex.

We let people learn on the job.

Safety training only benefits people who are going to be responsible.

I don't think a 'right' should require training. However, I recognize it will reduce accidents IF participants are made to be accountable.

I think training will likely reduce accidents in the first few years but afterwards the risk will increase unless the person is responsible and skilled.

Just like hunter safety training.

 

[bhayles]

I would point out that embezzlers and fraud perpetrators have potentially ruined more innocent lives than any bank robber . . .

No doubt...especially the un-caught ones, but that's beside the point.

The folks who stole with a keyboard and got caught did not endanger or physically harm anyone, they served their time and paid their debt to society, and should be allowed the right of self-protection.

 

[Muss Muggins]

No doubt...especially the un-caught ones, but that's beside the point.

The folks who stole with a keyboard and got caught did not endanger or physically harm anyone, they served their time and paid their debt to society, and should be allowed the right of self-protection.

Would it change your mind if it was your 401K that disappeared? And you were forced to rely on Social Security, which you hadn't planned on, because a ne'er do well stole every dime you had ever invested? If it wouldn't, there's no point in continuing this conversation

 

[Muss Muggins]

No doubt...especially the un-caught ones, but that's beside the point.

That actually is my point

 

[ClayCow]

If you don't know how to handle a gun you shouldn't handle one, overworked or not.

If you do know how to handle a gun, you know not to swing one around.

I am not sure what point you are countering. I would think we are all in agreement on this.

Sure. This is great in theory. But im going to bet the majority of gun owners dont know the laws nor the basics of guns. Id like to say im liberterian too, but when it could possinly violate my safety? Im worried. This overworked mother could possibly negligently discharge her weapon and kill me. What then?

To me. With the school shootings and whatever elae gun related. I take that as a consequence of our 2A right. Unfortunately to have this right we have to assume risks and the bad side. Its worth it to me.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Those who say "I'm all for training but I don't think it should be mandatory" are trying to have their cake and eat it too. Sure, in some imaginary world, everybody would get the training.

I'm curious how many weeks of government mandatory training did you require to learn how to operate the cylinder latch and which finger to operate the trigger on a revolver? Did you really need government mandatory training to know its unsafe to point a gun at someone just for fun? While we may disagree on some things here, I'm willing to bet you would somehow manage to learn basic gun operation and rudimentary safety without government mandating your training. Bad bet?

Tennessee passed a law that allows people to carry loaded guns in their cars without a carry permit (no mandatory training). Curiously enough, I don't see a bunch of cars on the side of the road with shot dead bodies inside. How can that be? I wonder why everyone isn't driving around shooting out the window since they haven't had government training to know it's illegal?

Believe it or not, people generally do well absent government meddling with their Constitutional rights.

 

[ladder13]

Should an overworked person who does not know how to handle a gun really be swinging one around? Yes constitutionally she has that right. Is it safe? Depends on her knowledge and upbringing. She could potentially use it and be charged with a crime because it wasnt legally justified. At that point a few bucks and time for training would be worth it.

Just providing a counterpoint

Do we take people's rights away only because they may potentially be unsafe or potentially commit a crime? Who decides that? What if "they" come for you with excuses like "he has too many guns or ammo"? There are places where storage of ammo is considered a hazard, deemed unsafe.
Where does it stop?
Usually we take people's rights away, ie jail time, after they commit a crime. Isn't that the way it's supposed to be?
Be careful what you ask for.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

No, she does not have that right. The constitution guarantees our right to own firearms. It does not guarantee the right to muzzle others.


HOWEVER, I'm not convinced that training would resolve this kind of issue.

You're right, it would not resolve it.

People know not to point guns at others. Inattention, mind wandering and carelessness are the issues, not a lack of government mandated training. Humans.

Those seeking a perfect world via government mandates should be careful what they ask for.

 

[ClayCow]

Do we take people's rights away only because they may potentially be unsafe or potentially commit a crime? Who decides that? What if "they" come for you with excuses like "he has too many guns or ammo"? There are places where storage of ammo is considered a hazard, deemed unsafe.
Where does it stop?
Usually we take people's rights away, ie jail time, after they commit a crime. Isn't that the way it's supposed to be?
Be careful what you ask for.

You absolutely took my potential statement out of context and used it for your agenda. My statement about potential was that at that point, she would prob have wished she had done some training.

 

[Triathloncoach]

I moved from NJ where absolutely no one is issued a carry permit to Georgia where you pass a background check and you are good to go. Based on my experience and skill level I believe I should have been required to take some form of "reasonable" course. But Georgia's gun laws certainly don't appear to be leading to more crime. I guess the onus is on me to be responsible. That's putting a lot of faith in me.

 

[Triathloncoach]

Constitutional right. No government mandated training/licensing.

All the crying about public safety is BS.

Gun owners do just fine with their freedom, it's been demonstrated time and time again despite the persistent handwringing.

"But what about the children!!!"

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

I moved from NJ where absolutely nobody is issued a carry permit to Georgia where you pass a background check and you are good to go. Based on my experience and skill level I believe I should have been required to take some form of "reasonable" course. But Georgia's gun laws certainly don't appear to be leading to more crime. I guess the onus is on me to be responsible. That's putting a lot of faith in me.

Adjusting to freedom can sometimes take a bit.

Every time there is a law allowing gun owners more freedom in Tennessee there are those, many of them gun owners, that fret over it. But it always works out jut fine.

I think you'll soon discover that folks handle their freedom well without government meddling.

 

[ChattanoogaPhil]

How do grandma, grandpa, and others who live in rural America, possibly 100's of miles away from a range or facility get "trained"?
I visited S. Dakota and Eastern Wyoming just this past summer. You can go for quite some time and see a single house here and there. Should they be denied self protection?

Rural America granny and gramps probably know more about guns than government utopia do-gooder policy makers ever will.

 

[ladder13]

You absolutely took my potential statement out of context and used it for your agenda. ........................

Mea culpa, you got me on this one. Yep, I suppose I'm just an old fashioned Constitutionalist, a dying breed if you will.

 

[wheelgunguy]

Let me put a blanket statement out there.

"Everybody from the unexperienced to the expert shooter can benefit from more practice and training."

I don't think anyone would disagree with this.

What many of us are questioning is the necessity of mandated training.

There are countless examples (real and hypothetical) that we can all come up with where people are under trained or negligent. Many times we have even witnessed it. Many times these people we have seen or heard about have received the mandated training or even more. I don't think these specific examples proves one way or the other that training should be mandated. It's a much bigger question than any one example.