No, it is stating the obvious about the general population.
I believe that most, if not all, here do the same.
Not only at the range, and certainly not only firearm owners. How often have you talked to a driver on the street due to their dangerous behavior or called the police on an idiot driver? I likely would become quite concerned about the person I saw putting on body armor at the range.
No, laws that infringe on our rights are designed to harm law-abiding citizens.
Meet the requirements of the 1938 FFA, today or tomorrow? The “prohibited” persons list has gotten far longer since the 1938 FFA ban on felons obtaining and possessing firearms. Recall when they, more than once, wanted to include those on the “no fly” list? Those people have not even been accused of any crimes, much less been convicted of a felony.
Currently 24/25 states proving the answer to be “Yes”. One has always been that way and has always had the lowest crime rates in the nation. Like driver’s licenses, we can see that does not make one a good driver or even knowledgeable about driving laws. Ask your friends some questions about driving. You might become more afraid to be on the road than at the range.
You can put whatever restrictions you want on yourself. Our rights are not up to you to decide what should or should not be “allowed”.
Yes, right where it states “shall not be infringed.”
They are not seeking to “weed out the careless”, they are seeking to “weed out” the law-abiding citizens such as us. As to tests, etc., many of the worst states (the most restrictive) do have ridiculous standards, including some that require mental health evaluations (NYS, for one). As to affordability, the most restrictive states do the exact opposite, especially when training, permits, etc., result in several or more hundreds of dollars just to apply for the permit/license. But as long as you are still “allowed”, who cares?