It would be drafted by people who run for and win elected office, not necessarily firearms owners. Of course, many firearms owners choose not to run for office believing that complaining about anti-gun laws on internet forums is enough to protect their rights.
It would mandate “training” by statute and delegate to an administrative agency (e.g., the ATF for federal laws or state law enforcement agencies for state laws) the task of defining what “training” includes.
It would be enforced with criminal sanctions (jail time, fines or both) imposed on those who do not successfully complete the mandated training.
It would exempt law enforcement from completing any training on the assumption that they are “experts” and already adequately trained in the use and safe handling of firearms.
It would require that firearms owners keep on their person and produce on demand proof that they have completed a certified firearms training class along with any mandated renewals.
It would require anyone who teaches a firearms training course to be licensed (think: fees, record inspections, etc) by an appropriate firearms regulator and registrar.
And then, inevitably, like is happening in CA (maybe this would even happen right at launch), very few instructors would be granted the coveted privilege of being allowed to give approved training and people wouldn’t be able to get their Mommy-May-I permission slip to own a gun in their own home due to a lack of trainers/classes.
True. Or, as is often done with government programs, training legislation would require training standards to be established by a named regulatory agency, then the legislature would not fund that agency.
I doubt it.
The Government isn’t interested in safety, but statistics to justify power regardless of common sense.
If you follow the Govt. mandated training in CA, for example, all your firearms would have to be unloaded and locked up, and you’d be banned from carrying most places outside your home, even if you possessed a CCW.
How’s that working out for you?
The hyperbole around guns is out of this world. A day or two ago Court TV was on regarding the trial of John Crumbly (father of a school shooter). Some normal-seeming lawyer/legal analyst was discussing the prosecution’s case. He made the statement “We’re talling about a parent who gave his son a handgun. A handgun is probably the single most dangerous weapon ever made by man. A child can walk up to an elephant and instantly kill it.” I thought wow. I didn’t know my lowly handguns were more dangerous than, say, a nuclear weapon, or even a simple old hand grenade. Who knew? Also, I’d like to see the hand gun that can be used by a child to immediately drop an elephant! But, this is honestly what people believe.
This is a sad and tragic story. IMHO training is not mandatory but if you train it will make you a more responsible gun owner. I am glad that I did not buy a gun and just strap it on. I am glad that I went through a police academy that trained me well. I can’t judge the X football player because I was not in his shoes. But this was mentioned and I also agree. Communicate and have a plan with all occupants that live in the home. This could have been avoided.
**Blow yer lungs out
** Shotgun blasts in the air!
** (300) rounds a second
** (500) Round Magazines
** ‘Clipazines!’
**Weapons of War
**Gun Buy Backs!
**ASSAULT RIFLES! (No such thing)
and on and on the Leftist propaganda machine rolls!
Disarm the Population (entirely) Only .gov will have the guns
SCARE tactics for the Shepple—Guns BAD!, Scary Black Guns! (SBG’s)
‘Don’t defend yourself!’(I love that one)
Give them everything they want! Wallets, Purses, Car(s) Homes, Life!
I don’t like all the mandatory requirements and fees needed to exercise a right that supposedly shall not be infringed. Especially when most of those fees and requirements are often clearly designed more to discourage legal carry instead of actually training safety and responsible use.
But there is nothing in the constitution against mandating children in public schools to take firearm safety classes. Every year at my son’s school they do a fire safety segment for several days culminating in a visit from the local fire department. I don’t see any issues with a firearm safety class, taught by qualified and capable instructors, culminating with a visit from the local sherif or PD.
TRUTH! I’m talking about mandatory 'adult ’ CONTROL/RESTRICTIONS/OVER REACH/INFRINGEMENTS!
Teach the child to Respect the Firearm (It’s not a Toy)
Teach them Responsibilities of shooting/owning the Firearm
Teach them the ‘FUN’ of shooting!
Teach them the (4) rules!
Then you have a Responsible kid who hopefully grows into a responsible ADULT! Job well done.
Again, it’s no different than sex or drug education in schools. Kids are all exposed to all these things. We all know they are, or will be.
Right now kids that don’t have parents teaching them are getting all their firearms education from “first person shooter” games, (which they ALL play), movies and, maybe, from friends or hands-on with illegally-gotten guns.
Blowing away 100 virtual bad guys with a digital automatic rifle isn’t my idea of a good start WRT firearms education.
I mentioned in another thread that I took my grand kids to a firearms safety course for kids and they enjoyed it and they learned a lot. It was a USCCA course given by a USCCA instructor.
Every month in 5.11 facility near my location we have 2 hrs free classes:
Perhaps it’s not the same as a training with real firearm, but definitely a great start for people who are responsible for their actions.
I love those and tomorow will be my 4th class.
I hope something like this will be brought to the schools.
… or be a mandatory class for new gun owners and will be provided at LGS…
Mandated by whom, how is it tracked, what is the penalty if you don’t do it, and how is a “new gun owner” identified vs an “old gun owner” and why does being new vs old matter for the mandate?
