Absolutely. But a certain subset of people see that as an infringement on their rights.
If it prevents injury or death, it’s not an infringement but a reinforcement.
I’m a gunsmith and an avid competitive shooter, and I absolutely think that mandatory training with firearms should be necessary. Right now, it’s mandatory to take a hunter’s safety course before you can obtain a hunting license, which includes firearms safety. In sane states, obtaining a permit to carry a firearm loaded in public (concealed, we won’t get into the idiocy of open carry) requires similar training.
To me, it’s no different than operating a vehicle or any other piece of equipment that has the potential to do great harm to others: You need to have training on how to use it properly and safely, the basics of the law and so on, and ultimately a level of enforced accountability in the event that you fail to follow protocols for safe handling, storage, and usage of said same.
Lots of people expect anti-gun people to abuse the concept through cost and time requirements. Sort of like they did with permits in may issue states. That is where opposition to requirements comes from.
The ATF already does this with suppressors, it’s an arbitrary $200 and an almost 2 year wait to buy a simple tube that barely makes your firearm silent. Because morons that write legislation think that Hollywood mouse fart gun silencers are real.
This just reinforces my firm belief that a gun safety course should be required before someone can purchase their first firearm.
Absolutely. But a certain subset of people see that as an infringement on their rights. If it prevents injury or death, it’s not an infringement but a reinforcement.
deleted by creator
I’m a gunsmith and an avid competitive shooter, and I absolutely think that mandatory training with firearms should be necessary. Right now, it’s mandatory to take a hunter’s safety course before you can obtain a hunting license, which includes firearms safety. In sane states, obtaining a permit to carry a firearm loaded in public (concealed, we won’t get into the idiocy of open carry) requires similar training.
To me, it’s no different than operating a vehicle or any other piece of equipment that has the potential to do great harm to others: You need to have training on how to use it properly and safely, the basics of the law and so on, and ultimately a level of enforced accountability in the event that you fail to follow protocols for safe handling, storage, and usage of said same.
A well regulated militia you say?
Lots of people expect anti-gun people to abuse the concept through cost and time requirements. Sort of like they did with permits in may issue states. That is where opposition to requirements comes from.
The ATF already does this with suppressors, it’s an arbitrary $200 and an almost 2 year wait to buy a simple tube that barely makes your firearm silent. Because morons that write legislation think that Hollywood mouse fart gun silencers are real.
This is why the class should be publicly funded and free for the student.
We used to teach gun safety and handling in school. Bring that back!