Some people shouldn't have guns
First, forgive any typos, as the girlfriend decided that my keyboard would be an excellent storage area for a drink.
I'm not saying that I support this, but it was just a thought, and I'm soliciting opinions.
Many times in the anti-gun argument, the comparison to cars is brought up. "If we have to license cars, why not guns ?"
I know I have limits when it comes to some things. I should not use a bandsaw or radial arm saw. Everyone has limits.
I'll wager that there are few here that have never been around someone at the range, and thought "That person has no business owning a gun".
A drivers license permits the bearer to drive. It does not specify WHAT you drive. If you choose to get an '84 Yugo, or a 2008 Callaway Corvette, or a 1910 Hupmobile, the choice is yours.
How many people would support a publicly funded (as in Drivers Education in schools) program that taught safety, had a basic test, and then licensed people to buy whatever they both wanted, and could afford ?
Also going to post this in the gun rights category, and prepare myself for being brutalized [:D]
I'm not saying that I support this, but it was just a thought, and I'm soliciting opinions.
Many times in the anti-gun argument, the comparison to cars is brought up. "If we have to license cars, why not guns ?"
I know I have limits when it comes to some things. I should not use a bandsaw or radial arm saw. Everyone has limits.
I'll wager that there are few here that have never been around someone at the range, and thought "That person has no business owning a gun".
A drivers license permits the bearer to drive. It does not specify WHAT you drive. If you choose to get an '84 Yugo, or a 2008 Callaway Corvette, or a 1910 Hupmobile, the choice is yours.
How many people would support a publicly funded (as in Drivers Education in schools) program that taught safety, had a basic test, and then licensed people to buy whatever they both wanted, and could afford ?
Also going to post this in the gun rights category, and prepare myself for being brutalized [:D]
0
-
How do you compose a test that is fair to say...."yes, you may defend yourself...or NO, you have less RIGHTS than others who did better than you." I don't trust anyone to come up with a system that could take away what the basics of our country is founded on. 0 -
"Shall not be infringed" means just that.
We should punish the behavior of individuals, not everyone. In addition, we should police ourselves as a society.
Bad, or unbalanced, people do bad, or crazy things. These events are the price of living in a free society.0 -
A driver's license is not carved in stone in the United States Constitution. 0 -
My thoughts were no more complicated than a drivers license test is. Basic safety is taught, and the mere ability to load a revolver, point it downrange, and not hit the instructor. A drivers license isn't saying you are ready for NASCAR, it just merely states you may not be as much of a moron who hasn't had the course. 0 -
There are people who can't read. There are people who just don't do well in classroom settings. There are people who don't realize they need to "prepare" for anything that would lead them to owning a firearm. There are idiots who would abuse their powers and deny others only because they have the power to do so. There are just way too many reasons this would never work....plus the fact that the founding fathers would kick our rears when we got to heaven for letting California happen to the entire country. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by lt496
"Shall not be infringed" means just that.
We should punish the behavior of individuals, not everyone. In addition, we should police ourselves as a society.
Bad, or unbalanced, people do bad, or crazy things. These events are the price of living in a free society.
LT, I am not disagreeing with you. This was just a thought I had while reading through some literature. Our rights are already infringed. They were taken gradually, and I'm looking for an avenue that might get them back, short of armed conflict.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
First, forgive any typos, as the girlfriend decided that my keyboard would be an excellent storage area for a drink.
I'm not saying that I support this, but it was just a thought, and I'm soliciting opinions.
Many times in the anti-gun argument, the comparison to cars is brought up. "If we have to license cars, why not guns ?"
I know I have limits when it comes to some things. I should not use a bandsaw or radial arm saw. Everyone has limits.
I'll wager that there are few here that have never been around someone at the range, and thought "That person has no business owning a gun".
A drivers license permits the bearer to drive. It does not specify WHAT you drive. If you choose to get an '84 Yugo, or a 2008 Callaway Corvette, or a 1910 Hupmobile, the choice is yours.
How many people would support a publicly funded (as in Drivers Education in schools) program that taught safety, had a basic test, and then licensed people to buy whatever they both wanted, and could afford ?
Also going to post this in the gun rights category, and prepare myself for being brutalized [:D]
The Right to bear arms is a RIGHT...not a privilege to be licensed0 -
quote:Originally posted by MT357
A driver's license is not carved in stone in the United States Constitution.
Yep, agreed.
Anyway, a driver's license test is a joke. Look at the 'tards that drive.
They go down the highway at 75mph yakking on a cellphone.
They leave their turn signal on for 100 miles.
They have no concept that the left lane is for PASSING, not a personal lane.
They don't look when they back up.
They don't understand Right of Way.
They drive too fast on icy streets because everyone knows that 4-wheel drive = 4-wheel stop.
A red light means you can go through it within the first 10 seconds of it being red.
They put on makeup while driving.
They shave while driving.
They turn around and yell at kids while driving.
Sorry, man, I was an insurance adjuster for 15 years. I've "seen it all" and I've come to the conclusion that a driver's license is far too easy to obtain.
Now, you want to float the idea of the government deciding who should and who should not have a gun?
No way.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Locust Fork
There are people who can't read. There are people who just don't do well in classroom settings. There are people who don't realize they need to "prepare" for anything that would lead them to owning a firearm. There are idiots who would abuse their powers and deny others only because they have the power to do so. There are just way too many reasons this would never work....plus the fact that the founding fathers would kick our rears when we got to heaven for letting California happen to the entire country.
LF,
That is entirely the scenario that got me wondering. I would never consider California as a residence. Your home state of Alabama is one I am considering. I'll be there in June and July. My home state, Virginia, is now at the focus of worldwide attention because of one idiot.
Like I said initially, this was just a thought.0 -
Hobbyguy,
Thanks for pointing that out to those that missed it. I should have elaborated further on those points. Hopefully anyone else will pick up on them.0 -
quote:Originally posted by HobbyGuy
I'm afraid that most people that have posted to this have missed the point entirely. This is not about the right to bear arms. It's about stupid people not having proper training with a firearm, that end up being a hazard to those around you. Everyone needs to stop the panic approach to defending their gun rights. Most people here want to be able to own, possess and keep their weapons for the same reason. When someone comes along with a realistic concern or question, similar to the principals used to obtain a hunting license, too many people go off on the 2nd ammendment issue. Step back, take a deep breath and be a little more realistic. [;)]
Except you can't. That's the problem.
I'll argue that an idiot behind the wheel is as deadly as the idiot weilding a gun. In fact, the idiot behind the while is probably more deadly, as he/she comes into contact with far more people than the idiot weilding the gun.
You want me to step back and say, "Hmmm... this is one of those common-sense gun laws." I'm sorry, I can't do it.
All it takes (as is proven in states that do not have "Shall Carry" laws) is some desk jockey with an agenda to "fail" you from being able to possess a gun.0 -
Spanielsells,
I respect your opinion, and you have a valid argument. Consistency would have to be a key element here.
Again, I'm not saying I support the idea, it's just an idea.0 -
quote:Originally posted by HobbyGuy
I'm afraid that most people that have posted to this have missed the point entirely. This is not about the right to bear arms. It's about stupid people not having proper training with a firearm, that end up being a hazard to those around you. Everyone needs to stop the panic approach to defending their gun rights. Most people here want to be able to own, possess and keep their weapons for the same reason. When someone comes along with a realistic concern or question, similar to the principals used to obtain a hunting license, too many people go off on the 2nd ammendment issue. Step back, take a deep breath and be a little more realistic. [;)]
You still do NOT infringe on my rights!!! PERIOD! You are a threat to the 2nd Amendment (and America/our Constitution alltogether)...and have proven yourself to be one on several occassions. There is a price for freedom...and sometimes it can be high...such as accidents resulting from mishandling firearms. The better course of action is widespread instruction. 75 years ago, every kid in the country knew how to handle firearms...they were raised using them.
Don't mess with my rights.0 -
quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by HobbyGuy
I'm afraid that most people that have posted to this have missed the point entirely. This is not about the right to bear arms. It's about stupid people not having proper training with a firearm, that end up being a hazard to those around you. Everyone needs to stop the panic approach to defending their gun rights. Most people here want to be able to own, possess and keep their weapons for the same reason. When someone comes along with a realistic concern or question, similar to the principals used to obtain a hunting license, too many people go off on the 2nd ammendment issue. Step back, take a deep breath and be a little more realistic. [;)]
You still do NOT infringe on my rights!!! PERIOD! You are a threat to the 2nd Amendment...and have proven yourself to be one on several occassions. There is a price for freedom...and sometimes it can be high...such as accidents resulting from mishandling firearms. The better course of action is widespread instruction. 75 years ago, every kid in the country knew how to handle firearms...they were raised using them.
Don't mess with my rights.
This guy is a moderator, so don't mess with his rights! [:p]0 -
People are people.
Always have moroons([;)], nuts. crazies.
Always will be moroons([;)], nuts. crazies.
.. that's a fact, not an opinion. We'll always
have to suffer their existence to one degree
or another.
It's too bad for the rest of us[8D]0 -
quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by HobbyGuy
I'm afraid that most people that have posted to this have missed the point entirely. This is not about the right to bear arms. It's about stupid people not having proper training with a firearm, that end up being a hazard to those around you. Everyone needs to stop the panic approach to defending their gun rights. Most people here want to be able to own, possess and keep their weapons for the same reason. When someone comes along with a realistic concern or question, similar to the principals used to obtain a hunting license, too many people go off on the 2nd ammendment issue. Step back, take a deep breath and be a little more realistic. [;)]
You still do NOT infringe on my rights!!! PERIOD! You are a threat to the 2nd Amendment...and have proven yourself to be one on several occassions. There is a price for freedom...and sometimes it can be high...such as accidents resulting from mishandling firearms. The better course of action is widespread instruction. 75 years ago, every kid in the country knew how to handle firearms...they were raised using them.
Don't mess with my rights.
ECC,
What I worry about is an amendment similar to the 18th. Prohibiion. The Constitution CAN be changed. All it takes is a lot of votes.0 -
Additionally, The Va. Tech. shooter by no means "mishandled" his firearms. Certainly he "misused" them. He was able to score a lot of fatal hits in a fairly short (9 minutes) period of time. The fact that he was a nutcase is a different discussion. 0 -
This is not a new idea. It has been one of the favorites of the "gun grabbers" for as long as I can remember.
The right to keep and bear arms is a RIGHT. Driving is a privilege licensed by the states. I'd like to see classes in school to help the younger generations understand the difference.
Your idea of teaching gun safety, handling and marksmanship in school is a good one. Even with a test if you wish. The NRA has been trying to get that one going for over a century.
The first time you tell somebody they are not qualified to exercise their Second Amendment right, there is no more Second Amendment RIGHT.
You are correct that the right to keep and bear arms has already been infringed. Total destruction of it is not the answer.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
quote:Originally posted by ECC
quote:Originally posted by HobbyGuy
I'm afraid that most people that have posted to this have missed the point entirely. This is not about the right to bear arms. It's about stupid people not having proper training with a firearm, that end up being a hazard to those around you. Everyone needs to stop the panic approach to defending their gun rights. Most people here want to be able to own, possess and keep their weapons for the same reason. When someone comes along with a realistic concern or question, similar to the principals used to obtain a hunting license, too many people go off on the 2nd ammendment issue. Step back, take a deep breath and be a little more realistic. [;)]
You still do NOT infringe on my rights!!! PERIOD! You are a threat to the 2nd Amendment...and have proven yourself to be one on several occassions. There is a price for freedom...and sometimes it can be high...such as accidents resulting from mishandling firearms. The better course of action is widespread instruction. 75 years ago, every kid in the country knew how to handle firearms...they were raised using them.
Don't mess with my rights.
ECC,
What I worry about is an amendment similar to the 18th. Prohibiion. The Constitution CAN be changed. All it takes is a lot of votes.
...should that happen, you will see another Revolution.0 -
Another example of gun owners supporting gun control. What field are they in, or retired from? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
This is not a new idea. It has been one of the favorites of the "gun grabbers" for as long as I can remember.
The right to keep and bear arms is a RIGHT. Driving is a privilege licensed by the states. I'd like to see classes in school to help the younger generations understand the difference.
Your idea of teaching gun safety, handling and marksmanship in school is a good one. Even with a test if you wish. The NRA has been trying to get that one going for over a century.
The first time you tell somebody they are not qualified to exercise their Second Amendment right, there is no more Second Amendment RIGHT.
You are correct that the right to keep and bear arms has already been infringed. Total destruction of it is not the answer.
JamesRK,
Another well thought out answer. Would you perhaps accept MANDATORY firearms training in public schools, and then anyone reaching the age of Majority being issued a license ? I totally agree that everyone required to register for selective service be given carte blanche access to own any firearm they should desire. For that matter, the education be there, and anyone 18 be automatically granted that right ?
Believe me, destruction of the second amendment was not the purpose or goal of this discussion. Read my prior posts, and you will know that. I am exploring avenues that would prevent that.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Fatboy lives
Another example of gun owners supporting gun control. What field are they in, or retired from?
Fatboy, you and I have sparred back and forth before. Read the first post, read the rest, and realize I NEVER said I supported this, it was just a discussion.0 -
quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
This is not a new idea. It has been one of the favorites of the "gun grabbers" for as long as I can remember.
The right to keep and bear arms is a RIGHT. Driving is a privilege licensed by the states. I'd like to see classes in school to help the younger generations understand the difference.
Your idea of teaching gun safety, handling and marksmanship in school is a good one. Even with a test if you wish. The NRA has been trying to get that one going for over a century.
The first time you tell somebody they are not qualified to exercise their Second Amendment right, there is no more Second Amendment RIGHT.
You are correct that the right to keep and bear arms has already been infringed. Total destruction of it is not the answer.
JamesRK,
Another well thought out answer. Would you perhaps accept MANDATORY firearms training in public schools, and then anyone reaching the age of Majority being issued a license ? I totally agree that everyone required to register for selective service be given carte blanche access to own any firearm they should desire. For that matter, the education be there, and anyone 18 be automatically granted that right ?
Believe me, destruction of the second amendment was not the purpose or goal of this discussion. Read my prior posts, and you will know that. I am exploring avenues that would prevent that.
Why the hell not?
I had to learn football, basketball, softball, volleyball and swimming in school.
These days, sex-ed is mandatory. And, they teach that homosexuality is normal and should be embraced by all.
So, it isn't as if they're not forcing sports on kids, and it isn't as if they're not forcing controversial subjects on kids.
Go for it. I'd support it.0 -
I would be all for revising this idea as Spanielsells suggests. Teach firearms safety and responsibility to everyone, regardless of if they intend to own one or not. If they choose to own a firearm, then go for it, if not, then fine as well.
Once more, I'm not saying that this is something I support, but merely a discussion.0 -
The public schools teach sex ed, & drivers ed, I think the schools should be required to teach firearms ed.
As long as it has nothing to do with ownership/use/possesion.
But it could be used against the student when he/she tries a "I didn't know" defense.
Don0 -
quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
JamesRK,
Another well thought out answer. Would you perhaps accept MANDATORY firearms training in public schools, and then anyone reaching the age of Majority being issued a license ? I totally agree that everyone required to register for selective service be given carte blanche access to own any firearm they should desire. For that matter, the education be there, and anyone 18 be automatically granted that right ?
Believe me, destruction of the second amendment was not the purpose or goal of this discussion. Read my prior posts, and you will know that. I am exploring avenues that would prevent that.
I don't see a problem with mandatory firearms training in school. To use your analogy, driver education is mandatory. I can remember when English Language, U. S. History and World Geography were mandatory. While we are making things mandatory, I'd like to see the schools teach children to read. If a person learns to read, he/she can learn anything else he wants to know.
I have to remain opposed to licensing any right. How about licensing the right to free speech? Or the right to due process? Or the right to be secure in your person, home, papers and effects?
If the plan would be to license everybody who reaches the age of majority, a license would be a little redundant anyway.
It appears to me that we have half of a good plan here.0 -
Just so there is no doubt to my agenda, and since it was brought into question:
I DO NOT support the vast majority of the existing, or proposed legislation regarding firearms.
I have been in law enforcement for over 20 years. I own a "couple" of class III firearms, that I went thru the hoops to get. I own these privately, and not as a result of my employment.
Do I have access to all the "cool" toys as a result of my employment ? Absolutely. Anytime I want, I have access to machine guns, short barreled shotguns, supressors, grenade launchers etc.
Do I think that this ability should be exclusive ? Absolutely not.
Look at my previous posts. I have written to journalists, and legislators. None of these letters have advocated gun control legislation.
I admit, I have not been trained in the use of an "assault" flashlight. [:D]
I was born in 1961. I was too young for Vietnam, and too old for the Gulf wars. Instead of serving my country, I elected to serve my community, and have done so for over 23 years.
Am I proud of the service I have done ? You can bet your ass on it.
I can truly say that I have made a difference.
Now, the bottom line. I can carry anywhere in the USofA, I own machine guns. I am not looking to expand what I already have. I am looking for creative ways to extend that to more people. Fatboy can moan all he wants. I still don't know, nor care about why he seperated sevice. I can only surmise from his previous posts. He could not hack it. A man has to know his limitations.
Now, all that being said, this is a DISCUSSION. Many of the other posters have had great input. Let's keep it at that. When some of the posters elevate to Supreme Court Justices, then we can elevate the discussion.0 -
quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
JamesRK,
Another well thought out answer. Would you perhaps accept MANDATORY firearms training in public schools, and then anyone reaching the age of Majority being issued a license ? I totally agree that everyone required to register for selective service be given carte blanche access to own any firearm they should desire. For that matter, the education be there, and anyone 18 be automatically granted that right ?
Believe me, destruction of the second amendment was not the purpose or goal of this discussion. Read my prior posts, and you will know that. I am exploring avenues that would prevent that.
I don't see a problem with mandatory firearms training in school. To use your analogy, driver education is mandatory. I can remember when English Language, U. S. History and World Geography were mandatory. While we are making things mandatory, I'd like to see the schools teach children to read. If a person learns to read, he/she can learn anything else he wants to know.
I have to remain opposed to licensing any right. How about licensing the right to free speech? Or the right to due process? Or the right to be secure in your person, home, papers and effects?
If the plan would be to license everybody who reaches the age of majority, a license would be a little redundant anyway.
It appears to me that we have half of a good plan here.
JamesRK,
I think there is the possibility that we could reach a consensus easily here. All it would take is a little tweaking. We are both Virginians. Let me know when you are ready to run for office. and I'll join ya [:D]
I can retire from my present job in 2 years.0 -
Now this I think would be a good idea. The right to arms is a right, so why not have firearms safety taught as a mandatory class in school.quote:Originally posted by JamesRK
quote:Originally posted by dcinffxva
JamesRK,
Another well thought out answer. Would you perhaps accept MANDATORY firearms training in public schools, and then anyone reaching the age of Majority being issued a license ? I totally agree that everyone required to register for selective service be given carte blanche access to own any firearm they should desire. For that matter, the education be there, and anyone 18 be automatically granted that right ?
Believe me, destruction of the second amendment was not the purpose or goal of this discussion. Read my prior posts, and you will know that. I am exploring avenues that would prevent that.
I don't see a problem with mandatory firearms training in school. To use your analogy, driver education is mandatory. I can remember when English Language, U. S. History and World Geography were mandatory. While we are making things mandatory, I'd like to see the schools teach children to read. If a person learns to read, he/she can learn anything else he wants to know.
I have to remain opposed to licensing any right. How about licensing the right to free speech? Or the right to due process? Or the right to be secure in your person, home, papers and effects?
If the plan would be to license everybody who reaches the age of majority, a license would be a little redundant anyway.
It appears to me that we have half of a good plan here.0 -
HobbyGuy
Senior Member
USA
1222 Posts
Posted - 04/21/2007 : 6:11:07 PM
If it was my job, yes. Would I like doing it? No.
Siek Heil my fureor.
quote:Originally posted by HobbyGuy
quote:Originally posted by Fatboy lives
Another example of gun owners supporting gun control. What field are they in, or retired from?
It figured that you'd crawl out of the woodwork to throw your two cents in. Yea, yea, I've already heard your BS about "being trained in proper flashlight use by the Department of Corrections." You've never been in law enforcement and I don't recall ever hearing that you have served your country in any branch of service. [B)]
First, for all of you reactionists that are just waiting for someone to post something that you disagree with so you may assault them, I never stated that I support any type of gun control. Read my posting and then read it again. I call that selective interpretation on your part. I simply stated that I've wondered why there isn't something similar to the requirements for obtaining a hunting license. Sure, any jackazz can purchase a firearm these days. Just because then can, does that make it right? I don't know. Look at what Cho just did. From some of the posting I've read from the "big talkers" here, I would bet my retirement that some wouldn't pass a firearm competency test if one existed.
ECC, I take your comments: "You are a threat to the 2nd Amendment (and America/our Constitution alltogether)...and have proven yourself to be one on several occassions" as complete BS and a real insult. I thought differently of you before that statement.
Stand on your pedestals and scream at the top of your lungs "I have the right to bear arms" until the cows come home. If you don't like what our govenment is doing, do something about it (instead of attacking people on this forum). I educate people about our right to bear arms, proper gun handling and safe gun storage. I do not agree with gun control in any way, shape, or form. If you believe that I do, you're an idiot and I honestly don't give a rat's azz about your opinion. You're just here to argue and that isn't my purpose for being here. [^]0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
50 comments