• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

There should at least be a IQ test!

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Honestly, I think some guys here were pretty rough on you. But take that as an attack on your statement of wanting some kind of test before being able to exercise a .

I haven't been too hard on him but he said:

anyone here can a mod please lock/delete this thread and delete my account,

The last fellow that said that exact same thing was a couple cans short of a sixpack and trolled here non stop.
I haven't seen him for a while and the phrase hoists a few red flags coming from a newcomer!
This is also the type of thing he'd start.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Issue #2 is should someone take learning to handle the gun safely and efficiently seriously, Hell Yes

Ya know, I've come to a slightly different conclusion.

I think we (the gun world) err by stopping at "seriousness" and the classic scare tactics (tragic news stories and photos of negligent holes in bodies). Those are intended to prompt someone to apply safety rules. But, they are not in and of themselves quite the exact thing that needs to happen.

The precise thing that needs to happen is a decision by the trainee to deliberately learn safe handling, and separate but connected decision to always practice those procedures every time. The core nugget is those two decisions.

So, why not just tell trainees, "Look Samantha. I'm going to ask you to make a couple decisions. Please deliberately decide to learn safe gun handling procedures." "Did you do it?" "Great." "Now I'm going to ask you for the second decision. Please deliberately decide to always practice the safety procedures you are going to learn here today." "Did you do it?" "Good." "You didn't cross your fingers or anything did you?"

You all get the idea. The scare tactics and so forth merely attempt to induce the decision. But, why not go straight to the point. Impress folks with why there are important decisions to make (scare tactics), but rather than leave it up to chance, actually consult the person and get him to actually make the decisions.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Ya know, I've come to a slightly different conclusion.

I think we (the gun world) err by stopping at "seriousness" and the classic scare tactics (tragic news stories and photos of negligent holes in bodies). Those are intended to prompt someone to apply safety rules. But, they are not in and of themselves quite the exact thing that needs to happen.

I'm not talking about hype, rather, actual safe handling around ME!
I enjoy some of the scare stories. Every year a few dog hunters shoot each other. That's cause for celebration.

A few years ago, two dog catchers shot each other in Henrico. Unfortunately, they both survived.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I'm not talking about hype, rather, actual safe handling around ME!
I enjoy some of the scare stories. Every year a few dog hunters shoot each other. That's cause for celebration.

Either you secretly joinged PETA, or you mean deer hunters that use dogs. :D
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Either you secretly joinged PETA, or you mean deer hunters that use dogs. :D

Trespassing, Deer poaching, drunken, road hunting, ons of bi@#$es ...Dog hunters!

It's an insult to all of us that do hunt...to call these sheep molesters "Hunters".

busted-2.jpg
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Honestly, I think some guys here were pretty rough on you. But take that as an attack on your statement of wanting some kind of test before being able to exercise a Constitutional right, not on you yourself. I think you mentioned that you definitely learned something in the analysis. You got lucky in your ignorance, and we should be blaming the government for the conditions that make this kind of ignorance so widespread. Please stick around. This thread will be forgotten and you will definitely enjoy everything else there is to learn here.

Dear Tanner - It looks like it is now safe to come home. (No smiley. I'm dead serious!)

Goingdef - Tanner is a guy who came here very much like you. We kinda-sorta ragged on him while figuring out how to get his brain housing group properly aligned and screwed down tightly. He's not totally fixed and ready to be sent out on his own, but it's just barely possible that even he could explain to you why your idea got mugged.

Folks would not spend so much on electrons to discuss this if they did not think there was a possibility of you understanding why the issue is so important and why your initial position must (yes, it must) be opposed so vigorously. If you were seen as the garden-variety troll the responses would have been very different.

I could get in trouble for telling you all this, but when you consider how much trouble I'm already in for everything, this would be less than a drop in the proverbial bucket.

stay safe.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
IQ test to own a gun? what about for driving? having kids? buying "dangerous" chemicals like bleach? How about an IQ test for when someone moves a 300lb TV?

It just dawned on me that our leaders already apply an IQ test. Well, sort of. Many of them seem to think we have the IQ of a fence post. They lie, lie, lie to us. And, they spin, spin, spin to us.

Its been going on since the end of the 18th century at least. Federalists like John Adams and Alexander Hamilton considered the common man so detestable and stupid that the election of 1800 was somewhat a referendum between the elitist and propertied Federalists and Jefferson, the supporter of the common man. Adams and Hamilton hated democracy as did many Federalists, considering the common man too stupid and dangerous when empowered to vote. Of course, the Federalists lost the election of 1800 to Jefferson, just barely. And, the Federalist party pretty much disappeared.

Politicians today have evolved and refined the Federalist view. Now they want our vote. And, will pretty much say anything to get it. They still think we're stupid.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
We never seem to learn from history. To start, it isn't taught really so many don't have a clue what to learn from.
I like to compare how our government treated minorities, to how we are being treated now. I was lucky in a way in that I grew up in the country and us dumb hicks were just too stupid to know we were supposed to hate each other, so we talked and told stories.

I was close friends with an Apache whose father had grown up on a reservation, other friends included Blacks and some very colorful Yankee descendants.

Anyway.....getting on with IQ or any other test to own firearms, I'd like to bring up history that was discussed and explained while I was still young and Iggernant:uhoh:

In the late 1800's, our Federal Government adopted Literacy Tests as part of the process to immigrate to the US. Never to waste a silly law, a lot of states realized that since most Blacks couldn't read or write, the Literacy Test was a good way to keep them from voting.

White folks BTW, were exempted....kinda P4Pish, ain't it.

This practice was still going on when I was nearly old enough to vote.

My point is that if the Government makes the test, they control who passes.
Start testing for firearms ownership and only Government approved Idiots will have guns.

As far as Native Americans, they had it a little rougher. They couldn't vote...first because they weren't people, then they weren't citizens. They couldn't own guns until the 50's.
 
Last edited:

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
Anyone remember the old TV episode (maybe Twilight Zone) where the whole episode revolved around a family whose boy was undergoing the mandatory government testing? If he failed it again, he was going to be put down. The family was hoping the latest treatments had worked and the boy would pass the test this time. Unfortunately, the boy failed the test. At the end of the show, you find out the test was for IQ and the boy failed because they couldn't "fix" how smart he was.

I'm deadly serious. I remember this show from when I was a kid. They couldn't dare air this today.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Anyone remember the old TV episode (maybe Twilight Zone) where the whole episode revolved around a family whose boy was undergoing the mandatory government testing? If he failed it again, he was going to be put down. The family was hoping the latest treatments had worked and the boy would pass the test this time. Unfortunately, the boy failed the test. At the end of the show, you find out the test was for IQ and the boy failed because they couldn't "fix" how smart he was.

I'm deadly serious. I remember this show from when I was a kid. They couldn't dare air this today.

Wow! Powerful story!
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Anyone remember the old TV episode (maybe Twilight Zone) where the whole episode revolved around a family whose boy was undergoing the mandatory government testing? If he failed it again, he was going to be put down. The family was hoping the latest treatments had worked and the boy would pass the test this time. Unfortunately, the boy failed the test. At the end of the show, you find out the test was for IQ and the boy failed because they couldn't "fix" how smart he was.

I'm deadly serious. I remember this show from when I was a kid. They couldn't dare air this today.

Twilight Zone: Examination Day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTE4BaKZbCk
 

zoom6zoom

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2006
Messages
1,694
Location
Dale City, VA, Virginia, USA
THere is an IQ test. It's called the Darwin Effect.

all I can figure is he flipped the safety to off without realizing it and then pulled the trigger figuring it was safe

NO. He failed as soon as he put his booger hook on the bang button.

I agree I should have asked if it where loaded before accepting it from him

AND THEN checked it your own damn self! Even if I watch someone clear a gun, I still always check it myself EVERY DAMN TIME. Even if I'm home alone and know in my heart no one has touched the damn thing.

Hope we don't seem overly harsh, but as you have seen it only takes one time when you don't follow procedure to radically change (or even end) your life.

Oh, and I'm thinking the muzzle velocity must have been a bit low if you could tell it was a Gold Dot. ;)
 
Last edited:

DrMark

Lone Star Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
1,559
Location
Hampton Roads, Virginia, USA
Freedom can be messy sometimes.

Idiots owning guns is what we put up with when we allow rights to all. It's not always neat, tidy, or polite, but is the right call in my opinion.


How about accidental discharge due to negligence?

It WAS an accident and it was also because the owner neglected his responsibility to safe the firearm before show & tell time.
You are exactly correct.

It was both an accidental discharge and a negligent discharge. Most accidents are of course due to negligence.
 
Top