Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Gun safety training should be mandatory. By DAVID ROSMAN, Columbia Missourian

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://www.columbiamissourian.com/st...-be-mandatory/

    There is a formula concerning tragedies: The less the personal connection less the greater the distance plus the more time that separates you from the incident, equals lower personal impact. C-(D2+T)I[sic]

    For me, the shootings at Northern Illinois University had a high personal impact. I teach at a very open college, not unlike NIU. I lived less than five miles from Columbine High School in April 1999 and knew kids that attended that high school and parents of children that died. In 2001, I took personal responsibility for the safety of my students, all of my students at Metropolitan State College in Denver. I take this type of violence very personally.

    Since Feb. 1, more than 30 men, women, boys and girls, have been killed during very public shooting rampages in the United States, including six at NIU and another six in Kirkwood, only 90 minutes away. Steven Kazmierczak and Charles Lee “Cookie” Thornton both purchased their firearms legally. Unfortunately, in the final determination, as with the Virginia Tech and Columbine shootings, regardless of hindsight, there is little we can do to prevent the next rampage.

    I am also an advocate for our Second Amendment right to gun ownership. This does not mean I agree with those who believe that if everyone was armed the world would be a safer place. The logic behind this argument is, at best, faulty. At worse, dangerous. The argument goes like this: If the students in the classroom had guns, the shooter would not have killed as many, if any. But then, would you want more guns in the hands of drivers experiencing road rage? In fact, concealed-weapon and carry laws appear to have no effect on crime whatsoever.

    The argument concerning our Second Amendment has little if anything to do with the extreme slippery slope arguments made by the orthopraxy gun advocates and the National Rifle Association. It has to do with the definition of “militia” and the possible lack of a semicolon. We already have gun control in the United States in the form of waiting periods and the prohibition of certain guns from private purchase, age limitations and limits on the number of guns that may be purchased at one time. We also have almost 250 million guns in the hands of our citizens.

    The argument continues, rightly stating that guns are not the only weapon of choice. The brutal murder of a New York psychologist this month was committed with a kitchen clever and chef’s knife. So will we now limit the sale and ownership of kitchen cutlery? Or baseball bats or tire irons?

    What we fear most is the loss of personal safety both in and out of our homes, the loss of control. We understand that we live in a chaotic world. Now there’s the rub – our greatest and worse fear, the loss of control.

    I do advocate mandatory training for anyone who wishes to own a handgun, shotgun or rifle, even for personal protection. Missouri requires gun safety courses for hunters, so the extension is natural. The University of Washington reports that one-third of all gun owners had no gun safety training. Two-thirds did not lock their guns in a home with children.

    Mandatory training is not gun control. Professional gun safety trainers are better prepared to identify someone whose personal judgment should be questioned. Annual training, as already required for hunters, including proper and safe storage, would add a layer of protection for our citizens and our children. Maybe then we will feel better about sending our children to school.

    I urge our legislators to take charge for the safety of our citizens. Mandatory gun safety training needs to be the law of the land for securing the right of the ownership of handguns, rifles and shotguns.


    You must be logged in to comment. If you don't have an account, you can register here.http://www.columbiamissourian.com/accounts/register/



  2. #2
    Regular Member compmanio365's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,013

    Post imported post

    What a joke.......so gun safety class teachers are now supposed to be psychologists as well and know whether or not you are "OK" enough to own a gun? What part of "shall not infringe" isn't understood here?

    "Really! The government making you pass a test in order to have a gun is a way of HELPING you secure your right to own a gun, not hurting it, seriously! You people are sooooo paranoid! LOL! If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear! "

    It's sad to think that some of the greatest enemies to our second amendment rights are so-called "supporters" of our cause......."death by degrees" is an applicable phrase here......


  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    When I left my most recent comment, there were about six.

    http://www.columbiamissourian.com/accounts/register/

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Who is the writer and why should we care what he says? Is he a local columnist?
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    205

    Post imported post

    compmanio365 wrote:
    What a joke.......so gun safety class teachers are now supposed to be psychologists as well and know whether or not you are "OK" enough to own a gun? What part of "shall not infringe" isn't understood here?

    "Really! The government making you pass a test in order to have a gun is a way of HELPING you secure your right to own a gun, not hurting it, seriously! You people are sooooo paranoid! LOL! If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear! "

    It's sad to think that some of the greatest enemies to our second amendment rights are so-called "supporters" of our cause......."death by degrees" is an applicable phrase here......
    You might want to shoot me for my opinion -- but as long as a safety class has no bearing of whether I'm "approved or denied", I think it's beneficial.

    I personally learned ALOT in the classroom portion of my CCW class(damn.. it was long though)..

    If the NRA could put together some kind of 1-hour program taught by their instructors with NO PASS OR FAIL system, I think it's a great idea.

    ..The concept that the "instructor" is going to judge someone on their ability to handle a gun is COMPLETE BULL****. An instructors job is simple -- Teach a class!

    The concept has merit, but I doubt it would ever come to pass because the gun-grabbers would want to turn it into "just another hoop to jump through" and another way to prohibit people from purchasing guns.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    psmartin wrote:
    You might want to shoot me for my opinion -- but as long as a safety class has no bearing of whether I'm "approved or denied", I think it's beneficial.
    Of course training is beneficial, but read this again:
    Mandatory training is not gun control.
    The author wants it to be mandatory, in which case it has eveything to do with approving you or denying you.

    Sounds like HankT wrote it. He was always pushing state-mandated training. Anything which denies your right to do something before meeting some arbitrary state requirement is by definition control of that activity, in this case it's gun control. And this author can KMA.





  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    I am not in favor of any kind of training being required to own a gun or carry it on your own property. However I think some kind of training should be required before you are allowed to walk down a public street with one on your hip. I know this rubs many of you wrong but with rights comes responsibilities and there are a lot of posters on here that don't seem to care about anything but their 2A rights and the hell with anyone else's.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    And to think we won our Independence with NO SAFETY TRAINING other than that which Dad taught you. What were those wacky colonists thinking?? Those goofballs...

    Mandatory anything means GOVERNMENT CONTROL and is an infringement and an insult to LIBERTY! You cannot legislate safety, it interferes with natural selection! Peer Pressure and COMMON SENSE must rule!

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    SNIP it interferes with natural selection!
    Well, yes. I just don't want to be "naturally selected" as the backstop for the untrained person's bullet.Besides, what's a good Catholic boy doing arguing for natural selection? (Playful, rhetorical question.)

    Iagree that it is better left to up to individuals and non-government groups. For all the reasons already written. (Except the natural selection part )

    If we can believe them, NRA has already made a serious dent in firearms accidents. They've got some stats somewhere comparing accident rates before NRA safety programs and currently.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    LOL...

    I've always said training is a great idea, be it from Dad, Grandpa, the NRA or a course, it'sa great idea. But to be mandated by the government is an infringement. At some point we must stop relying on "legislation" to save us and keep us safe and rely on good old fashioned American Horse Sense!

    Listen, after being 30-Hour OSHA trained and being a division Safety Officer for my company, I nowfirmly believe we should remove all safety devices,safety and warning labels and let the problem take care of itself!

    "Is this gun loa.....BOOM"

    And the gene pool deepens....

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    LOL...

    I've always said training is a great idea, be it from Dad, Grandpa, the NRA or a course, it'sa great idea. But to be mandated by the government is an infringement. At some point we must stop relying on "legislation" to save us and keep us safe and rely on good old fashioned American Horse Sense!

    Listen, after being 30-Hour OSHA trained and being a division Safety Officer for my company, I nowfirmly believe we should remove all safety devices,safety and warning labels and let the problem take care of itself!

    "Is this gun loa.....BOOM"

    And the gene pool deepens....
    I would agree with this except too many times it isn't the idiot that gets removed but some other decent person. How many times do you hear about a drunk driver killing someone only to walk away from the wreck unharmed.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    Who is the writer and why should we care what he says? Is he a local columnist?
    He has the bully-pulpit of the lamestream media that would value his/its opinion above ours.

    Re some subsequent comment on one-hour training; it is a precept of NRA training that it must cost some $$. That is a common idea on increasing the valuation of training, that cost enhances value.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran Nelson_Muntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Manassas, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    697

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    "... for securing the right of the ownership of handguns, rifles and shotguns."
    Thanks but no thanks. I've already Secured My Right under the 2A.

    Of course, Mr. Huffman did not write the above. It was FTA.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    BobCav wrote:
    LOL...

    I've always said training is a great idea, be it from Dad, Grandpa, the NRA or a course, it'sa great idea. But to be mandated by the government is an infringement. At some point we must stop relying on "legislation" to save us and keep us safe and rely on good old fashioned American Horse Sense!

    Listen, after being 30-Hour OSHA trained and being a division Safety Officer for my company, I nowfirmly believe we should remove all safety devices,safety and warning labels and let the problem take care of itself!

    "Is this gun loa.....BOOM"

    And the gene pool deepens....
    I would agree with this except too many times it isn't the idiot that gets removed but some other decent person. How many times do you hear about a drunk driver killing someone only to walk away from the wreck unharmed.
    Not entirely analogous. A car's frontal cross-section is more than 20 square feet on just a Geo Metro. A .45 bullet is going to be around... .16 square inches. In the roughest calculation, an erroneously driven car is going to be at least 18,000 times more likely to hit a person than a stray bullet.

    Unfortunately, the chances are greatly increased when the gun is aimed at a person. When someone downs a fifth of bourbon in an evening, he may be convinced that pointing an "unloaded" gun at someone and pulling the trigger is a good idea. And no "safety" class is going to prevent that, unfortunately.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •