I think people who buy a gun without getting some safety training are foolish.
So do I, but I agree with you that training shouldn't be mandated by law. I was taught firearms safety from age 2-3, and I'm still learning about it (and practicing it, and teaching others about it) today.
My kids are just a bit above the Eddie Eagle age (they know that well). I've started teaching them the 4 rules of firearm safety. In addition, I drilled them the steps to clear firearms. They know each type of guns and especially 'the round in the chamber'. They still lack the strength to rack the slide or bolt to clear the round though. Hopefully my older one will be ready for range this summer.
When I was a young kid & couldn't rack the slide my dad showed me how to catch the sights on a hard surface and chamber a round while pushing down with my bodyweight, if that makes sense.
The thread is about Gun Dealers and Private Firearm Instructors being opposed to the new gun laws in AZ, which no longer require people to be knowledgeable about firearm safety before buying a gun.
...
The point being made by the AZ gun dealers is that under the new law, anyone who passes the NICS check can buy a gun, without even the most basic understanding of its safe usage.
This is total bullsh*t on the part of the dealers. First off, regardless of their stupid law requiring a safety class for a concealed carry permit, anyone not legally prohibited in AZ can buy a gun and open carry it with no proof of training with nothing more than a NICS check, or in the case of a private transfer, displaying ID to prove their age.
Secondly,
check out these Arizona laws.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/15/00714-01.htm&Title=15&DocType=ARS
15-714.01. Arizona gun safety program course
A. In addition to the voluntary training in the use of bows and firearms prescribed in sections 15-713 and 15-714, each school district and charter school may offer as an elective course a one semester course in firearm marksmanship that shall be designated as the Arizona gun safety program course.
B. A pupil shall be deemed to have satisfactorily completed the Arizona gun safety program course by demonstrating that the pupil has the ability to safely discharge a firearm.
C. The course of instruction prescribed in this section shall be jointly developed by the Arizona game and fish commission, the department of public safety and private firearms organizations and may include materials provided by private youth organizations. At a minimum, the Arizona gun safety program course shall include:
1. Instruction on the rules of gun safety.
2. Instruction on the basic operation of firearms.
3. Instruction on the history of firearms and marksmanship.
4. Instruction on the role of firearms in preserving peace and freedom.
5. Instruction on the constitutional roots of the right to keep and bear arms.
6. Instruction on the use of clay targets.
7. Practice time at a shooting range.
8. Demonstration of competence with a firearm.
D. School districts and charter schools shall arrange for adequate use of shooting range time by pupils in the Arizona gun safety program course at any established shooting range.
E. Pupils who satisfactorily complete the Arizona gun safety program course shall receive a certificate of accomplishment.
F. Instructors shall be certified by the Arizona game and fish department or by a national association of firearms owners.
G. Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or expand the liability of any person under other provisions of law.
This law only affects who can carry concealed without a permit. Allowing a shirt to ride over a holster is no more dangerous than open carry; in fact, open carry is much more dangerous IMO because of weapon retention and escalation of force issues. But I still won't ever support either one requiring a license.
While I don't believe there should be a government training mandate, I am always leary of a shooting range that does not require some level of certification or verification of safe shooting skills and practices. But this should be done at the Range/Club level, not at the government level.
I've been muzzle swept and nearly shot at the range before, sometimes by "highly trained" experts who took state approved safety courses or who had military training. I was muzzle swept by an Iraq War combat veteran recently at a gun store, with his finger on the trigger. He got slightly offended, but I explained the importance of safety to him and corrected his mistake when it happened. I do the same no matter where I am.
I dont believe that there should be required safety course to get a gun, nor do I believe people should be required to take a test to get a license to drive or to operate heavy equipment. I also don't think there should be a background check before you can get a gun. I love absolutists.
I missed your sarcasm and thought that we were in agreement here.
If your are not a felon then you should be able to own any weapon you want
I agree, when someone is convicted of a felony and goes to prison, they shouldn't be allowed to have guns in prison. Once they're out though, they have rights just like every other human being on earth. If they're evil and bad, don't let them out.
What about
this convicted felon?
Anthony Circosta, a decorated Iraq War veteran from Agawam, needed a gun permit in Massachusetts to get a promotion at his security guard job and to pursue a possible career as a police officer. But first he needed to have his record cleared of a childhood felony - shooting a classmate in the shoulder with a BB gun when he was 13.
He sounds pretty evil and dangerous.
you should be able to own any weapon you want, however, if you want to carry said weapon concealed or open in public (I advocate open) then i should be secure in the knowledge that you know safe practices.
Knowing safe practices and practicing safe firearms ownership are two completely different things. And guess what, the only way to tell when someone will do something is unsafe is after they have done it. Trained people make stupid mistakes all the time, as do the untrained. Both should be punished if what they do is criminal, but neither can be prevented by forcing the law abiding to sit through some class.
It shouldnt be this big issue because everyone on this sight is pro 2nd amendment.
That is the issue. The 2A was put in place to hold the government in check, not to hold law abiding gun owners who haven't passed a safety course in check.
Ask the
Jews For Preservation of Firearms Ownership why licensing and restricting a right the way you suggest is such a bad idea.
Would you want someone who has never taken a driving lesson driving down a street that your kids were on?
They do, every single day. There's an estimated 10,000 unlicensed drivers driving in MA every day. They get arrested for it, every day. They also drive drunk, try to kill people by running them over and sell drugs from cars. They do this because they don't care about the law. Passing a law that only applies to the law abiding who submit to the legal licensing process achieves what exactly?
When weighing your constitutional right to bear arms verus my god given right to live, my right to live wins.
We have a constitutional right that
recognizes our God given right to life, liberty and self defense. People like you trying to legislate the poor out of the group of people who can access their "rights" are greasing the slippery slope that American gun owners are trying not to slide down.