There really is no way to stop straw purchases, or theft. My idea is just a suggested alternative
to the current system. I doubt most killers have NICS records aside from trivial shit, otherwise
they would be in prison, not in the LGS.  Like I said, there are ways to avoid either system.

If you're going to carry a firearm in public you should demonstrate competency and a knowledge of the laws regarding deadly force
I have to do it every year
Is it possible that the anti's could load down the requirements? Sure its possible.

want to OFFER free training - I'm with you 100%

mandatory anything - literally go choke on a giant herpes filled dildo...

Why is it laughable? Military Drill Instructors routinely flag
unstable, untrust worthy recruits. They are just skilled at watching
for bizarre behavior. They train on that.  Are they perfect? No.

Why would an NRA instructor be any less savvy. And a person
could opt for a review of their peers or something.  
Look, this is just an idea. I'm not trying to hammer it out or anything.
This can take many forms. I'm just suggesting it as an idea which could be
further developed, and as an alternative to our current system.

Once again, you skipped over the question.  HOW does your plan accomplish the stated task of "preventing psychos from getting firearms?"

If all you've got is "the instructors can tell if somebody is weird", then why couldn't we just train gun store employees to look out for these "signs" and avoid the whole "you must take a class" all together?"

You haven't put a lot of thought into this, have you?

You have no idea what you're talking about.

No, I havn't.  This is just an idea which I'm throwing up.
I havn't drawn up blueprints. I'm just offering a potentially
better option than what we have.

And what's stopping an NICS check from stopping a crazed kid
with no record from buying a gun and going on a shooting spree?

What's stopping the same kid from buying a Buick and driving it into a playground?

Generally a credit check to make sure he can afford a Buick, a driver's license,
perhaps car insurance could help weed out some.  Sure those things can be maneuvered around, but no
plan is perfect. And I'm not suggesting a plan to stop kids from fulfilling their
GTA fantasies.  Just focusing on gun stuff here.

Absolutely nothing.  That is why NICS should be eliminated as well.  It serves no purpose, other than to waste money.

So you've never heard of F2F sale of automobiles either.

Nothing.  I never claimed a NICS check does a damn thing to stop anything.  NICS is equally as stupid as your proposal (it still at least does work sometimes, something your plan won't do).

Well good luck getting that one repealed. If you have a better suggestion, by all means.
I think my idea, if properly thought out, and executed, would conserve the privacy and
rights of gun owners, and help steer away those with devious intentions.

Sure, noone likes "mandatory."  I would rather have mandatory free, and private
training and certification, rather than mandatory "free" federal or state registration.

Here is a serious analysis regarding why what you wrote is bad juju.  



O.k. let's start here.

First:   What training do you have in mind?    It takes all of 5 minutes to teach a person everything they will ever need to know on how NOT to accidentally shoot someone.

In fact I dare say that everything you need for a person to know to safely handle a firearm can fit on a 3 x 5 index card using the NRA's three rules:

(1) Always keep the weapon pointed in a safe direction.
(2) Always keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot.
(3) Always keep the gun unloaded until ready to use.

I cannot think of a possible scenario where a person follows all three of those rules and has an accidental or negligent discharge that harms another person.  

So there you go; all the training you need and all you need is an index card to do it.    Problem solved.  




You need to realize that people don't shoot themselves or others "accidentally" because they don't know which end the bullet comes out of a firearm or because they don't know what the trigger does.  They shoot themselves and others because they are negligent, careless, reckless, or because they really want to shoot someone.   No amount of training will ever completely remove those traits from all people.  

Our Government has tried very hard to do so (see Law Enforcement and the Military) and negligent discharges still occur.   This is an unfortunate cost of doing business much as it exists with automobiles, heavy equipment, alcohol, power tools, swimming pools, etc.

This is a PERSON issue and not a TRAINING issue.   Training doesn't mean a thing if the person receiving the training doesn't listen to, absorb, and then apply said training.

Furthermore, what on earth makes you think a firearms instructor is qualified to identify potentially unstable individuals and why on earth does that strike you as a good idea?




So a poor person who has a bad week at the office who shows attitude during the class gets to spend more of his or her money to retake the class or take a longer class because some instructor didn't like the person's attitude?

Furthermore if you put the liability on the instructor as to pass / fail those who are "worthy" of firearm ownership and those who are not, you have increased their liability to the point where they are going to deny people for anything and everything under the sun to avoid the litigation nightmare that is to follow.

As for criminals:  ALL CRIMINALS were law abiding citizens at some point in their life or rather they were at least not prohibited persons at some point in the their life.   What makes you think a person who takes a class today won't join MS13 tomorrow?   Our Military has dealt with this problem in their own ranks for quite some time.

Oh and you don't need much training, as a criminal, to walk up behind a person and shoot them in the back of the head when they don't know you are there; a little tactic some MS13 operatives have been known to prefer.




There is no way the government gets involved in this process requiring training and licensing without requiring paperwork to go with it.  NO WAY NO HOW.   It is simply not possible and if you think it is possible then you have not thought through what it takes to pass laws and what the law itself would have to say.  

There is no meaningful way you can mandate training for such a thing and not have a paper trail.   Period.  End of story.  Fin.

You are either living in a dream world or are being purposefully deceptive with this nonsense.

Oh and those 4473s are subject to government review and inspection which sometimes includes copying.    The Government has access to extensive amounts of information pertaining to firearms currently and such additional programs would only add to that capability.



Here are my thoughts:   rational, logical, responsible people will act rationally, logically, and responsibly to seek out and receive the training they need to property handle, carry, deploy, and use firearms suited to their personal needs.

Irrational, illogical, irresponsible people will act irrationally, illogically, and irresponsibly with their firearms as they currently do with their cars, motorcycles, airplanes, hot water heaters, swimming pools, power tools, fireworks, etc...

This may strike you as a scary proposition but it isn't for this simple reason:  most people including many stupid people believe in self preservation and even if they lack the requite knowledge to handle a firearm safely and are generally irresponsible in other areas of their lives, most people don't want to blow limbs off themselves, their loved ones, or go to jail for 20 years due to their own stupidity.

In other words, mandatory training offers ZERO positives for gun owners and society at large while opening the door to government agents using that process to deny citizens their rights to own firearms.

Don't believe me?   Take a look at D.C.'s mandatory training regiment and how that has stifled firearm owners.

Freedom is scary, dirty, and messy but overall freedom is a beautiful thing.    

Yes, there are costs to be paid and some of them are heavy.   I pay them gladly.

Once again, you fail to grasp basic human nature.  Making any potential gun owner participate in "mandatory training" isn't going to do jack shit in the realm of "steering away those with devious intentions."  You're just pulling stuff out of your ass at this point.

You'd have to repeal the Brady Act for your private training NICS waiver idea as well.

His only response is; more restrictions.  More burden on law abiding citizens. He doesn't have time for common sense, he's too busy "chasing the unicorns that killed Kennedy."

How old are you?

So OP what new government agency will be deciding if i am qualified to carry a gun after the approved training ?
and who sets the standards for the training?
and if i fail your standards of training do i have to give up my guns i have been shooting probabley long before you were a glimmer in your daddy's eye?

Now that youve passed the mandatory training, we have a surpise Sanity Test for FREE!

A silent killer aint got no time fo dat.  Theyll just steal or buy a gun illegally rendering your NRA training useless

Also when they do flip and kill, the victims family will easily blame NRA and sue the NRA trainer.

So, uh... what's DU?

you don't see the issue of the government mandating training and of having to register yourself with the government basically to get said training...

you don't see much, do you?

I would be for it but I would really like more people learn how to use it.

seriously tired of this fringe bullshit.

this is not becoming isolated and lately after reading multiple threads.....I don't see anyone offering CONCRETE solutions besides throwing middle fingers around like a angry troll.


What is a sensible solution?

Banning?

FUCK NO....

door to door..taking it away?

restriction...OH FUCK NO...

But I really would love more people learning how to use it.....learning to participate in classes and competition or just using it instead of keeping it and not doing anything with it.

militia ...shall not be infringed....

Yes I agree....but if I had my way......I would really use that militia clause and require everyone to come to some kind of training and learn how to safely use it.

Jesus CHrist...king of the Jews....we are not GIVING UP anything folks for that...seriously we are not.

And yet cops keep shooting bystanders.

Yet the government enacts it and makes sure it's enforced.

The government is still involved, dude.

That's professional accidental shooting, totally different situation.

Do they do so because they have no idea when to legally use deadly force?
Plenty of agencies have very minimal training and should really ramp  up their training, no doubt about it
Additionally, if an officer can't pass the qual, they get their gun taken away til they CAN pass the qual.

Will NYPD have to take and pass the class? That whole miss the bad guy hit the bystander thing,

I remember that incident and that black guy didn't even have a weapon...

NYPD asked him to show them his hands and then asked him to show some ID..he goes into hi...BAMMBBAmx48 times...

Probably one of the best responses against my idea, in my opinion:

In response to the TaxMonkey,

Ok, you're right, training can be made extremely easy. You can make it slightly more
challenging than an index card. Hell, hunter's safety which trains children offers
at least a basic firearms course and competence demonstration.  

As a matter of fact, as someone who has taken Hunter's Safety, I would totally
argue that Hunter's safety would be more than adequate to teach basic firearms
competency.  Children pass this course.  But it teaches plenty of basics, but is challenging
enough that it requires that the citizen has some sort of brain. I would actually propose that taking a
Hunter's Safety course alone would be suitable for anyone wanting to buy a firearm.
No instructor's screening required.

Yeah, negligent discharges do happen. In my opinion, anyone who has a user error ND
is a complete moron. Firearms are ridiculously simple devices to operate, and
check to ensure they are safe.

I'll try.  California requires a written test be passed in order to obtain a "handgun safety certificate".  The test costs $25 and is good for 5 years, IIRC.  Recently, this requirement was expanded to all firearms.  I can see this "creeping incrementalism" of testing and training going into the territory of being extremely costly and time consuming very quickly.  That's why mandatory training is a bad idea.

I thought the original intent of this plan was to somehow "weed out" the bad eggs who have "devious intentions" (you've still yet to explain how this is accomplished).

Now you just seem to be focusing on the "training" aspect of it.

So what exactly is this plan supposed to do again?

Any training will show the bad weeds dude.
I've watched this and experienced this in Switzerland. Fascinating setup....

But pretty much everyone knew in the range the kookie guy was just not his best that day.

It's probably still better than the NICS system, which can be avoided
by someone with a clean record.  Hunter's safety is good because it
requires that a person pass an extensive written test, and a demonstration
of safe handling.  It's not hard, but requires enough study to deter your
typical dead brain. Also, I can't imaging too many malicious people sitting
through a day long class which requires you to show up at 7 or 8am.

It's not exactly a science, but it requires a bit of work, on the citizen's part.
Anyhow. If it doesn't weed out every nut out there, at least it helps inspire
a sense of firearm responsibility in most well meaning citizens, and that's still
better than what we've got.

So if it's an accident it's ok?

O.k. then you realize that a course itself is not required.   If you are so concerned on this issue simply have the government print all that informationand mail a copy to each citizen or put a copy on the government website for them to read or otherwise place it somewhere readily accessible to the average person.

Problem solved.



Even the best of us will have a lapse in judgement every now and then.    A class won't do anything to solve that.

That's human nature for you.

No, its not
But lets get the people who are completely incompetent with their firearms off the street

So 90% of the NYPD then?

Ok

You are trying to regulate morality. Good luck!


 

Is 90 % of NYPD the problem?
We all know from extorris' posts that NYPD has training issues.
We also know that there are a whole lot of additional issues that come into play when LEOs are using deadly force
The issue at hand is a baseline level of competency for people with carry permits.

I think actually attending Hunter's Safety is better. It's a good class.
They cover a lot of info. They have you show up at 7 or 8pm.  They offer lunch. If I remember correctly, it's all day(or two
days, one for instruction, and one for testing), and free.
You take, like a 100 question exam, and have to go out to the range. Walk a basic course with a wooden toy gun
to ensure you know how to point it in the right direction. Know firearm safety rules, load and shoot a real firearm, and then go home
with your Hunters Safety Card.

I just don't see your typical Adam Lanza, or Cho type person going through this
type of effort. Plus it teaches plenty of safety and responsibility.
That's more screening than what we have today.

Dad just turned 82, I think I should send him and mom to the mandatory training. How well do you think that would work?

 

You must be somewhere between 16 and 22.

While training MIGHT make a person aware of safety rules and procedures, it doesn't necessarily make them mindful of them during day to day use. Plenty of experienced (trained) gun people completely fail at safe gun handling.

That same service could be offered in PDF form to be downloaded by every citizen in the country.   That's better because classes are limited by their very nature (i.e. limited seats at a minimum).



All of these things can be learned from reading / watching a video at home with the exception of discharging the firearm.    That has to do with the efficacy of the use of the firearm and not the safety.   You can work on the safety aspect at home without ever having to load or discharge a firearm.

That's what you are going for here, right?  Safety?



We have more than enough screening:  it's called 18 USC 922.    There are so many screens and filters that can land a person in jail that adding one more to the list won't possibly help.

And you are right:  I cannot see Adam Lanza, a kid who murdered his mother and then shot up a school, seeking to take your safety course which renders the entire exercise moot from the start.

Well, OP, you were right about one thing: this thread sure did generate a LOT of heat.

Think more, post less.