A new Florida law made gun-carry permits optional. A dramatic drop in safety classes followed

What other constitutional rights do you think that people should be required to pay money to exercise?

 

Its not a bad idea to teach them, or "make them jump through all kinds of hoops" (as you put it), but its unrealistic to expect that to be approved by the school boards.

You mean guns should be funded by taxpayers?

 

Are you willing to add liability to trainers who teach the classes? If, for example, someone who took the class then commits a crime, or has an accident, should the trainer be liable for damages? If, as you suggest, these folks produce something that mitigates future harm, make them responsible for it.

 

Of course not. Are driver school teachers liable for accidents drives have down the road?

 

Can we have a proper voting system if people don't register to vote
can people exercise their second amendment rights without having to undergo mandatory training or register their firearms?

 

Heh. I get that individual responsibility isn't a Leftist thing, but responsible gun owners don't need to take a class to learn how to be responsible with their firearms.

Why do you need to be taught this?

 

I think Lefties should be forced to take classes about individual responsibility in order to exercise their constitutional right to breathe. This would solve a lot of our country's problems. What do you think?

 

That's cool, but we are talking about those who are ignorant and not so responsible, and we have plenty of those in Florida. They'll buy a gun, tuck it under their belt and think it makes them a cop, or Rambo.

You seem to argue classes are not useful, but lot of people, including many long time gun owners understand the value of training, and professional instruction. Likewise, you can learn to play golf on your own, but even the pros hire coaches.

Ok........

Don't feed them folks!

 

No, we weren't talking about "ignorant and not so responsible" people, we were talking about responsible people.

I never made nor suggested any such argument. The vast majority of gun owners received instruction in the proper and safe use of firearms at some point in their lives, whether it be from an older relative, the military or a professional firearms instructor. For many people, I would recommend taking a firearms class, especially if you are unfamiliar and uncomfortable with a firearm. However, FatBack made an excellent point, and it is for that reason I cannot endorse requiring people to take a course to exercise a fundamental individual and constitutional right.

Evidently, my point sailed over your head or struck a nerve. You see, with some people, you have to take things to their logical extreme to get them to grasp even the simplest of concepts.

 

Nothing is free, Fatback. To insure even the continued existence of our democratic republic, which we expect to protect those "rights," many have paid with their lives. Innocent civilians, however, should not need to pay that price, just because some gun owner is too irresponsible, or too cheap, to keep his weapons securely stored, when he's not carrying them.

That is just common sense. And common decency.

 

Read the OP and learn what its about.

Responsible people are not an issue.

Yes. That is what we are talking about.

From the OP : " I think there will be a drastic increase in easily preventable mistakes by law abiding gun owners, which will put the owner in prison, and someone else in an early grave, and it looks like its already happening. First time gun owners with no prior experience with firearms SHOULD get the training whether or not its required by law."

 

There are other states that did this years ago so can you show some significant increase there?

 

Are you okay with a poll tax?

 

This is a false analogy. There is a difference between charges required for the physical act of exercising a right, versus costs incurred to be able to actually exercise it. Let me clarify that otherwise confusing sounding explanation. No one comes to your house, or to wherever you spend your time, to give you the opportunity to vote. Any costs to the voter, of getting to the polling place-- whether that be for gas, for the bus, or for an Uber-- must be born by him. But the voting itself, bears no charge. Likewise, exercising your right to own a firearm, costs you nothing. But that does not mean, you don't need to buy a firearm. IOW, costs incurred to be able to own a firearm, just like to be able to vote, are not considered infringements upon those rights. If having a gun license, for another example, were considered a "poll tax" for the right to bear arms, then requiring someone to have an ID, to vote, would be the same thing.

 

It HAS been studied. Its the 'harmless mistakes' aka gun related accidents and needless shootouts committed by ignorant and untrained people, no matter how nice and well meaning they might be. IMO, new and unexperienced gun owners should take a class be it mandatory or not.

Expect more violent crime if Florida passes permitless gun carry
Coupled with the state’s stand your ground law, more unregulated guns in public spaces also raise the stakes of what were once harmless mistakes.

https://www.tampabay.com/opinion/20...f-florida-passes-permitless-gun-carry-column/
Take for example a recent study from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, which tracks the rate of firearm-related assaults following firearm deregulation across 36 states. They discovered a 24% increase in firearm-related assaults in states that relaxed their regulations governing concealed carry.

The study also reveals that states that retained a requirement for live-fire gun safety training did not experience a similar jump in firearm related assaults.

After the legislation passes, as it inevitably will, the state can expect to see a 22% jump in firearm homicides, a 13%-15% jump in violent crime and a spike in gun thefts.

 

I like the part where you pretend that I don't understand and then go on to explain it...

People who vote drive the future of this nation. At the very least they should be required to explain the three branches and functions of the federal government.

No one should have to pay the federal government to exercise their rights or to be compelled to pay a private institution or authority by the federal government

 

You talking about voter id cards?

 

I would also include that ( in addition to forcing people to pay to take firearms classes in order to exercise a constitutional right )
You have to pay to get a driver's license but I don't believe that people should have to pay in order to obtain an ID

 

I support voter id laws. Its not inconvenient at all, and not designed to "harass law abiding citizens"

I said "IMO, new and unexperienced gun owners should take a class be it mandatory or not", so you added the "forcing" there in order to build the strawman to argue against. Have fun

 

How about you take your ironic projection and your straw man and you go and have fun.

I have better things to do now.

If you may have noticed I gave my opinion and I was not responding to one of your posts

 

Apparently not.

How about building another strawman? Its easy, - and fun.

 

Yes, because someone who has, say, been a firearms instructor and range safety officer for 50 years should have to take a safety class. Someone who TEACHES safety classes should have to take the class. My uncle doesn't take gun safety classes because he doesn't have to-he teaches them! My wife and I are both range safety officers, she regularly teaches training classes.

I don't. I know exactly what their motives are.

 

Why? The suggestion here was that first time gun owners with no prior experience with firearms and no knowledge of the laws, would benefit from them be they mandatory or not.

From the OP
"First time gun owners with no prior experience with firearms SHOULD get the training whether or not its required by law."

 

There is no rational excuse for firearm safety training being optional. Interpretations of 18th century intentions have little to do with it.

 

well the problem is this-almost every person who wants to ban gun ownership supports incremental restrictions including mandatory training. So when us pro rights advocates see a gun banner calling for anything short of a gun ban, we are skeptical that their motivations are anything other than getting closer to a ban