09-20-2016, 11:54 AM
Quote:what do you define as training, who gets to define training on a legal sense?
I'm a huge advocate of the 2nd amendment but I don't carry most places, Florida requires a CCW or a 3 step law when in public. So if I feel the need to take a firearm with me I follow the 3 step law. But I'm not changing oil with a 9MM strapped to my side, it wouldn't be good for business lol.
As for what training do I have? I guess none. I grew up around firearms, learned at a young age to respect them. I took a hunter's safety course one year but it wasn't any sort of training, just a list of you can shoot this and can't shoot that stuff.
If we want to set the precedent that the state needs to sign off on individuals receiving the proper training to exercise their constitutional rights, well that's more dangerous than 1000 idiots with 1000 guns.
Just imagine if you where required to take a safe public speech class before allowed to exercise your 1st amendment right to free speech, can you see how that could be a little dangerous to the practice of free speech?
I'm not sure free speech and guns are anywhere near the same thing.
Jagibelieve, one thing I don't understand about your argument is you state only dumb people get guns without training, yet reality tells us we have lots of people you consider dumb. If that is the case, why would a training course requirement in order to purchase a gun be a bad idea? It seems to me, logically, we should be required to take a course before purchasing a gun.