Potential Gun Control Solution

[elsie]

I look at the suggestion in the same way I look at a Poll Tax. Either can be easily abused.

Probably one of the reasons Poll Taxes are prohibited.


elsie

 

[Just Me]

Potential solution to gun control? You seem to be overlooking the goal of those who oppose the 2nd Amendment. They want to disarm everyone. Period. You give and give and give, they just keep taking. What you call a solution is what they call a step in the right direction.

Why don't we just go back to the 2nd Amendment, which simply affirms our RIGHT to arms. Beyond that is infringement.

I accidentally shoot someone? Already have a law for that (Criminal Negligence).

My kid gets my gun and shoots himself? Already have a law for that (Reckless Endangering).

Bad guy steals a gun and uses it in a robbery to kill a clerk? Yep, laws for that (Theft, robbery, murder).

My point is simply that we have a right to arms. If I misuse or abuse the arms I am accountable for whatever laws I violate with the arms. Any law that infringes is unconstitutional. Deal with the crime, not the tool used.

PS. I don't see anyone taking my car away if I run over a pedestrian. I may be prosecuted for Reckless Driving, but they can't take my car.

 

[Greenbug]

....separation of church and state so extreme we no longer say the Pledge of Allegiance in schools, etc...

I think ^^^^this^^^^ has a lot to do with the way today's youths' are "turning out".

Not to say all kids these days are bad apples or whatever, but I can remember growing up getting my butt whiped when I was mis-behaving, and I deserved it. Some kids these days definately deserve a butt whipping for sure, same goes for some adults!

 

[CharonPDX]

If you make it so that it is *NOT* a government record in any way shape or form, (sort of like Oregon-qualifying CHL classes are now - the INSTRUCTOR doesn't send anything directly to the state, just provides a paper proving you attended and that they verified your identity to the best of their ability,) and only applies to a purchase from an FFL, I'd say sure.

Of course, how do you track "first purchase"? In theory, the government doesn't hold background check records, but for this to work, they'd have to openly do so. "Oh, you're running a background check on someone not in the system - do they have a certificate?" The FFL says yes, and now the background check system knows to skip that question next time. Anyone who has an established relationship with an FFL (the FFL has record of having sold to before the law is passed,) automatically passes - the FFL on next check answers yes. Anyone with a CHL automatically is entered into the system as passing.

But *HELL NO* for private purchases. If, as a private seller, you want to make sure you're selling to someone you think should be allowed to own a gun, that's your prerogative, do whatever background check/require whatever proof of training you want. But private sales are private sales.

To use the car example - a private person selling a car to another private person is under no obligation to ensure that the buyer is licensed or insured. And as many like to point out - where a dealer is. Again, if the car seller feels like verifying, more power to you. But if we're not going to require it for "a privilege not a right" cars, we should DEFINITELY not require it for "is a right" guns.

 

[CharonPDX]

....separation of church and state so extreme we no longer say the Pledge of Allegiance in schools, etc...

I think ^^^^this^^^^ has a lot to do with the way today's youths' are "turning out".

Not to say all kids these days are bad apples or whatever, but I can remember growing up getting my butt whiped when I was mis-behaving, and I deserved it. Some kids these days definately deserve a butt whipping for sure, same goes for some adults!

What school is that? My kid's "liberal as all get-out" Portland Public School still says it every day. My ultra-liberal and "so ultra-anti-gun she left the room when I opened the Christmas present of my grandfather's shotgun" sister teaches in Beaverton School District, and has her kids say it every day.

 

[eternalphoenix64]

News to me. I haven't been in elementary or middle school in several years, but I know Washougal High School never does it. The best you get is the national anthem before games.

When I was in middle school in Colorado it was also hit-or-miss with homeroom teachers, most of the time we didn't. Heck, even by 3rd grade the practice was starting to become less common-place. I obviously can't speak for all schools, but for the better part of my experiences, it was phased out of schools.

The general impression I get is that there's a lack of respect for the the flag and everything that it stands for. Soldiers are lucky they get the respect they deserve. I still remember one soldier who had a class with my in my first term back to college.... we went a whole term, 10 weeks, where the only person that thanked him for his service was the instructor. I never got a chance to do so myself to until the last week of classes. He had always come in late and was often the first out. It seemed every time I tried to wait for him before class, he had drill, every time I tried to get out of the row to catch him, he was gone before I could blink. But when I finally got my chance, I thanked him for defending my right to sit in that class with him. I could see the tears forming in his eyes. It saddens me that so few people take the time to make that simple gesture of respect.

As for the turnout of youth today... that was pretty much the nail hit on the head. IMHO. I'm part of that generation, but I'm astounded by how exceptionally stupid the majority of my generation is. However, my parents are of a slightly older generation than their parents, and my parents believed in raising children to be respectful, conscientious, intelligent, truth-seeking citizens. And even though I let my parents know all through my childhood that I hated them and they were terrible and yada yada yada..... they once told me I would thank them for it later. There's not many parents that can say that to their children and have it come true, but mine did. I can't count the times that I've thanked them for raising me the way they did. Sure, it took me a long time to pull my head out of me *** (it was so far up there it had come back out the other end), but I learned. I made my mistakes, paid the consequences, and learned from them. Today though, kids don't have to pay the consequences of doing something stupid. There are abortions and mommy and daddy to save you and lenient penalties and mommy and daddy to give you everything.

And I'm ranting, and I know it, and I'm gonna just stop there. I think I've made my point

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

Sure, I'm all for mandatory training. Let's have it in Chesaw, it'll only be held on Saturdays that coincide with a blue moon, and cost $24,000....

Yes, that is an example of reductio ad absurdum ( pushing the argument's premises or conclusions to their logical limits and showing how ridiculous the consequences would be, thus disproving or discrediting the argument) but when it comes to FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS I don't trust the government to have my best interest at heart.

Training is a GOOD thing, and SHOULD be done, but letting the state be in control of it, and mandating it means that bearing an arm is not a right, it is a privilege (a special advantage, immunity, permission, right, or benefit granted to or enjoyed by an individual, class, or caste.)

 

[deadeye]

some others thoughts from a month ago..........http://www.northwestfirearms.com/off-topic/110684-should-there-required-training-new-gun-owners.html

My post there......Lets just see into the future a little.

2012- Oregon requires hand gun handling safety course prior to purchase. This is mandatory per ORS.1234 and is to be given at point of purchase or online.

2013- Oregon house votes to ammend ORS.1234 to include a). instruction to be given by state approved instructor.

2013- Oregon ammends ORS.1234 to include b). state approved instructor has ability to determine if training is sufficient to warrent purchase.

2014- Oregon ammends ORS.1234 to include c). state to extend training to long guns with like rules for handguns to warrent purchase.

No matter what good intentions it may start out to be, the record of slowly erroding our rights is clear to see in many other areas.
To give any control such as this as a requirement leads to a very slippery slope and further errosion of gun rights.

 

[nwdrifter]

"Shall not be infringed upon"

What he said

 

[scot4199]

nope....

 

[PiratePast40]

Maybe we're on to something here. We could go through the Bill of Rights and require training, completion of a test determined by the government, and payment of a fee. What's good for one is good for the rest - right?

 

[Just Me]

Maybe we're on to something here. We could go through the Bill of Rights and require training, completion of a test determined by the government, and payment of a fee. What's good for one is good for the rest - right?

You might be onto something. piers morgan would at least have to shut his pie-hole for a while.

 

[RICKRWS]

PLEASE WATCH THIS-














Choose Your Own Crime Stats
YouTube
Crime stats they'd rather you not hear. https://www.facebook.com/AmidstTheNoise https://twitter.com/AmidstTheNoise

 

[wayoutwest]

Everyone who keeps posting "What ifs'" about new laws, bans, regulations, simply needs to looks to the south, California and then Illinois and New York...thats what anything new will be based off of, only then some.


Handgun Safety Certificate Program | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General

Handgun Safety Certificate Program

Effective January 1, 2003, the Basic Firearms Safety Certificate Program was replaced with the Handgun Safety Certificate Program. These new statutes affect the general public in two principal ways. First, unless exempt, individuals must possess a Handgun Safety Certificate (HSC) prior to purchasing or acquiring a handgun. Second, unless exempt, individuals must perform a safe handling demonstration prior to taking delivery of a handgun from a licensed dealer.

HSCs are acquired by taking and passing a written test on handgun safety, generally at participating firearms dealerships and private firearms training facilities. A Handgun Safety Certificate Study Guide, pdf to help individuals prepare for the Handgun Safety Certificate Test is available for purchase at firearms dealerships at $.50 each. There is also a Handgun Safety Certificate Video available for purchase at firearms dealerships or from DOJ Certified Instructors at $5.00 each.

The handgun safety demonstration protocols and DOJ Certified Instructor standards have been established and implemented by DOJ. An explanation of the handgun safety demonstration can be found starting on page 45 of the Handgun Safety Certificate Study Guide (revised January 2012), pdf.

For additional information regarding the Handgun Safety Certificate Program. Please choose from the following:

Entities Recognized by DOJ as Providing Comparable Handgun Safety Training to Those Entities Specified by Penal Code section 31635, subdivision (b)
Handgun Safety Certificate Forms and Publications
Frequently Asked Questions

And for what is on the test...

http://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/pdfs/firearms/forms/hscsg.pdf?

 

[RICKRWS]

They already have. People are forced to sign up for Obama Care. That was the first step of the Obama plan.

 

[RICKRWS]

"Shall not be infringed upon"

They already have. People are forced to sign up for Obama Care. That was the first step of the Obama plan.

 

[hermannr]

How would you feel about a law being passed which requires first-time gun buyers (with reciprocity to first-time buyers who purchased after, say, January 1, 1995) to attend a class?

This class would, preferably, be subsidized so that people can take it for cheap or free. This person would be provided with a certificate of completion that they could use to purchase a firearm either from a business or an individual. There can also be regulations to cover those who can prove ownership of a gun prior to 1995, as well as costs for those who do not intend to purchase a weapon.

The class would be taught by a certified professional and would focus on topics such as:

Gun safety - proper posture, proper respect (don't point at others, always treat as if loaded), proper storage and security, proper cleaning
How to shoot safely - Line-of-sight, back drop, general awareness of surroundings, a target-shooting period at the end of the class for your final certification
Self-defense laws - When are you legally allowed to shoot? What could be the consequences? What are the consequences if you fire when you shouldn't?
Carry laws - Open carry, concealed carry. What are the requirements? What are the laws governing? Crossing state lines? Reciprocity?
(anything additional you would add?)

Note: This would NOT count as a Hunter's Education course

I think this would eliminate a lot of problems that we see with guns today. Stolen guns being used in violent crimes? - proper storage and security (I know this will help very little, but it would still help). Accidental discharges (say, from a child finding) relating in deaths or serious injury? Proper storage and security. Backfires resulting in serious injury? - proper cleaning. Accidents on the range (God, we hope not)? - proper respect. Getting knocked off your feet from recoil (potentially shooting more rounds by accident)? - proper posture. The list goes on.

Just wondering what you guys would think of this.
I know gun control gets to be a pretty heated topic, so please, everyone be respectful of ALL opinions expressed.

EDIT: For those that don't read everything (I know I don't), I made this post about a 3rd of the way through the second page:

"So how about, instead of required..... the class was free to people who have purchased a firearm in the last 6 months? And at a reasonable fee (given the time of the instructor, cost of ammo, use of loaner weapons for those without their own, cleaning and maintenance of loaner weapons) for those who have not? Fair compromise?"

The best gun control bill would be one that repealed the NFA34, the GCA68..and all amendments to same.

 

[beauxregard]

i think classes teaching first time gun buyers isnt exactly a bad idea. right now just about anybody can go buy a gun and have no idea how to use it. if someone is going to buy a gun and carry it around, it would be nice to know they know how to use it. i dont know how i feel about that being mandatory tho. i would think that any honest citizen first time gun user would have no problem taking a small class on how to properly operate a firearm. but as one individual said in this thread, no amount of training or gun saftey is going to keep criminals from commiting crimes. now as far as doing background checks and possible psych evaluations before purchasing guns from a store, i could maybe see that. it would probably take longer, but that wouldnt bother me cause i dont buy guns from stores anyhow. i am completely against forcing all guns to be registered with the government. i dont think its their right to know how many guns i have or if i even have any for that matter. when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have them, and if/when they outlaw them and uncle sam comes knocking on my door to disarm me, what guns???

 

[Kevatc]

How would you feel about a law being passed which requires first-time gun buyers (with reciprocity to first-time buyers who purchased after, say, January 1, 1995) to attend a class?

This class would, preferably, be subsidized so that people can take it for cheap or free. This person would be provided with a certificate of completion that they could use to purchase a firearm either from a business or an individual. There can also be regulations to cover those who can prove ownership of a gun prior to 1995, as well as costs for those who do not intend to purchase a weapon.

The class would be taught by a certified professional and would focus on topics such as:

Gun safety - proper posture, proper respect (don't point at others, always treat as if loaded), proper storage and security, proper cleaning
How to shoot safely - Line-of-sight, back drop, general awareness of surroundings, a target-shooting period at the end of the class for your final certification
Self-defense laws - When are you legally allowed to shoot? What could be the consequences? What are the consequences if you fire when you shouldn't?
Carry laws - Open carry, concealed carry. What are the requirements? What are the laws governing? Crossing state lines? Reciprocity?
(anything additional you would add?)

Note: This would NOT count as a Hunter's Education course

I think this would eliminate a lot of problems that we see with guns today. Stolen guns being used in violent crimes? - proper storage and security (I know this will help very little, but it would still help). Accidental discharges (say, from a child finding) relating in deaths or serious injury? Proper storage and security. Backfires resulting in serious injury? - proper cleaning. Accidents on the range (God, we hope not)? - proper respect. Getting knocked off your feet from recoil (potentially shooting more rounds by accident)? - proper posture. The list goes on.

Just wondering what you guys would think of this.
I know gun control gets to be a pretty heated topic, so please, everyone be respectful of ALL opinions expressed.

EDIT: For those that don't read everything (I know I don't), I made this post about a 3rd of the way through the second page:

"So how about, instead of required..... the class was free to people who have purchased a firearm in the last 6 months? And at a reasonable fee (given the time of the instructor, cost of ammo, use of loaner weapons for those without their own, cleaning and maintenance of loaner weapons) for those who have not? Fair compromise?"

Great idea.

Now, how is this going to prevent evil people from killing other people? On second thought ... it's an idea. That will never fly.

 

[kumabear17]

Am I really one of the only ones who remember how we learned to shoot back in the 50's and 60'. When I was 8, my parents gave me a BB gun. The other kids had them too and we were pretty good at shooting tin cans. No one messed with them as the older kids would have turned us in and we'd of had our butts spanked. When I was 10 our Cub Scout troop arranged for us to learn how to shoot 22's. We used the indoor range at Ft. Lawton in Seattle and for several weeks we got to shoot and learn the "rules' regarding firearms. After that my parents bought me a .22, but since my dad being a sailor was never hope a friend's dad used to take me target shooting at the Pickle Factory in Kent. I was hooked. Bought a .303 at Sears for $13 and off we went.
Of course the Army give me the pleasure of learning how to fire the really exciting guns. That was 1969. When I had kids we started my oldest at 8 and my youngest was 5. We were the house where if other parents wanted their children to learn how to shoot BB guns, they called us and asked if we would teach them. Many of them still shoot. My youngest went on to be an Army Ranger. Kind of funny while he was at RIP he had to show another buck sergeant how to take apart an AK-47.
I guess my point is why aren't we taking on the personal responsibility to teach others. Do any of you really think the Government can manage any program successfully? (Ever heard of social security, Medicare or the Post Office). Any plan by the Government to train us to justify owning a firearm is just a first step to them controlling sales and disallowing civilians to have a firearm in their possession.
I vote "No"!