Seattle Times laments that you can't fix carelessness with legislation

[Kevinkris]

Ever since I was 8 yrs old I knew that it was my responsibility to be safe and aware when handling a firearm. A gun owner is responsible for it while in his hands or in the safe.
Why should it be the government's job?
If a new gun owner is not responsible enough to familiarize themselves with it then they are at fault no-one else.
Why do people think the government needs to get involved in everyday personal business?
It astounds me!!!!

you cannot expect other to know something unless you have taught them to know it. you were fortunate enough to have been taught about responsible gun ownership, others have not been. government is a necessary evil and im not exactly a fan of it but its not wrong to rely on it to serve its purpose. if people were only hurting themselves it would be out of place for others to get involved but the function of government as we want it to be is to insure you do not impede the lives of others without just cause. having training provided for those who desire it, is not getting government involved in day to day life. its telling government to do its job.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

well, i have trouble recognizing the hazards of other tasks as relevant when you are talking about the problems we do have as gun owners. sure most of us wont even seriously injure ourselves but there are gun owners who will. just because cars, doctors, and chickenpox kill more people than guns does not mean we cant find ways to decrease the likelihood of someone getting shot by mistake. deferring to other stats is only sweeping the problem under the rug. those who say its already trending in the right direction are just denying that it can be better. this is a conversation about poor firearm handling, not children falling into a pool.

There comes a point though when your efforts are better spent elsewhere. Gun safety at this point is not a significant issue. (Unless your the media or a gun control freak) Especially when you consider other issues. This does not mean we should ignore it but just that it doesn't require the attention now that many would like us to believe. Can it be better? Certainly. We could take firearms from everyone and create an army to prevent people from making any more. (Well not really as that is unrealistic) Beyond this though we can't do much else because the human factor will apply no matter what we do. Humans occasionally make mistakes and no amount of training will prevent that. Compare the statistics in states where training is required with those where it is not. You will find that they are virtually the same. Therefore if we want to improve much beyond where we are now we need to look at confiscation and enforcement rather than training. Good luck with that though as I have no intention of giving up my guns unless forced and then if I have my way it will be lead first.

 

[Kevinkris]

im sorry but i have to say it. your last post really does not have any substance.

first: the training required is nothing more than a 20 minute video and 50 rounds down range, not really training im sure everyone here would agree with that part. so the "training" they received clearly would have no effect on the outcome. thankfully there are those of us who seek proper training and thankfully its the majority of us.

second: you can dwindle the argument for removing guns from the hands of americans by reducing the total number of people injured by guns. take MAIG for instance, who quotes the before mentioned total and twists the number to look as if it is a pandemic. (really) train people to properly handle firearms by providing actual quality training using pre-existing resources, such as police and military facilities and training staff; who we are already paying. this would have the potential to reduce accidental firearm injury to hundreds from the thousands that current stats show every year.

third: just because greater hazards are out there doesnt mean we cannot reduce this one. we are having this conversation using a website dedicated to catering to gun owners who feel strongly about protecting their second amendment rights. we are here to discuss this issue and strangely the argument is fighting against those who want to reduce or eliminate this right isnt worth our time because people are killed by the flu more than firearms?!

my argument isnt require training, it is stop keeping these facilities/services strictly for state use and allow everyone to use them. we are all paying for them already, why cant i use it too? i didnt enter this online community to have people tell me what political talk show hosts say. i came to find information resources, learn the laws, enjoy images of the great firearms members have built and discuss firearm issues.

this is the place to discuss these issues. this is not the place to defer to other issues, even if they should be focused on by the nation more than this.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

well, i have trouble recognizing the hazards of other tasks as relevant when you are talking about the problems we do have as gun owners. sure most of us wont even seriously injure ourselves but there are gun owners who will. just because cars, doctors, and chickenpox kill more people than guns does not mean we cant find ways to decrease the likelihood of someone getting shot by mistake. deferring to other stats is only sweeping the problem under the rug. those who say its already trending in the right direction are just denying that it can be better. this is a conversation about poor firearm handling, not children falling into a pool.

No, it's a conversation about distorted and invalid statistics being used to justify unnecessary and inefficient legislation. That aside, there is such a thing as a lost opportunity cost. There are limited hours in a day, and limited dollars in any budget, as well as limited days in a legislative session. If we address less important issues at the cost of addressing more important ones we are being quite foolish, but that seems to be a specialty of government. A good example is mandating that consumers spend upwards of $50B per year for airbags in cars that save about 5000 lives per year. It's then argued that we can't put a price (approx. $10M) on each life saved, but the lost opportunity to do something else with that $50B, like build more trauma centers that might save ten times that many lives, means that more lives are lost that could be saved if we behaved rationally.

 

[Caveman Jim]

you cannot expect other to know something unless you have taught them to know it. you were fortunate enough to have been taught about responsible gun ownership, others have not been. government is a necessary evil and im not exactly a fan of it but its not wrong to rely on it to serve its purpose. if people were only hurting themselves it would be out of place for others to get involved but the function of government as we want it to be is to insure you do not impede the lives of others without just cause. having training provided for those who desire it, is not getting government involved in day to day life. its telling government to do its job.

It is when every day we have gun banners causing the slow death to the 2A ( death by a thousand cuts)!!!
Government is not able to fix problems, they have proven that all they touch turns to bubblegum.

 

[Kevinkris]

It is when every day we have gun banners causing the slow death to the 2A ( death by a thousand cuts)!!!
Government is not able to fix problems, they have proven that all they touch turns to bubblegum.

how about fighting to roll the laws back? government follows the loudest voices and no one is calling for the things that would actually help. in this case government is only a tool being used in the problem. much like your gun, government will only do something if people make it act.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

im sorry but i have to say it. your last post really does not have any substance.

It wasn't intended to have any substance as such. You have a distorted view as to the extent and gravity of the problem and therefore it makes no difference what I say. It is so insignificant that our government should not be wasting our time on it when it can do much more elsewhere. The private sector is already handling it. As for the training necessary how long does it take to learn the rules of safety? You need not be an expert marksman to know the few rules needed. Also keep in mind that these programs are not free. TANSTAAFL (There ain't no such thing as a free lunch), that means someone or some group must pay for it. I don't know about you but I would much rather our tax money be spent in the areas where it has the greatest potential. Perhaps pool safety training would have saved a friend of mine from losing their grandson last year. I don't know of any children of friends that have died from firearm accidents but I do know one from a pool accident. Try telling those parents and grandparents that pool safety wasn't as important even though the statistics prove otherwise.

 

[Caveman Jim]

how about fighting to roll the laws back? government follows the loudest voices and no one is calling for the things that would actually help. in this case government is only a tool being used in the problem. much like your gun, government will only do something if people make it act.

Were too busy defending at Every turn...

 

[Kevinkris]

again you miss the point. i never said those issues do not matter, they matter very much, unfortunately they are simply irrelevant when you want to push back against the stigma being placed upon gun ownership. when these people try to use twisted statistics against you, it just doesnt work to tell them about other problems. this is the issue they are concerned with, it is the issue you should focus on when you want to change their mind. they use these deaths as a tool to change the minds of people who do not fully understand what they are hearing. speak about where these numbers are coming from, inform them on how you feel about it when you know it is deceitful, provide source information. when you try to say there are more important things to deal with, you are simply ignoring what they think about guns. yes those issues are important too but deferring to other issues when they are concerned with this one will not get us anywhere.

listen to what makes them think it is necessary to restrict the second amendment and correct the flaws in the information that has been provided to them. we all need to stop saying it isnt important enough to address and start giving suggestions for real solutions. when you are not willing to listen to the opposition, you will not be heard by them either. you dont have to give up any of your rights to see them expand in other places.

all of this crap we had to deal with last year and several other times can be quelled by standing behind the issue you are fighting for without distracting them with other issues. you just have to at least try to speak on a level that has substance. by trying to seek changes that encourage gun owners (new and old) to seek training can only do good things for protecting our right to own weapons. reducing the number of accidental firearm injuries will also make it more difficult for the anti's to use statistics against us. making proper training more available to people may even encourage more people to exercise this right. as the biggest benifit, it will save lives. all without giving anything up, how is that distorted?



and jim, with respect to you latest post. sun tzu says you have already lost the war. if we only defend against attacks, we will never overcome them.

 

[ZigZagZeke]

when these people try to use twisted statistics against you, it just doesnt work to tell them about other problems. this is the issue they are concerned with, it is the issue you should focus on when you want to change their mind. they use these deaths as a tool to change the minds of people who do not fully understand what they are hearing. speak about where these numbers are coming from, inform them on how you feel about it when you know it is deceitful, provide source information.

And this is precisely what I did before, and as a part of my argument that other issues are more important. They are more important PRECISELY because the statistics are stated deceitfully, and that is what I pointed out before mentioning any other issue.

 

[Caveman Jim]

"and jim, with respect to you latest post. sun tzu says you have already lost the war. if we only defend against attacks, we will never overcome them."

And you actually believe everything you read?

 

[Kevinkris]

And this is precisely what I did before, and as a part of my argument that other issues are more important. They are more important PRECISELY because the statistics are stated deceitfully, and that is what I pointed out before mentioning any other issue.

thats a fair way to put it and there isnt anything wrong with pointing it out but you still have to address the opposition's points and concerns. it just cant be a fall back argument. yes i feel they are more important that the problems with guns but the media doesnt and those who have fallen for it doesnt either, so we need to fight back directly.

And you actually believe everything you read?

no but people wiser than i am follow his writings for a reason. i try to read philosophy from as many of the great authors as i can and i find myself at odds with many of their views but at least this reference does reign true.

 

[rkoreis]

i mean how hard or costly would it be to open our military base ranges once a month and have the same guy that teaches the soldiers about weapons instruct those who want to learn.

Look at where military posts with ranges are located. Ft. Lewis is an outlier. Most are located away from population centers. The original NRA was about rifle marksmanship and safety. The NRA should be out front on this. Work with the private ranges that require NRA membership to support their having free range days with NRA certified instructors providing clinics.

 

[Kevinkris]

Look at where military posts with ranges are located. Ft. Lewis is an outlier. Most are located away from population centers. The original NRA was about rifle marksmanship and safety. The NRA should be out front on this. Work with the private ranges that require NRA membership to support their having free range days with NRA certified instructors providing clinics.

it could work, this kind of suggestion is definitely a productive comment. its still not a direction i like (not that its bad) but it addresses a gap we have in safety training. i dont know about requiring ranges to do this but it couldnt hurt to try to get ranges to allow this kind of workshop from time to time.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

thats a fair way to put it and there isnt anything wrong with pointing it out but you still have to address the opposition's points and concerns. it just cant be a fall back argument.

Trying to come up with solutions to a non-existent problem is futile and a waste of time and effort. If they can make you believe there is one though then you will keep trying to fix it by incrementally giving up the very thing they want to take until eventually they succeed. The only solution is to point out that it is not the problem that they want you to believe it is. If they were really interested in saving lives then they would give the facts an honest look and start taking aim at things that will reap much better results. Perhaps registering baseball bats, or regulate the types of shoes people wear when they walk out the door, or require a $10000 permit before someone is allowed to put a pool in. Yes, these are absurd suggestions, they were meant to be however they are no less absurd than what the gun control folks are asking and would work to fix things that are proven to be more dangerous. Gun safety is not this super technical thing that requires a college degree. Gun safety can be taught in about 20 minutes and doesn't require a range, or even a classroom for that matter. Most of that is becoming familiar with your firearm. Now if you want to learn both gun safety and to increase the accuracy of your shots then that will take some range time. Now that is where we could make some progress. Not by having free range days but by giving people incentives to create more ranges. Remember the owners/operators of these ranges have to abide by regulations, maintain insurance, and maintain the ranges. They cannot do so for free. Another way is to find ways to lower the cost of ammunition so people can get the practice on the range without breaking the bank. Keep in mind though that this will not appease either the media or the gun control folks as that does not fit the agenda of either of them. One is only interested in a story that will get people to watch them and the other is really only interested in taking away all of the guns. That is their true purpose no matter what names they hide behind.

 

[bnsaibum]

Trying to come up with solutions to a non-existent problem is futile and a waste of time and effort. If they can make you believe there is one though then you will keep trying to fix it by incrementally giving up the very thing they want to take until eventually they succeed.

THIS!

 

[Caveman Jim]

It is up to each new person who buys a firearm to make that decision, they are TO BE "RESPONSIBLE", NOT GOVERNMENT. We already have too damn many rules to follow, stay out of our lives!!!

 

[Garg]

I injure myself every time I see Rachel Maddeau


What are the odds of me being injured by a firearm if I make a pass at a supermodel who is the girlfriend of an American speaking Cherokee pro athlete?

I would say, 50- 50....

 

[GunnyG]

They are. Have you been bringing up the rear?

The NRA should be out front on this. Work with the private ranges that require NRA membership to support their having free range days with NRA certified instructors providing clinics.

Join a club, become a RSO and/or instructor, get involved in the executive board, and make that suggestion.

Plenty of clubs do host "intro" days. Involving families through JROTC, BSA and 4H shooting sports programs, the NRA, the Am Legion & VFW have programs and grant money to pay for the ammo, etc.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

Something else to note is that you don't even necessarily need to be a certified instructor to help out. During the training classes the instructors need assistants. As I am not certified yet I help out as an assistant.