Traits of someone that shouldn't own or operate a firearm.

[barnabus1999]

A "man" comes on here and trashes his wife... I'll call it as I see it!!

I legitimately, and sincerely, think he is being disrespectful to her, demanding of her, and not understanding HER needs/wants/likes. She has to learn what HE mansplains, what HE thinks she needs, what HE thinks she should want, what HE thinks she is capable of or not capable of. You can relate to that eh?

I think she will surprise him.

Whoa I interpreted that differently. He needed somebody else to talk to and that's what we are here for.

 

[bbbass]

Whoa I interpreted that differently. He needed somebody else to talk to and that's what we are here for.

Understood that people can see things differently. That's what I've been saying in this whole thread and the basis for recommending he not try to "mansplain" things to his wife.

I won't argue his right to talk, I just suspect he has a really poor attitude towards his wife. No wonder she doesn't listen to him.

IMO, even the worst ditz can be taught to shoot safely, until they've PROVEN that they can't. Good lord, I've taught grandkids to shoot... you have to be right there on top of them. The OP seems to be suffering from PTSD from having been shot previously at a range or whatever. IMO, HE is not a good candidate to be teaching anybody in his current condition, much less a spouse that sounds 180deg of different than he is...

I'll stand firm on my opinion that he is not taking her needs and style of learning into consideration. He now says she is a very competent people manager, and that HE is not... I suggest he stop trying to manage her and seek the help of people that know how to teach all kinds of persons.

 

[WillametteWill]

Interesting how this is exactly the kind of subjective criteria that many antis think should be used in prohibiting a person from legal access to firearms.

It is. I sincerely hope many of us have provided assistance to the OP regarding training and helpful suggestions for the bride.

For a right such as the 2A, subjective and even objective criteria is problematic. Society allow for some objective (prohibiting felons, etc.) but there is definitely not agreement with this. You are right that it is the slippery slope that has been used against us (pro 2A folks) for decades now.

A study I saw once indicated only about 1% of people do any training after their initial concealed carry class. Knowing what I know, seeing what I have seen...it would be VERY easy for me to say that 99% of the people should not be carrying. But I will fight to the death for their right to carry.

 

[bbbass]

That's the excuse I use when buying. "Resale Value"

One of my best friends has always kept a "bank account" in firearms. If/when he needs cash, he can always sell one.

I'm currently embroiled in a discussion on the ASP FaceBuk page of John Correia regading selling a firearm to finance taking a gun class. I put out that it's a principle of basic personal economic health not to sell a fixed asset for a transitory experience, and was dogpiled for it.... FUN STUFF mikey!!

 

[Dinglenutz]

saying she likes a gun because of what color it is is fairly commonplace these days but still concerns lots of us gun owners that know better.

I won't lie, I always avoided FDE guns because to me they are ugly as dog poo. It's a major purchase for a lot of people and it's pretty normal to like pretty things.

 

[barnabus1999]

My wife often buys wine 'cause the label is "neat".

I must have feminine traits that's why I have most of my fire arms. I think they look neat.

 

[WAW44]

There is a difference between opining and prohibiting.

Its just a common sense approach to drafting new law... don't you know?

 

[bbbass]

Its just a common sense approach to drafting new law... don't you know?

Ain no common sense in this world, much less so in anti-gunners!!!

 

[WillametteWill]

I'm currently embroiled in a discussion on the ASP FaceBuk page of John Correia regading selling a firearm to finance taking a gun class. I put out that it's a principle of basic personal economic health not to sell a fixed asset for a transitory experience, and was dogpiled for it.... FUN STUFF mikey!!

As much as the bride and I are into training, I agree with you 100% on this. I perhaps won't buy a gun that I want to finance training, but never sell one. Was it by John because he wants your training money??? JK

 

[bbbass]

As much as the bride and I are into training, I agree with you 100% on this. I perhaps won't buy a gun that I want to finance training, but never sell one. Was it by John because he wants your training money??? JK

Not sure if it was one of John's classes because I didn't read the whole article he posted. But my wisdom regarding financial good sense and the perishable nature of DGU classes/skills needing constant replenishment that would eventually deplete one's firearm ownership fell on deaf ears. I can't imagine selling a gun to buy ammo to practice with either. But I guess "they" never heard of saving for what you want, or "need"!! <sigh>

 

[DB is Here]

As others have said, pay to have her trained. Happy wife, happy life...it ain't rocket science.

 

[Member 5605]

Traits?
Firearm ownership is a right and unless you've been a bad boy or girl, there shouldn't be any traits to exclude ownership.

 

[Mikej]

One of my best friends has always kept a "bank account" in firearms. If/when he needs cash, he can always sell one.

I'm currently embroiled in a discussion on the ASP FaceBuk page of John Correia regading selling a firearm to finance taking a gun class. I put out that it's a principle of basic personal economic health not to sell a fixed asset for a transitory experience, and was dogpiled for it.... FUN STUFF mikey!!

I had to look up John Correia. "FaceBuk"... Isn't that what people use it for? Dogpiling? I wish I could sell a couple three guns. Guns that were purchased and don't get used, She doesn't like to shoot them. I don't like, or want to shoot them. They sit in the safe taking up space. She won't let me sell them!

 

[bbbass]

I had to look up John Correia. "FaceBuk"... Isn't that what people use it for? Dogpiling? I wish I could sell a couple three guns. Guns that were purchased and don't get used, She doesn't like to shoot them. I don't like, or want to shoot them. They sit in the safe taking up space. She won't let me sell them!

Yes, that seems to be the current social trend. Esp by the younger set... those whippersnappers not only think they know everything, but they got NO REsPECT!! If I hear "boomer" one more time...

Keep yer dirty mittens offn her guns!!!

My wife often says I don't 'need" another gun, or "we" don't need another gun, or "she" doesn't "need" another gun... pffft what has that got to do with it? Like I'd tell her she doesn't "need" another pair of shoes, or earrings, or a new bra.... wait, not sure about that last one.

 

[Howard1955]

Generally agree except for I know many that don't have guns for self defense, might never use one even if they had to, but nevertheless enjoy various shooting sports. IMO there is no reason to deprive a squeamish person of the enjoyment of shooting.

The squeamish/hesitant type of person made my list because of a conversation my parents had when I was a kid.

Dad wanted Mom to carry a gun when she was commuting to work at night. Their conversation eventually included the sheriff, who said "Will you be willing and able to shoot someone if you ever need to pull that gun?"

Mom said no. Which meant that she shouldn't carry a gun, since the end result could very likely be that a do-bad would simply take it from her.

We Americans have the 2nd Amendment, which is a written guarantee that our representative government won't interfere with our God-given right to defend ourselves.

But it isn't wise to think that every single American has the same level of responsibility or integrity. Some aren't temperamentally suited to be around firearms. Some are just plain evil.

 

[Howard1955]

As others have said, pay to have her trained. Happy wife, happy life...it ain't rocket science.

Heh. I recently heard "It ain't rocket surgery".

 

[Mikej]

Like I'd tell her she doesn't "need" another pair of shoes, or earrings,

Oh no...

 

[DeanfromOregon]

Heh. I recently heard "It ain't rocket surgery".

lol, I say that!

 

[bbbass]

The squeamish/hesitant type of person made my list because of a conversation my parents had when I was a kid.

Dad wanted Mom to carry a gun when she was commuting to work at night. Their conversation eventually included the sheriff, who said "Will you be willing and able to shoot someone if you ever need to pull that gun?"

Mom said no. Which meant that she shouldn't carry a gun, since the end result could very likely be that a do-bad would simply take it from her.

But did you not write that those persons shouldn't OWN a gun? As opposed to saying shouldn't CARRY a gun. ???

(Edit to add: I would also have to say that I am in favor of "shall issue" carry permits, and not require a demeaning convo with a sheriff, who in his all knowing, all seeing male authority repeats the typical old police captain saw about a gun being taken and used against a gun owner/carry person. It's not that it is not often true, it is that it is also often untrue... most often, the mere display of a firearm will ward off a robber or attacker, and more importantly, none of his business! And yes, I understand that in "may issue" states, he could make it his business.)

We Americans have the 2nd Amendment, which is a written guarantee that our representative government won't interfere with our God-given right to defend ourselves.

But it isn't wise to think that every single American has the same level of responsibility or integrity. Some aren't temperamentally suited to be around firearms. Some are just plain evil.

It's not up to me to decide who gets a gun and who doesn't. We can sit here and spitball about who "shouldn't" have one, but that should be the end of it. As I said, posting an opinion is a whole different animal than working to decide who should be prohibited.

If I were to apply the same logic to writing/posting, I would say that there are some people that shouldn't post. Fortunately, it is not my responsibility to decide who here can say what, and who can or should be banned. If it was, I would be the first one I would ban!!!

"I would never join a club that would have me as a member" - Groucho Marx

 

[uberguy]

These are almost universally the worst weapon to give a woman with no handgun experience.

The details are underwhelming.

I find a 38 revolver an ideal starting defense worthy firearm for new people, since operating a slide and magazine changes, chamber loaded, tap-rack-bang jam drills are difficult for many nubies.

And as pointed out, my wife took a woman's only beginners course, hadn't mentioned it but they had a variety for the ladies to try out and she developed a liking for the Glock 19, which surprised me.

She shoots a Colt Detective Special and G19 quite well, in spite of your universal observation. Did the same for my now adult daughter and she stayed with the 38. Started them both out (before classes) with a Ruger 22 pistol that I loaded for them, but never considered that for either to own or use in self-defense.

I see from another post of yours you helped a legally blind woman, incapable of operating a car and unfamiliar with firearms, uncomfortable with a 38 to acquire an AR. The logic of that is, well there is no logic in that. There's either a lot more to the story or it's fictional.