
Originally Posted by
wolfhunter
I agree that firearms training is important and that every gun owner should have training, but NOT as a condition of ownership! If the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is actually a RIGHT, the government, at any level, can only restrict that right IF the citizens allow it. If we allow a prohibition on ownership based on a level of training, we leave a loophole in the middle of our Right in the determination of the level of training required. Is a Hunter Safety course sufficient? Does it have to be a State certified course? How many hours? What curriculum? By requiring training as a prerequisite to ownership, you'd turn a Right into a regulated privilege. Claiming the founding fathers would've agreed is a cheap shot for the uneducated. The Signers of our founding documents had a strong leaning toward behavior based on personal responsibility not government legislation.
Gun ownership and responsible, trained behavior should be our society's norm. The peer group of our neighborhoods should encourage us to be familiar and proficient. Discussions in our break and lunch rooms should involve practice techniques, course availability, and range days, just like those fisherman who sit around discussing lures, baits, knots/rigs, favorite locations, and techniques.
How was what I said a cheap shot at the uneducated? Do you think most framers in the days of the founders were educated? I think they used common sense. Some may have had an education but for the most part most didn't. It was the respondsibility of the father to train his son in the usage of any firearm they may have owned.
"An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject"