GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-25-2013, 07:00   #176
Matthew Courtney
CLM Number 285
Instructor #298
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Lake Charles
Posts: 5,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by N4LP View Post
I especially enjoy the bullet holes in the ceiling 1ft beyond the firing line. I'm guessing that's someone firing a gun, it kicks up, they flinch and fire again.

As disconcerting as that is though I've never heard of someone being accidentally shot here. I'm sure it must have happened, but it's pretty rare.

...found a newspaper article about this happening in 1997. Women shot her friend with almost the exact scenario I described above.
The startle reflex happens frequently enough than lesson plans for NRA Basic Firearms courses are written so that the first 5 shots that people fire in an NRA course are fired with only one round in the firearm and hunter ed courses in every state are conducted with only one round in the firearm.
__________________
You will never begin in the fight you have planned for. You will begin in the fight the other guy has planned for. Retreat in a manner that leads him into your fight should he press his attack.

www.louisianashooters.com
Matthew Courtney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 07:02   #177
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 26,172
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
As I understand your point, a right granted by [memorialized in] the Constitution...
The Constitution merely codified the rights of We the People, it did not grant them. I think you are finally getting that to some degree, at least you appear to be open minded on some things. Congratulations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
As I understand your point, a right granted by [memorialized in] the Constitution cannot be interfered with in any way even though the associated behavior of an individual may pose a risk to public safety. Even if that interpretation is well established in case law, it doesn't make sense to me.

I am not a lawyer, nor am I an authority on the Constitution. Delving into this area is beyond the scope of my knowledge, but it does seem that:

1. We have the right to speak freely, yet we cannot shout "FIRE" in a theatre or joke about bombs on a commercial flight preparing to take off. ...
1) You're mixing apples and potatoes and trying to think of them as the same thing when they are not. On the one hand, yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is a fire is the prudent thing to do and does not require the sustaining of a defense under the right to Free Speech.

OTOH, your paraphrasing a judge's comments concerning a person yelling fire in a theater, when there is no fire in the theater, and then trying to sustain a defense from civil and or criminal liability by maintaining the invoked right to Free Speech. The judge was merely pointing out that the Bill of Rights in general, and the right to Free Speech specifically, could not be used as a defense to essentially legalize criminal acts. The judge was primarily pointing out that one of We the People's rights does not give a person license or cause to infringe the other rights of We the People.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
... 2. Citizens have the right to gather in their homes or in public places, but such right does not include the ability to engage in behavior that might be detrimental to public safety or interfere with the free movement of others in the community. ...
Illegal acts by a person or persons that infringe upon the rights of We the People are also not protected by the Bill of Rights. Even so, you're stretching way "out there" and remaining vague without going into any specifics. To respond vaguely, I'll say that jury nullification is just one part of the checks and balance of power the People may use prior to picking up arms if/when the government oversteps and or infringes upon We the People's right(s).

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
... What I'm trying to say so awkwardly is there does seem to be a test of reasonableness under the law regarding whether or not pursuit of a free act may cause harm to others or otherwise negatively affect the general citizenry. ...
It has nothing to do with "testing reasonableness," but rather everything to do with a right not being used as a defense against criminal acts. The Bill of Rights codifies the right of We the People against a tyrannical government or more specifically, tyrannical persons within the government itself, but those rights codified in the Bill of Rights cannot be used to justify or defend criminal acts of a person or persons against other members of the American populace.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
... If someone carries a concealed, deadly weapon in public without proper training in its safe operation, that strikes me as being detrimental to public safety. ...
(emphasis mine)

Then stay at home. You have a right to remain in your house and we do not have the right to force you to come out; however, by the same rights, you cannot force your personal beliefs onto others because we have the constitutional rights to life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Don't you get it? If you're scared of others having weapons, then stay at home, but DO NOT try to infringe upon their rights to Liberty.

Now, if and when the time comes that you or a loved one are injured due to the negligent, UNINTENDED act or actions of another, then seek remedy through the legal system, but based on the numbers, you're more likely to get attacked by a bull shark in a river channel than you are to get shot by a person CCW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
... Does the Constitutional right of any person carrying a firearm supersede the right of other citizens to live without being endangered? I ask because I don't know.
Now you are mixing apples and moon rocks in a bucket of vagueness. One right shall not and does not give license to infringe other rights; however, first prove how my carrying a firearm causes you or another citizen to be endangered. You really reaching with this one...

Simply put, you're totally without logic or reason when the surface of your premise is scratched with merely the slightest scrutiny. Look at what you stated, "Does the Constitutional right of any person carrying a firearm supersede the right of other citizens to live without being endangered?"

HUH?!? It's mixing apples and moon rocks man, apples and moon rocks. They have nothing to do with each other.
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"You gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" - Josey Wales

Last edited by Peace Warrior; 03-25-2013 at 07:06..
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 07:09   #178
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 26,172
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by N4LP View Post
I especially enjoy the bullet holes in the ceiling 1ft beyond the firing line. I'm guessing that's someone firing a gun, it kicks up, they flinch and fire again.

As disconcerting as that is though I've never heard of someone being accidentally shot here. I'm sure it must have happened, but it's pretty rare.

...found a newspaper article about this happening in 1997. Women shot her friend with almost the exact scenario I described above.


ETA: Sorry, I cannot find the slow-mo version that really details what happens.
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"You gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" - Josey Wales

Last edited by Peace Warrior; 03-25-2013 at 07:21..
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 07:22   #179
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and south
Posts: 2,681
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post
The Constitution merely codified the rights of We the People, it did not grant them. I think you are finally getting that to some degree, at least you appear to be open minded on some things. Congratulations.

1) You're mixing apples and potatoes and trying to think of them as the same thing when they are not. On the one hand, yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is a fire is the prudent thing to do and does not require the sustaining of a defense under the right to Free Speech.

OTOH, your paraphrasing a judge's comments concerning a person yelling fire in a theater, when there is no fire in the theater, and then trying to sustain a defense from civil and or criminal liability by maintaining the invoked right to Free Speech. The judge was merely pointing out that the Bill of Rights in general, and the right to Free Speech specifically, could not be used as a defense to essentially legalize criminal acts. The judge was primarily pointing out that one of We the People's rights does not give a person license or cause to infringe the other rights of We the People.


Illegal acts by a person or persons that infringe upon the rights of We the People are also not protected by the Bill of Rights. Even so, you're stretching way "out there" and remaining vague without going into any specifics. To respond vaguely, I'll say that jury nullification is just one part of the checks and balance of power the People may use prior to picking up arms if/when the government oversteps and or infringes upon We the People's right(s).


It has nothing to do with "testing reasonableness," but rather everything to do with a right not being used as a defense against criminal acts. The Bill of Rights codifies the right of We the People against a tyrannical government or more specifically, tyrannical persons within the government itself, but those rights codified in the Bill of Rights cannot be used to justify or defend criminal acts of a person or persons against other members of the American populace.


(emphasis mine)

Then stay at home. You have a right to remain in your house and we do not have the right to force you to come out; however, by the same rights, you cannot force your personal beliefs onto others because we have the constitutional rights to life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Don't you get it? If you're scared of others having weapons, then stay at home, but DO NOT try to infringe upon their rights to Liberty.

Now, if and when the time comes that you or a loved one are injured due to the negligent, UNINTENDED act or actions of another, then seek remedy through the legal system, but based on the numbers, you're more likely to get attacked by a bull shark in a river channel than you are to get shot by a person CCW.


Now you are mixing apples and moon rocks in a bucket of vagueness. One right shall not and does not give license to infringe other rights; however, first prove how my carrying a firearm causes you or another citizen to be endangered. You really reaching with this one...

Simply put, you're totally without logic or reason when the surface of your premise is scratched with merely the slightest scrutiny. Look at what you stated, "Does the Constitutional right of any person carrying a firearm supersede the right of other citizens to live without being endangered?"

HUH?!? It's mixing apples and moon rocks man, apples and moon rocks. They have nothing to do with each other.
Obviously you skim over statements like "I'm not an expert", "I'm asking because I don't know, "this area is beyond my level of knowledge" as well as questions I asked for the sake of discussion. Your only interest here is to demonstrate your vast knowledge of the founding documents, which I admitted having little knowledge of, at my expense. Apples and moon rocks?

I'm thinkin' you qualify for the monkey cage I proposed a few posts ago for members who love to show their ass because they think its special. You prove nothing to me dude except the extent of you arrogance; that has now been well established.
PhotoFeller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 08:45   #180
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
People really enjoy our local zoo, especially the monkey cage. The monkeys look so much like humans, but they always behave the same...scratching the same body parts, chasing cage mates that don't smell or act just right, strutting around like they're king of the compound, showing their ass as though its something everyone should pay attention to.

I'm thinkin' we may need a special cage for some folks here at GT.

You have just proven yourself to be un-teachable and basically a troll, you go on to use the same insult in another post showing that you cannot accept, or perhaps grasp that you are in the wrong. While your insults to people who disagree with you are semi-polite, they are what they are nonetheless.


While you have claimed great respect for the Constitution, you have shown little knowledge of its root. You have claimed to love freedom and to understand responsibility yet you want Government regulation to deprive others of their freedom and to take responsibility for your safety.

It is obvious the way you are clinging to your idea that you think the solution to all problems is the application of more laws. It cannot be limited to this one topic. I can only imagine some poor freedom that you don't like others to have if it doesn't have a specific Amendment of its own.

You attempted to present your proposal in an innocent "why not?" manner as if it were open to discussion that you wanted to learn from, but your defensiveness about it shows that was an act, a ruse and a façade. One might even suspect that you are testing "the conservative gun owners" positions for some other purpose.

I seem to recall you as being an Obama supporter in the threads pertaining to the election.

Curious.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:12   #181
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 26,172
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Obviously you skim over statements like "I'm not an expert", "I'm asking because I don't know, "this area is beyond my level of knowledge" as well as questions I asked for the sake of discussion. Your only interest here is to demonstrate your vast knowledge of the founding documents, which I admitted having little knowledge of, at my expense. Apples and moon rocks?

I'm thinkin' you qualify for the monkey cage I proposed a few posts ago for members who love to show their ass because they think its special. You prove nothing to me dude except the extent of you arrogance; that has now been well established.
Ad hominems instead of reason.

I read your "primate post" as well, but I decided not to respond. So in closing, I state categorically that you have the right to be butt-hurt on line as well as to have an unreasonable phobia about regular Joe & Josephine American carrying firearms.
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"You gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" - Josey Wales
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:16   #182
Peace Warrior
CLM Number 221
Am Yisrael Chai
 
Peace Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: With the other 7,999,999
Posts: 26,172
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by silentpoet View Post
I am worried about all the new people posting on forums and facebook. They say such stupid things, there should be a test or a permit before they express their first amendment rights.
Hear hear!!!
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
"Nothing we're gonna do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that [our gun ban legislation] will bring gun deaths down..." - VPOTUS Joe Biden
"Love 'Em All!!! Let Jehovah sort 'em out." - The Holy Bible
"You gonna pull those pistols or whistle Dixie?" - Josey Wales
Peace Warrior is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 09:54   #183
rhino673
Senior Member
 
rhino673's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 782
I overheard a guy asking for "pistol ammo" . The LGS owner asked " Ok , what kind do you want?"
The customer gave him a blank stare and said " Ummm.....I don't know . Are they different?"
To my LGS owners credit he very patiently proceeded to give the customer the basics of ammo and recommended some basic gun safety training.
There is a lot of newbies out there right now and need some patience and understanding. We were all newbs at some point.

Last edited by rhino673; 03-25-2013 at 09:56..
rhino673 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 10:11   #184
Roger1079
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South FL
Posts: 1,734
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
I'm a new gun owner, but I watched about 20 hours of youtube videos on guns and gun saftety before I bought one. Love Hickok45. That said, I sometimes get very nervous at the range with some of the folks that do some very stupid things. NJ is very strict as far as permit requirements - but there is ZERO training requirement - that is not good.
I have witnessed people do some very idiotic things at the range and when I do, I quitly walk out and notify someone that there is a safety hazard on the range if they haven't already noticed and intervened. I have witnessed everything from someone looking down the barrel of a pistol that failed to fire to someone leaving the booth with a loaded weapon and their finger on the trigger while unintentially pointing it at others.

I think the worst I ever witnessed was a guy with his girlfriend a few lanes down from me. This is going back years so some details may be fuzzy, but the details I do remember are enough to show the sheer stupidity. It was a Glock and the boyfriend loads the magazine and racks the slide. He proceeds to hand it to her. She accidentally hit the mag release and the magazine fell out of the pistol. She backed out of the booth looking bewildered at what happened with her finger on the trigger (magazine out with a chambered round) and turns to her boyfriend with the gun literally pointed at his chest saying "It fell out." Realizing what she was doing, rather than doing the intelligent thing and telling her to put it down on the bench in the booth, he does something even more stupid and grabs it by the slide and pulls it out of her hand with her finger still inside the trigger guard. How he managed to not take a round in the chest is nothing short of a miracle.

After I saw that, I packed up my range bag and headed out and alerted the rangemaster as to what had just happened.

No matter what the training, there are always going to be idiots.

Last edited by Roger1079; 03-25-2013 at 10:13..
Roger1079 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 10:15   #185
Lady Glock
Senior Member
 
Lady Glock's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: GA
Posts: 3,493
Send a message via ICQ to Lady Glock
Quote:
Originally Posted by F14Scott View Post
LadyGlock, and others who do not secure firearms in the home,

With great respect for your right to live as you like and raise your children as you like, I urge you to consider the following.

As was stated, children are not little adults. Their brains are, literally, not fully formed, yet, especially their frontal lobes. This is the part of the brain that dictates impulse control, affects decision making, and governs cost-benefit analysis. Children, by definition, physically, cannot be expected to make the correct decision with enough predictability to allow them to do so on their own.

There is a reason we don't give children cars to drive, even though I have seen plenty of kids operate cars and motorcycles on the track with plenty of physical skill. There is a reason we don't let kids sign contracts and legal documents, even though many of them can read and write at very high levels of comprehension. There's a reason we protect kids from sex, even though, by 13, they have both the equipment and the desire up and running. We don't let them vote, or smoke, or marry. In all these cases, we recognize that the kids do not have the maturity to make the right choice reliably, so we make it for them.

Your little ones may know the rules of gun safety. They may love and respect you. They may promise up and down that they will never... whatever (touch a gun when you're not around, etc., whatever your rules are). When they make the promise, they completely mean it. But, when you are not around, they will have the idea - "Hey, let's go check out the gun (or eat the cookie, or go to a prohibited internet site, or any number of things kids do when we're not around)." And, their incompletely formed brains, lacking the ability to counter their impulse, will neglect to stop them from doing something stupid.

It might not happen to you. But, there's a reason children are children. It's because, on a long-term, statistical basis, children cannot reliably make proper decisions.

Again, I'm all for people making their own choices on child rearing. But, I have enough anecdotal evidence of children making horribly poor decisions, despite seemingly full-proof training, that I feel compelled to say something when I hear someone say, "It won't happen in my house."
It's quite possible that my children didn't have the ignorant childlike attitude that forces children to act out in a way that is against their parents wishes because I actually took them to the range and let them shoot the guns. They didn't have the unfullfilled desire to experiment with the guns. If they wanted to hold them, they knew I would clear them first, then they had to check to make sure it was clear too and then they were allowed to hold, touch, handle the guns.

They knew not to put their finger on the trigger until they were aiming in a safe direction. When we got to the range, they got to help load and make ready the guns they wanted to shoot. They saw what a gun was capable of because we shot at stuff that would explode...like watermelons and gallon jugs of water. They saw what would happen when the bullet hit the object.

I taught them range courtesy. Most often, we had the range to ourselves...but I still taught them about a hot range and a cold range. The gun was to always be pointed down range even when the range was cold, the action was to be open, everyone on the line took 2 steps back and nobody was to touch the gun until it was again declared a hot range.

My God...how did we survive our childhood, when guns were left on the table and rifles were stood in the corner? Every one of us who grew up with guns in the house is lucky to be alive I guess!

My children are 13 and 18 now. The 18 year old is a master sharp shooter with the Junior NRA. The 13 year old hasn't had the opportunity to participate with that group as we moved to a less gun friendly place that doesn't have the meetings. Even though he doesn't have the "formal" title, he is just as good as his older sister and knows all the safety rules about how to handle, transport, carry, whatever you care to call it. I've taught him well and am confident he is smart enough to take care of himself around my "non secured" firearms. Though I do thank you all for your concern!!
__________________
This is ok, right? I'm not breaking any rules or making anyone mad at me for this comment, Right?

Trust in God...Everyone else keep your hands where I can see them!
Lady Glock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:28   #186
fiveoboy01
Senior Member
 
fiveoboy01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 988
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
founding documents, which I admitted having little knowledge of,
That's blatantly obvious.

As for the rest of the thread, I worry about myself and not everyone else.

MOST(I venture to say the vast majority of) firearm owners realize the potential for injury and/or death to themselves and others, and will take steps to educate and at least train themselves on safe handling. Others won't. That's life.

Back in the times of our founding fathers, just about everyone had a gun. How did anyone survive? When I was a freshman in high school, mom took me to the hardware store and bought me a Marlin bolt-action .22 rifle. I had zero prior training. How did I not shoot anyone or even myself?????

"Who should and who shouldn't" have a gun is just the stupidest damn discussion. It's an object, incapable of doing anything without the actions of a human. This can be said about many other(potentially deadly) objects. The fact that we are even discussing that someone should or should not have one is just laughable to me.
__________________
Rimfire Club #6923
Walther Club #310
Niners Club #8989

Last edited by fiveoboy01; 03-25-2013 at 11:29..
fiveoboy01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:34   #187
F14Scott
CLM Number 283
Luggage
 
F14Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 3,979


I don't think you understand, or at least believe, what I said about children's capacity for proper decision making.

Children, by their very nature, are prone to making poor decisions. They do it all the time, mostly in harmless ways. A four-year-old, by virtue of his or her being taught not to touch a gun, is most definitely not protected from a mishap. I don't think you'd find consensus otherwise among any field of child psychologists, educators, firearms instructors, parents, safety experts, just anyone.

Four-year-olds barely have the cognitive capacity to understand the finality of death, much less permanent injury, legal consequences, etc. Their memory system is markedly different than adults'. Four-year-olds are little impulse machines, learning about their world by doing without thinking two seconds into the future. They might alter behavior to avoid punishment, but often do not. They are only just learning to delay gratification, display patience, and make decisions based on anything other than "I want that, now."

Regardless of your firearms-centric upbringing of your kids, which, by the way sounds terrific, as do your kids, the fact remains that simply teaching young children about gun safety is not sufficient. While unsecured firearms is not a guarantee of a mishap, relying on such a system certainly cannot be endorsed as even close to ideal.

One last time: Young children do not have the capacity to self-regulate themselves around guns (or poison, or knives, or power tools, or pools, or cliffs, etc. ad infinitum). In the same way they need babysitters until about the time they approach the teen years, so do they need to be physically separated from unsupervised firearms. It's not about the parents, and it's not about the kids. It's about human biological development (or lack thereof), and it can't be fundamentally accelerated.

And I do agree with you, that it's a miracle I survived my upbringing. I did some incredibly stupid, dangerous things. Two that come to mind were almost falling headfirst over the railing of a spiral staircase as I slid down it on my stomach, six stories up (12 years old), and doing burnouts on my motorcycle, no helmet, in the rain, in Dallas traffic, after drinking (18 years old).
__________________
If it jams, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.

Last edited by F14Scott; 03-25-2013 at 11:36..
F14Scott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:38   #188
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 39,681


Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
You have just proven yourself to be un-teachable and basically a troll, you go on to use the same insult in another post showing that you cannot accept, or perhaps grasp that you are in the wrong. While your insults to people who disagree with you are semi-polite, they are what they are nonetheless.


While you have claimed great respect for the Constitution, you have shown little knowledge of its root. You have claimed to love freedom and to understand responsibility yet you want Government regulation to deprive others of their freedom and to take responsibility for your safety.

It is obvious the way you are clinging to your idea that you think the solution to all problems is the application of more laws. It cannot be limited to this one topic. I can only imagine some poor freedom that you don't like others to have if it doesn't have a specific Amendment of its own.

You attempted to present your proposal in an innocent "why not?" manner as if it were open to discussion that you wanted to learn from, but your defensiveness about it shows that was an act, a ruse and a façade. One might even suspect that you are testing "the conservative gun owners" positions for some other purpose.

I seem to recall you as being an Obama supporter in the threads pertaining to the election.

Curious.
When countrygun is preaching about the COTUS and the founding principles you know the apocalypse is near.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 11:51   #189
JohnnyReb
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
JohnnyReb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FEMA REGION III
Posts: 5,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
When countrygun is preaching about the COTUS and the founding principles you know the apocalypse is near.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
Its easy to take the side of the constitution when it favors you.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
Confederate General Albert Pike: The struggle against oppressive authority is universal and eternal.
JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 12:40   #190
Wil Ufgood
CLM Number 263
GTDS #88
 
Wil Ufgood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Out There
Posts: 1,577
__________________
Jimmy Feldman: A stretcher for his balls?
Wil Ufgood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 12:59   #191
JohnnyReb
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
JohnnyReb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FEMA REGION III
Posts: 5,124
Would you be willing to pay additional costs for firearms, for companies to team up with the NRA and include vouchers for NRA safety courses?

This allows the private sector to address the problem, and there is already a relationship between some of the manufacturers and the NRA. Taurus is an example that comes to mind. They include (or did include) a free NRA membership with firearms purchases.

This does not force anything upon anyone and I'd imagine it could be done with a limited price increase. Could be more useful then just a basic membership, and it most likely will increase membership in the NRA when people recieve the training.
__________________
Confederate General Albert Pike: The struggle against oppressive authority is universal and eternal.

Last edited by JohnnyReb; 03-25-2013 at 13:01..
JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 13:03   #192
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by F106 Fan View Post
In California, you have to have a Handgun Safety Certificate before you can buy any handgun. The certificate is good for 5 years.

Basically, it is nothing more than a test on safe gun handling and storage requirements. Among other things, it enumerates the gun owner's legal responsibilities.

OK, that covers the certificate. At the time you pick up a handgun, you have to demonstrate that you can load and unload the weapon including, in the case of a semiauto, proving that the chamber is empty.

In theory, every new gun owner is fully aware of the functioning of a handgun, knows the requirements for storage and is fully aware of their legal responsibilities plus has demonstrated at least a minimal capability in safe gun handling.

All new handguns come with a locking device. For rifles and shotguns, you have to certify that you have a compliant gun safe or storage cabinet.

It's a start...

Richard
It it's a start towards tyranny.
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 13:04   #193
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
So, should the government be involved in mandating that gun owners recieve training?

I'm all for people getting the training they need. I think for CCW permits, an applicant should demonstrate safety, and their ability to shoot a reasonable course of fire if they want to carry a firearm in public.

But, I'm against the government being involved in mandatory training, to their standards to own a firearm.
So you want them to be trained to get a CCW permit or be able to show it but you don't want mandatory training?

Sorry but no training should be necessary to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights.
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 13:06   #194
ChiTownPicaro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 655
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
I'm a new gun owner, but I watched about 20 hours of youtube videos on guns and gun saftety before I bought one. Love Hickok45. That said, I sometimes get very nervous at the range with some of the folks that do some very stupid things. NJ is very strict as far as permit requirements - but there is ZERO training requirement - that is not good.
So 20 hours of youtube videos makes one qualified and trained? What makes you more trained than someone else? Why shouldn't they be nervous about you?

I have seen the movie Commando a dozen times, The Expendables a dozen times, and I am currently watching a few youtube videos. Does this mean I know gun safety? Or know anything about how to shoot?
ChiTownPicaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 13:09   #195
WayneJessie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by jame View Post
I hate to be indelicate, because we're all "2nd Amendment, HELL YEAH!" around here, but is anyone mildly concerned about some of the new gun owners that have zero experience with firearms?

I've talked a bit with some of the guys at my local place of business, and they say they do. My concern is that the new guy is going to come home from work and throw his loaded G26 in his sock drawer when he gets home, without a second thought that his 6 year old will get his hands on it.

Has anyone else had the same thoughts?
You were a noob at some time in the past. Will there be accidents from so many new gun owners? Possibly, but the same is true for new driver's license holders, new airplane pilots, heck, so much of what we do has a large element of danger to it that it's a wonder more of us are not wipped out from our own ignorance. Folks taking advantage of their 2nd amendment rights in record numbers is a good thing. Now personal responsibility on their part comes into play.
__________________
I'd own a Glock; were it not for Glock owners.
WayneJessie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 13:14   #196
JohnnyReb
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
JohnnyReb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: FEMA REGION III
Posts: 5,124
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiTownPicaro View Post
So you want them to be trained to get a CCW permit or be able to show it but you don't want mandatory training?

Sorry but no training should be necessary to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights.
I think the interests of the public require that a CCW holder demonstrate safety and the ability to shoot a reasonable course of fire.

However, my suggestion was that manufactures include vouchers for a NRA safety course with firearm purchases. If the consumer doesn't want to go, they don't have to redeem the voucher (just like they don't have to join the NRA when that free membership is included in the purchase).

If a manufacture doesn't want to be part of this, that's their choice as well.

This provides a private sector solution to many of the OPs concerns, without involving the government.
__________________
Confederate General Albert Pike: The struggle against oppressive authority is universal and eternal.
JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 13:52   #197
TheJ
Lifetime Membership
NRA Life Member
 
TheJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GA
Posts: 1,478
Blog Entries: 4
Some think the interests of the public require people who worship in churches to demonstrate that their not on a jihad and do not spread hate and/or intolerance before they are allowed to worship with or preach to others.

Some think the interests of the public require people demonstrate that they will not publish or post online things that are seditious or will upset people and cause them to question government or elected leaders.

Some think the interests of the public safety require people to demonstrate that the are law abiding citizens before they are afforded protection against self incrimination or against unreasonable searches/seizures.

Just because something may be perceived as furthering public safety does not mean it just or not in violation of natural rights.
__________________
Jay

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. -F. Scott Fitzgerald
TheJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 15:45   #198
purrrfect 10
Senior Member
 
purrrfect 10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Linden, Virginia
Posts: 875
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokeross View Post
My Dad kept his Colt Woodsman in his sock drawer. Still does actually. He is nearly 87 y.o. and although the sights look fuzzy to his old eyes, he can still bounce a target along the ground with it shooting from the hip.
We all knew the gun was there in his drawer, but knew better than to touch it.
I guess things are different now days. I keep mine locked up unless I am using them.
Yea grew up in the good ole day too. But all gun owners need to be responsible and keep guns locked up..Kids are kids these days too, most with the lack of respect..
__________________
WAR DOES NOT DETERMINE WHO IS RIGHT, IT DETERMINES WHO IS LEFT
(((((((((((((((((((( •
THAT SAID • ))))))))))))
I'm in the best condition I possibly can be ~ being in this condition...
purrrfect 10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 16:01   #199
ashecht
Senior Member
 
ashecht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by skeeter7 View Post
Those people are the reason why I rather be at the range alone. I don't have to worry about getting shot by anyone other than myself.
Since I shoot so often, the folks at my range do their best to either put me one side by myself or put me a lane or two away from any first timers. Seen too many folks walking from lane to lane with their fingers on the trigger, or sweeping a gun past me. When I see sh&t like this, mr nice guy disappears and a tongue lashing is on its way. Here in NC no training is required for a purchase permit which kinda steams me. Too many mr and mrs groupon coming in. When I see folks wearing rental muffs my anxiety meter gets pinned and I watch them like a hawk
__________________
G19 Gen4, G26 Gen4, G30 Gen3
Springfield Range Officer
Italian Beretta 92FS Inox
Ruger SR1911 Commander
Colt LE6920
ashecht is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2013, 16:47   #200
daishi
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 21
I guess I'll chime in, since I'm one of these new shooters.

I grew up in the city in CA. All I had was my air rifle as a kid. My dad gave me a few safety rules, but I never had someone, an uncle, a grandpa, or a mentor to keep tabs on me. As a husband and future father, I'm up to my G19, a shotgun, and a 10/22.

It was a rocky start since I lacked a foundation. I've received a lot of pointers from RSOs. I've finally taken a shotgun course to get familiar with my Mossy and am looking forward to taking a handgun course. I've discovered that some of my friends are shooters and we're going to the range regularly. I feel like I've come a long way in the last six months and I'm a decent shot (from what my friends and instructors say), but I still have a lot to learn and to practice.

However, I can see how some newer gun owners, especially ones from the city, can be of worry. Some may be lacking a mentor and never get around to taking classes. They weren't raised and taught to handle/respect firearms. How to reach out to those people? I don't know. I don't agree with mandatory training, but it would be great if we can find a way to encourage or to steer new shooters in the right direction early on. At the range I go to, they usually ask if you're a new shooter. If you are, they'll radio the RSO to give them a heads up. They're usually kind enough to give pointers. I think they do a great job of that.

I nearly had a heart attack yesterday because of some kids in the two lanes to my left. I chatted up the RSO after I noticed one of them was sweeping a lot of people with his finger on the trigger, including my friend. Another would hand a loaded pistol to the other with his finger in the trigger guard. Unfortunately, they didn't speak much English, so the rules weren't sinking in each time the RSO would correct them. I made mistakes when I first started, but I can't help but wonder how or who will help those kids. It seemed like they were more interested in shooting than they were with learning safety or proper technique. I didn't see any adults with them. At best, they looked 18, but they acted like high school freshmen.

I guess my point is that some of us newer shooters who didn't grow up with a "gun culture" make the effort to learn and to practice. I've been fortunate to have friends who are in a similar boat and we'll help anyone we know if they want to get into shooting. On the other hand, there may be some new guys who fall through the cracks.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
daishi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:44.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 959
310 Members
649 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42