• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This just reinforces my firm belief that a gun safety course should be required before someone can purchase their first firearm.

    • hedgetank@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m a gunsmith and an avid competitive shooter, and I absolutely think that mandatory training with firearms should be necessary. Right now, it’s mandatory to take a hunter’s safety course before you can obtain a hunting license, which includes firearms safety. In sane states, obtaining a permit to carry a firearm loaded in public (concealed, we won’t get into the idiocy of open carry) requires similar training.

      To me, it’s no different than operating a vehicle or any other piece of equipment that has the potential to do great harm to others: You need to have training on how to use it properly and safely, the basics of the law and so on, and ultimately a level of enforced accountability in the event that you fail to follow protocols for safe handling, storage, and usage of said same.

    • borkcorkedforks@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lots of people expect anti-gun people to abuse the concept through cost and time requirements. Sort of like they did with permits in may issue states. That is where opposition to requirements comes from.

      • BaroqueInMind@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The ATF already does this with suppressors, it’s an arbitrary $200 and an almost 2 year eaitbto buy a simple tube that barely makes your firearm silent. Because morons that write legislation think that Hollywood mouse fart gun silencers are real.