What part of range safety don't you understand?

[Acasper708]

What part of range safety don't you understand?

There's that guy that does u tube vids that shot himself like that.
He was practicing with a glock holster that had a thumb release.
He then switched over to his 1911 and instinctually went for the thumb release when drawing the 1911. He hit the safety and ended up shooting himself in the leg in the middle of the draw.
It still doesn't excuse the fact he had his finger on the trigger when drawing it.
I wouldn't put my finger on a single action trigger until it's pointed away from me.

But accidents happen.

As for the state requiring safety classes before owning a weapon. I completely support that!!

[jocko]

good thing it was only a 45 ,,, a 9mm would have killed him for sure. Just sayin

I remember 40+ years ago a partial friend and lateron a drug dealer, ...One night he wasin a tavern with a bunch of my buddies and he had a Jennings 380 in his pocket kand he reached in and BANG off it went. The bullet traveled down his leg towards the outter part of his leg, and stopped at his knee. It looked like a gian **** trail. He would not go to the hospital for he was on probation for sumpin and he was not supposed to have a firearm on him. to this day, he still walks with a limp.

Stupid is as stupid does.

[b4uqzme]

Much of what we learn on our own stems from trial and error.
We burn or cut ourselves and then take more precautions.
But being shot and dead isn't something you come back from.

I really don't think all important aspects of gun safety are natural, obvious and self evident.

I continue to be an advocate for gun safety training.

Unless I am misreading these posts, it appears we are all advocates for safety training. The question is about mandatory vs voluntary. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

For the record, I am against mandatory...even for something as important as firearm safety training.

[getsome]

Even though Georgia doesn't require it I would support a law that required you to at least demonstrate you know how to load and unload your weapon and how to handle it in a safe way....I got no problem with that same as if a guy wants a drivers license for a tractor trailer I want him to be able to handle that thing safely and show the DOT officer he knows how to drive and back it up before they turn him loose on the highway....I see it the same, demonstrate that you can handle a deadly weapon correctly and safely....

[Bawanna]

Unless I am misreading these posts, it appears we are all advocates for safety training. The question is about mandatory vs voluntary. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

For the record, I am against mandatory...even for something as important as firearm safety training.

Well that makes two of us anyhow. About the same odds we have in Federal Government.

[jocko]

I think that is why Indiana reciprocity is not honored by Ohio bcause we have no mandated training to get a ccw permit where as Ohio has some sort of mandatory training to get a ccw permit. Kind of a sh!tty excuse on Ohio's part but if I was Indiana, I wuld just tell Ohio, fokk u , then to we won't honor any ccw licensxe from Ohio, but as you know Indiana is one of the few states that just carte blanch honors any ccw states permit. Just sayin

[Barth]

Even though Georgia doesn't require it I would support a law that required you to at least demonstrate you know how to load and unload your weapon and how to handle it in a safe way....I got no problem with that same as if a guy wants a drivers license for a tractor trailer I want him to be able to handle that thing safely and show the DOT officer he knows how to drive and back it up before they turn him loose on the highway....I see it the same, demonstrate that you can handle a deadly weapon correctly and safely....

+1
Exactly.
I would include safe storage and transportation.
This is a deadly weapon we are talking about - not a jon boat.

[sharpenit]

I think that is why Indiana reciprocity is not honored by Ohio bcause we have no mandated training to get a ccw permit where as Ohio has some sort of mandatory training to get a ccw permit. Kind of a sh!tty excuse on Ohio's part but if I was Indiana, I wuld just tell Ohio, fokk u , then to we won't honor any ccw licensxe from Ohio, but as you know Indiana is one of the few states that just carte blanch honors any ccw states permit. Just sayin

You're right to be miffed. Especially considering how little "training" is required by Ohio's permit. Basically, you just have to show that you can load the pistol, point it in the right direction and pull the trigger. Then you're good to go.

But I am grateful that you Hoosiers DO accept our Ohio permits.

[b4uqzme]

+1
Exactly.
I would include safe storage and transportation.
This is a deadly weapon we are talking about - not a jon boat.

Just consider that any time you mandate anything, you quash someone else's freedom...even if it is for something you feel is important and worthwhile. Examples: there are people who think that mandated government healthcare is important and there are people who think that gun control is worth sacrificing other people's freedoms for...

And consider that any time you give your freedoms over to government, it rarely - if ever - turns out well.

Mandate, by definition, is the antithesis of freedom. I'm for freedom. Better to accept the serious responsibility that comes with gun ownership and let's be accountable for ourselves. Bravo OP for addressing the situation.

[jocko]

I guess IMO the second amendment never stated u had to quality to own a gun. Illinois has made the requirement for their ccw permit so strict kand costly and sh!tty, that I doubt very few will go through the B.S.. they designed it that way once the courst said you have to allow ccw permits, They didn't limit Illinois from making ur kiss their asses to do it.

[Barth]

Just consider that any time you mandate anything, you quash someone else's freedom...even if it is for something you feel is important and worthwhile. Examples: there are people who think that mandated government healthcare is important and there are people who think that gun control is worth sacrificing other people's freedoms for...

And consider that any time you give your freedoms over to government, it rarely - if ever - turns out well.

Mandate, by definition, is the antithesis of freedom. I'm for freedom. Better to accept the serious responsibility that comes with gun ownership and let's be accountable for ourselves. Bravo OP for addressing the situation.

I couldn't disagree more.
Requiring a drivers license for cars is a perfect analogy.
Is is mandated, regulated and enforced by government, and does work out well.
The thought of having untrained, uneducated drivers piloting two tons of steel is frightening.
The perceived freedom of one individual
shouldn't put life and limb of another at risk.

If an individual can't demonstrate the most basic knowledge of gun safety?
IMHO - They have no business owning a handgun.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness shouldn't put others at risk.
That's not my notion of Freedom.

[jocko]

I think that is totally different "analogy". IMO

IMO a drivers license is a state/government revenue cash cow. It still doesn't stop one from driving drunk, or reckless. CCW permits is a state cashcow IMO, If one looks at all the fokking regulations jus tto own a gun,let alone suck up to the ccw permit regulations that some state put down for IMO harrassment. hio has a training program. Indiana does not. I have no stats either way buyt i bet the peole on both sides of the border with different training procedures according to the state regs are no better than each utter.

In most states they require a motorcycle rider to pass a driving course, but damn near every rider I have seen who takes this test shows up on a fokking 125cc or 250cc bike, certainly not the real bike they intend to ride downt he highway 70 MPH. Whenthey can prove tome thatobtaining a permit like Indiana allows is dangerous to the civilian population due to no training etc, then I will listen. I would ventrue to say that most all people who apply for a ccw permit are people who have been around guns ALOT. They know how to shoot, becuase I can't hit jack sh!it with my kahr should not eliminate me from owning a gun to protect myself...

I have always felt that this permitting bull sh!t was harrassement to the legal law abiding person, as u know the BG willnever apply for a permit and ganster style shooting is not the norm in the real world.
Not aruging with u directly Barth, as we all have an opinion, When u have anti fun politicians in any state the lws for ccw are gonna be geared to NOT allowng u to carry withut some type of real and maybe costly harrassment. Would one have ever thought that Indianas would have had our CASTLEDOCTRINE law had it not been for a overlyfriendly 2nd amendment legislature.

[b4uqzme]

Thanks for opening that door Barth. The states' position on driving is that driving is a privilege...not a right. Is that where you want gun ownership to go? How about the rest of our Bill of Rights? That's a very slippery slope. Make no mistake. I agree that firearm safety is essential.

[b4uqzme]

I think that is totally different "analogy". IMO

IMO a drivers license is a state/government revenue cash cow. It still doesn't stop one from driving drunk, or reckless. CCW permits is a state cashcow IMO, If one looks at all the fokking regulations jus tto own a gun,let alone suck up to the ccw permit regulations that some state put down for IMO harrassment. hio has a training program. Indiana does not. I have no stats either way buyt i bet the peole on both sides of the border with different training procedures according to the state regs are no better than each utter.

In most states they require a motorcycle rider to pass a driving course, but damn near every rider I have seen who takes this test shows up on a fokking 125cc or 250cc bike, certainly not the real bike they intend to ride downt he highway 70 MPH. Whenthey can prove tome thatobtaining a permit like Indiana allows is dangerous to the civilian population due to no training etc, then I will listen. I would ventrue to say that most all people who apply for a ccw permit are people who have been around guns ALOT. They know how to shoot, becuase I can't hit jack sh!it with my kahr should not eliminate me from owning a gun to protect myself...

I have always felt that this permitting bull sh!t was harrassement to the legal law abiding person, as u know the BG willnever apply for a permit and ganster style shooting is not the norm in the real world.
Not aruging with u directly Barth, as we all have an opinion, When u have anti fun politicians in any state the lws for ccw are gonna be geared to NOT allowng u to carry withut some type of real and maybe costly harrassment. Would one have ever thought that Indianas would have had our CASTLEDOCTRINE law had it not been for a overlyfriendly 2nd amendment legislature.

I just hope Jack Sh!it never jumps you in an alley. You'd miss him.

Thanks for your support. This is about the most important issue we've addressed here. It's critical we think it through.

[Barth]

I think that is totally different "analogy". IMO

IMO a drivers license is a state/government revenue cash cow. It still doesn't stop one from driving drunk, or reckless. CCW permits is a state cashcow IMO, If one looks at all the fokking regulations jus tto own a gun,let alone suck up to the ccw permit regulations that some state put down for IMO harrassment. hio has a training program. Indiana does not. I have no stats either way buyt i bet the peole on both sides of the border with different training procedures according to the state regs are no better than each utter.

In most states they require a motorcycle rider to pass a driving course, but damn near every rider I have seen who takes this test shows up on a fokking 125cc or 250cc bike, certainly not the real bike they intend to ride downt he highway 70 MPH. Whenthey can prove tome thatobtaining a permit like Indiana allows is dangerous to the civilian population due to no training etc, then I will listen. I would ventrue to say that most all people who apply for a ccw permit are people who have been around guns ALOT. They know how to shoot, becuase I can't hit jack sh!it with my kahr should not eliminate me from owning a gun to protect myself...

I have always felt that this permitting bull sh!t was harrassement to the legal law abiding person, as u know the BG willnever apply for a permit and ganster style shooting is not the norm in the real world.
Not aruging with u directly Barth, as we all have an opinion, When u have anti fun politicians in any state the lws for ccw are gonna be geared to NOT allowng u to carry withut some type of real and maybe costly harrassment. Would one have ever thought that Indianas would have had our CASTLEDOCTRINE law had it not been for a overlyfriendly 2nd amendment legislature.

Requiring a demonstration of simple knowledge that you can safely operate something dangerous,
like a car or gun, before being allowed to own/use it just makes sense.
It creates a safer environment for folks own/operate these things.
For themselves and others.

Does that magically make everything safe? No
Does knowledge make these things safer for all of us? I say yes.