Jump to content
ogfarmer

A3764- Assembly Bill-- Requires successful completion of firearms education program to obtain initial firearms purchaser identification card and permi

Recommended Posts

So, then let the ranges mandate that you need to take a safety class before attending.   The government doesn't need to get involved. 

+1

Mandatory NRA course 4 hours, Plus Range safety and Orientation is A part of becoming A member at our range. And we have A full cap of 1155 members.

There are times that we as members need to self police each other. But not often.

And it is well maintained and organized club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This!  Excellent Post!  Too bad it contradicts your other one.  

 

Have you ever heard the phrase "you cannot fix stupid"?  You think a training course will make you more safe at the range, etc.?  The community should police itself.  If someone is unsafe at the range, the range officer, and/or others there should politely set them straight.   Do you honestly think this will matter.  "Peace Officers" go through lots of training and there are quite a few stories about stupid cops doing dangerous things with firearms.  This is about control, not safety!

Do you mind pointing out which post of mine contradicts. I like to set the record straight. Thx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The elephant in the room is whether or not the NRA will oppose this bill or not.  I suspect the NRA will not oppose it because they stand to make huge profits and gain members if it is passed.  If it passes with the NRA's blessing, how will that affect your opinion of the NRA?

NRA did and does lot on training, safety side. They may also do lot in other states for 2A. But I have no respect for them here in NJ for giving it up as lost cause. What happens in NJ does NOT stay in NJ. As population is moving around to other states, this decease, associated politicians, ideas and unconstitutional laws will spread.

 

If NRA supports this, anti-2A would have achieved part of their goal - drive another stake through 2A community and it would be shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are talking about adding an additional requirement to the already ridiculous and right infringing practice of having to get an FPID in the first place.

 

You are seriously telling me that some of you want to add training requirements to it because "it sounds like a good idea"? :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: 

 

We should be fighting the FPID, not trying to add stuff to it?

 

To me, it's as ridiculous as saying although rape is illegal, we're going to pass a law that you need to use a condom during all rapes. We just want to make sure that you are having safe sex while you are brutally abusing someone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the logic of some here, there should be mandatory training required before someone can purchase the majority of the tools at Home Depot.

It saddens me that supposed 2A supporters would be ok with any additional legal restrictions on our rights. This is why "rally the troops" never seems to work in NJ. People intent on being reasonable simply don't understand that the anti's are anything but reasonable. They know their end game and all these things are designed to win them their goal. Resist at every turn an counter with an aggressive offense.

They can afford to lose a thousand times and keep trying. Once we lose, the game is over.

Yeah it's mind blowing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a thought.  Knowing how evil and manipulative politicians are.....  Maybe this was designed to drive a wedge between NJ gun owners and the NRA.  You know if the NRA backs this that many members will be left with a bad BAD taste in their mouths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NRA doesn't oppose this bill, they will not get another penny from me other than what I have to give them.  The problem is that in order to renew my range membership, I have to be an NRA member for the insurance, and on a whole, they still do a  lot of good.  Lapierre, I hope you are listening.  Turn up that hearing aid.   The NRA's only stance should be that they heartily recommend and help to provide training, but it should be out of the hands of the government.

 

The elephant in the room is whether or not the NRA will oppose this bill or not.  I suspect the NRA will not oppose it because they stand to make huge profits and gain members if it is passed.  If it passes with the NRA's blessing, how will that affect your opinion of the NRA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the logic of some here, there should be mandatory training required before someone can purchase the majority of the tools at Home Depot.

 

It saddens me that supposed 2A supporters would be ok with any additional legal restrictions on our rights. This is why "rally the troops" never seems to work in NJ. People intent on being reasonable simply don't understand that the anti's are anything but reasonable. They know their end game and all these things are designed to win them their goal. Resist at every turn an counter with an aggressive offense.

 

They can afford to lose a thousand times and keep trying. Once we lose, the game is over.

 

Yes!  I feel the same way...  Even the people that SHOULD know better and have common sense, right OgFarmer, they are ready to sell us out even further. 

 

 

We are talking about adding an additional requirement to the already ridiculous and right infringing practice of having to get an FPID in the first place.

 

You are seriously telling me that some of you want to add training requirements to it because "it sounds like a good idea"? :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:

 

We should be fighting the FPID, not trying to add stuff to it?

 

You are right!  It is exhausting that so many are willing to just give these destestable clown legislatures what they want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you mind pointing out which post of mine contradicts. I like to set the record straight. Thx.

 

As I read the post, maybe you were being sarcastic.

 

Sorry about that.  It's hard to tell, as there are so many members on here that seem to want to give up their personal liberty.

 

 

Based on responses here, this bill may pass and it will be a shame.

 

Yes, its good idea.

Yes, it will help NRA and firearms business in NJ.

Yes, it will help people in general.

No, bad idea in  NJ based on its history to scr*w 2A community at every opportunity.

Yes, if NJ scraps FID and Pistol Permits all together and issues CCW as people will then be *operating* a firearm in public space.

 

It is NOT a good idea. 

The purpose should not be to help NRA or local businesses.

No it will not help people in general.  I will not feel or be any more safe.

State will NEVER scrap anything, only add more and more schumer to what is already there.

 

The way you write this, it can be read that you are being sarcastic and that you are really for it.  More yes than no, etc. 

Perhaps sarcasm with "shame" and "no" lines.

 

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pass that guy HB a big glass of koolaid for me.

 

It really is sad the views of some of the people of this forum and the fact that they are  representing a percentage of New Jersey gun owners.   Yes, I have seen examples of people handling firearms unsafely, but it isn't a rampant problem and can usually easily be addressed by someone near them politely educating them.   I feel more safe at the local range than I do riding my bike on the county road near my house, and I am not calling for mandatory cell phone and texting classes before somebody gets a cell phone or a car. 

 

I have just one question, if you mandate training before someone gets a firearm, what firearm are they going to use to learn how to use it properly?   I know what you are thinking, progressive-minded forum members, but renting a firearm, or the like, isn't going to cut it in learning how to be a good and safe and responsible firearm owner  just as educating people on what alcohol can do to one's judgement and body isn't going to stop a few from driving drunk. 

 

If anyone decides to get a firearm and does not on his or her own learn how to use it properly, maintain it properly, and store it properly, then he or she will still not get it after a mandatory state-sanctioned safety class.  Safety comes from taking the time to educate oneself, reading about a topic and learning from others by their example.  For most people, I believe firearms ownership in itself, flips a switch, and like a rite of passage, they step up and become more responsible. 

 

Say you get hired somwhere for a job  and they have a class about employee theft.  They have cameras up everythere, and they don't allow you to handle money, etc.  Do you really think that that employer will have any more honesty there, or less need for concern than another employer that sets up an atmosphere of trust in and empowerment of his or her employees?

 

Stop creating a nanny-state culture in which people are not accountable for their own behavior.  Stop giving the government more and more control over the people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pass that guy HB a big glass of koolaid for me.

If this was meant for me, then you proceed from a false assumption. I don't drink anyone else's Koolaid but my own. Neither theirs, nor yours. I make/drink my own. But I learn the ingredients 1st, and I make sure that it won't kill me before I drink it.

 

It really is sad the views of some of the people of this forum and the fact that they are  representing a percentage of New Jersey gun owners.   Yes, I have seen examples of people handling firearms unsafely, but it isn't a rampant problem and can usually easily be addressed by someone near them politely educating them.

 

Care to back that up with some statistics? How many times have you been swept on a public range? How many times have people's fire pelted you with ejected brass when standing next to them at a port without a clue on their part?  How many "Idiots with Guns"  YouTube Videos have you watched?

 

I feel more safe at the local range than I do riding my bike on the county road near my house, and I am not calling for mandatory cell phone and texting classes before somebody gets a cell phone or a car.

Well, if you want to bet your life (or that of your loved ones on that, that's your thing. I do not.

 

I have just one question, if you mandate training before someone gets a firearm, what firearm are they going to use to learn how to use it properly?

The particular firearm doesn't matter. The training to which I refer involves all firearms (handgus, long guns, shot guns, etc.). It's also a means to assess the student's general attitude towards handling firearms of any sort. Things like having the discipline not to sweep people at will, keeping the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, not loading until ready to shoot, knowing the laws of the state you live in (or will likely travel in), etc. etc. If you want to get into a specific class of firearms, that might be an "advanced" class.

 

If anyone decides to get a firearm and does not on his or her own learn how to use it properly, maintain it properly, and store it properly, then he or she will still not get it after a mandatory state-sanctioned safety class.

 

Did you not read what I said? I NEVER said "State Sanctioned." It could be as simple as a "range policy" of requiring an orientation training session or work with an RSO before being allowed to shoot at that range (rental or purchased)... or the gun shop requiring training (industry mandated not Govt.) before selling the weapon.

 

Safety comes from taking the time to educate oneself, reading about a topic and learning from others by their example.  For most people, I believe firearms ownership in itself, flips a switch, and like a right of passage, they step up and become more responsible.

 

Now, who's "drinking the Koolaid?" You have to know how to educate yourself. You have to know where to find the "educational materials,"  and vet them. You have trust that it makes intuitive sense (and that your intuition isn't failing you). Also, while you're doing all that self training, you have to make sure you don't kill yourself or someone else in the process while learning how things work. It's not just going to come out of thin air. To use an analogy of yours, how often do people learn to drive a car on their own and learn it as flawlessly as you seem to be projecting with firearms learning? Or, in my case, how do you learn to SCUBA dive in a "dry suit" as opposed to a wet suit? If you don't know what you're doing, you could be dead quickly.  Now let me ask you... how many times have you had to go to a family and comfort them, telling them that their loved one died while diving in a cave without the proper training or equipment, and dealt with their reaction?  How many dead bodies have you had to recover (or watch being recovered)?

 

Say you get hired somwhere for a job  and they have a class about employee theft.  They have cameras up everythere, and they don't allow you to handle money, etc.  Do you really think that that employer will have any more honesty there, or less need for concern than another employer that sets up an atmosphere of trust in and empowerment of his or her employees?

 

Apples & Oranges... Dishonesty/Employee theft does not bear the same risk of death or serious bodily injury (unless you're stealing rare life saving drugs from a hospital, or safety equipment from a construction site, or something like that). Firearms by their nature are a lot more dangerous if mishandled by an untrained, uncaring individual. It isn't totally about knowledge. It's also about "attitude." 

 

Stop creating a nanny-state culture in which people are not accountable for their own behavior.  Stop giving the government more and more control over the people.

Again,  who said anything about "govt. control?"   As stated previously, all of this can be handled by the industry itself (as we have done for SCUBA, Cave diving). 

 

I have absolutely no problem with people being accountable for their own behavior, and I encourage that wherever possible. But "true" accountability, please. That includes accepting all the consequences of all your actions, should something go wrong.  If an untrained, undisciplined, careless shooter ever kills or injures  me or mine.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If any range "mandates" training, they can say goodbye to my money. I rather sit home than paying someone who is in bed with anti 2A, in principle.

 

Its not about cost, its not about if its useful or necessary, it about principle.

 

Its different matter, if this was to be about open carry / CCW. At least then I can see the reasoning that someone would be operating firearm in public, hence need training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was meant for me, then you proceed from a false assumption. I don't drink anyone else's Koolaid but my own. Neither theirs, nor yours. I make/drink my own. But I learn the ingredients 1st, and I make sure that it won't kill me before I drink it.

 

 

Care to back that up with some statistics? How many times have you been swept on a public range? How many times have people's fire pelted you with ejected brass when standing next to them at a port without a clue on their part?  How many "Idiots with Guns"  YouTube Videos have you watched?

 

Well, if you want to bet your life (or that of your loved ones on that, that's your thing. I do not.

 

The particular firearm doesn't matter. The training to which I refer involves all firearms (handgus, long guns, shot guns, etc.). It's also a means to assess the student's general attitude towards handling firearms of any sort. Things like having the discipline not to sweep people at will, keeping the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, not loading until ready to shoot, knowing the laws of the state you live in (or will likely travel in), etc. etc. If you want to get into a specific class of firearms, that might be an "advanced" class.

 

 

Did you not read what I said? I NEVER said "State Sanctioned." It could be as simple as a "range policy" of requiring an orientation training session or work with an RSO before being allowed to shoot at that range (rental or purchased)... or the gun shop requiring training (industry mandated not Govt.) before selling the weapon.

 

 

Now, who's "drinking the Koolaid?" You have to know how to educate yourself. You have to know where to find the "educational materials,"  and vet them. You have trust that it makes intuitive sense (and that your intuition isn't failing you). Also, while you're doing all that self training, you have to make sure you don't kill yourself or someone else in the process while learning how things work. It's not just going to come out of thin air. To use an analogy of yours, how often do people learn to drive a car on their own and learn it as flawlessly as you seem to be projecting with firearms learning? Or, in my case, how do you learn to SCUBA dive in a "dry suit" as opposed to a wet suit? If you don't know what you're doing, you could be dead quickly.  Now let me ask you... how many times have you had to go to a family and comfort them, telling them that their loved one died while diving in a cave without the proper training or equipment, and dealt with their reaction?  How many dead bodies have you had to recover (or watch being recovered)?

 

 

Apples & Oranges... Dishonesty/Employee theft does not bear the same risk of death or serious bodily injury (unless you're stealing rare life saving drugs from a hospital, or safety equipment from a construction site, or something like that). Firearms by their nature are a lot more dangerous if mishandled by an untrained, uncaring individual. It isn't totally about knowledge. It's also about "attitude." 

 

Again,  who said anything about "govt. control?"   As stated previously, all of this can be handled by the industry itself (as we have done for SCUBA, Cave diving). 

 

I have absolutely no problem with people being accountable for their own behavior, and I encourage that wherever possible. But "true" accountability, please. That includes accepting all the consequences of all your actions, should something go wrong.  If an untrained, undisciplined, careless shooter ever kills or injures  me or mine.....

 

 

I am not reacting to the importance of training.  I am reacting to the mentality that the government and regulations solve problems.  There are  many on here that won't distinguish between State-Sanctioned training and private training and would just as soon take the state plan.  I agree that it is responsible to get training.  But, it is not YOUR job or the  STATE's to tell me to do so, or how much training I need, etc.   If you want that training, join a private range and insist that it be enforced for all members to the level that you are satisfied with.  You have to have training in most cases to join one.  Maybe I don't experience these dangers too much because I don't go to a public range and see all of the reckless shooters.  By the way, don't public ranges have Range Officers and don't they do something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on responses here, this bill may pass and it will be a shame.

 

Yes, its good idea.

Yes, it will help NRA and firearms business in NJ.

Yes, it will help people in general.

No, bad idea in  NJ based on its history to scr*w 2A community at every opportunity.

Yes, if NJ scraps FID and Pistol Permits all together and issues CCW as people will then be *operating* a firearm in public space.

 

This. Absolutely this, good sir.  

 

The real problem is not the training or testing requirement but the dysfunction of our government.   I think this requirement would be excellent if there were not so many bureaucratic issues plaguing the law-abiding citizens of Jersey.  That being said, I still have a tendency to support this if it can be swiftly followed by a greater, more persuasive, push for CCW. 

 

 

I'm not trying to pick a fight but I really don't understand this idea of "private use" vs. "public use" of arms as it relates to training.  Maybe it's because I've always lived in urban areas or suburban areas with close or connected apartments/condos.  But for me if my neighbor misuses a firearm, it affects me directly, whether they were on their private property or not.  With buildings today, anything bigger than a .22 is coming through that drywall, and I'd rather not find out how fast or how far it'll go.  I'd like to be able to do whatever I want in my home but in terms of training, I don't see why the need would be any different in my scenario...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Discussing this with a friend at the range today and another thought occurred to me.  Let's say the NRA gets behind this (or at the very least does not oppose it) the bill gets passed, we have two or three years of noobs getting trained by NRA instructors and some join the NRA.  THEN...  The great state of NJ decides they do not want the NRA doing the training anymore, they change it to NJ state based training only.  So now the anti 2A NJ gov't will have had it's cake and eaten it too.  The bill sticks as a law but the NRA gets cut out of the loop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NRA would never back this..

Most states don't have a FID requirement let alone required training to get a gun. Stop thinking that this makes sense and is normal.

 

I never said it makes sense or was normal.  What I'm saying is that the NRA just might want this to happen because they have much to gain from it and if it does happen, what happens next.  The world is not a simple place, you have to think about all contingencies. That's all I'm saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not trying to pick a fight but I really don't understand this idea of "private use" vs. "public use" of arms as it relates to training.  Maybe it's because I've always lived in urban areas or suburban areas with close or connected apartments/condos.  But for me if my neighbor misuses a firearm, it affects me directly, whether they were on their private property or not.  With buildings today, anything bigger than a .22 is coming through that drywall, and I'd rather not find out how fast or how far it'll go.  I'd like to be able to do whatever I want in my home but in terms of training, I don't see why the need would be any different in my scenario...

With all due respect, this mentality is why we have what we have in NJ. I dont hear 22s coming out zooming through drywall in any other states. Is NJ only state with urban areas ? Are our 22s more lethal and dangerous ? Or everyone else got thicker drywalls ?

 

"What IF" is how this cesspool that is NJ, imposes its stupid laws on 2A community.

 

* What if neighbour lawnmover runs over people?

* What if the nail gun discharges one towards next door ?

* What if hammer swing slipped out of hand ?

 

We as a society are strangling ourselves in what-ifs, spending enormous amount of energy on stupid stuff, then wonder why we are not moving forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not reacting to the importance of training.  I am reacting to the mentality that the government and regulations solve problems.  There are  many on here that won't distinguish between State-Sanctioned training and private training and would just as soon take the state plan.

Understood, and I agree that the govt. is not the answer here, either. If it is to exist at all, it should come from the industry.

 

 

I agree that it is responsible to get training.  But, it is not YOUR job or the  STATE's to tell me to do so, or how much training I need, etc.

Fair enough. As long as you are willing to accept the consequences of not having sufficient training. If, hypothetically, your lack of training or discipline results in someone being injured or killed, then you deserve to pay the maximum penalty for that offense, especially if training would have made you at least more aware, if not more careful.

 

Maybe I don't experience these dangers too much because I don't go to a public range and see all of the reckless shooters.  By the way, don't public ranges have Range Officers and don't they do something?

They do, but they can only do so much. And they can't do anything in private homes or other private places where the untrained, uncaring firearm owner might be with their firearms. And, even in the public range to which I go, they make you watch a safety video the first time. But it's a joke.

 

Trust me, I get what you're saying about govt. intervention. To me, that is *not* the answer. They'll Fkuc it up even worse. All I'm saying is, either get the training (however you wish to get it, voluntarily or otherwise), or be prepared to accept the consequences of not having it. Hopefully, me or mine won't ever be the victim of someone's lack of training.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the NRA will quietly back this bill since they will likely become a major benefactor.  I guess the good thing though is one can simply do the hunter education for free, even if they do not intend to hunt,   But wow, NJ state and the NRA in bed together.  Strange bedfellows indeed.

My first thought was how many people on this forum will support it. Shit like this seems meagerly popular around here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not going to lie. I like mandatory training. We have it for other stuff. Why not this. My only problem is that its just another restriction in an otherwise marxist state. You need training to drive, a course for a hunters license so why not for this. This would benefit ranges and trainers in NJ so its supporting local business. Not their stupidest idea

Exactly. Look at all the problems they have in the 45+ states that have no licenses or requirements at all to purchase a gun!

 

Typical Jersey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont get it. All you people go to Florida, Utah and every other ccw class so you can carry concealed in other states. Thats training before you are allowed a constitutional right. Very few states have constitutional carry.

You have it backwards.

 

Very few states have training requirements for concealed carry. Better? OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all due respect, this mentality is why we have what we have in NJ. I dont hear 22s coming out zooming through drywall in any other states. Is NJ only state with urban areas ? Are our 22s more lethal and dangerous ? Or everyone else got thicker drywalls ?

 

"What IF" is how this cesspool that is NJ, imposes its stupid laws on 2A community.

 

* What if neighbour lawnmover runs over people?

* What if the nail gun discharges one towards next door ?

* What if hammer swing slipped out of hand ?

 

We as a society are strangling ourselves in what-ifs, spending enormous amount of energy on stupid stuff, then wonder why we are not moving forward.

 

I agree that we shouldn't make laws to account for every single scenario that one could conceive of.  However, I was simply making the point that private use of a gun means something very different in the city than it does in an area where there is a driveway and a garden between your home and that of the neighbor.  It's kinda the same old safety vs. freedom dilemma.  I absolutely want my freedom with no restrictions and I think that I deserve that but I know what kind of idiots live next door and I want someone to regulate them so that I don't have to go start some sh....  I'm just recognizing this conflict, not saying that it justifies government intrusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the kind of training this would most likely entail isn't going to take wrecklessness, or lack of higher level thinking out of the individual, or increase one's wisdom. It isn't going to increase one's awareness level enough to change behavior, etc. Someone is either responsible and SEEKS being informed and/ or training, or does not.  So, mandating this training won't have the desired effect.   Instead, it will just give the State more power over the people, and more tools to regulate and control, and possibly end the private ownership of firearms.

 

Providing more affordable private opportunities and places to practice with the firearm is the answer!  And if the State was really interested in safety it would make it easier for, and help establish more training facilities to make training more accessible to everyone,  and to allow for more competition in providing that training and better prices for the individual.  And, for safety's sake and reasonableness, the state could forgo its sales tax on firearms purchases and the cost of FID and permits so that that money can be put toward training, just like it does on the sale of safes. 

 

And, continuing on this line of thought, why not have some of the local training facilities partner with local gun dealers in offering basic safety classes when purchasing new guns?   I would say the current NRA basic class as it stands is cost-prohibitive toward this goal, which in my estimation needs to be about $25 for that class.   And, for new shooters, the NRA might be able to offer a $5.00 first year membership and state that the other $30 SHOULD be put toward training.   This class should also be offered to prospective gun owners as well who inquire in the gun shops, and to seasoned gun owners.  The local training facitlity could even charge, say $50, and stipulate that if you take the class, maybe $20 could be put toward higher level training courses, etc..

 

Additionally, to raise awareness, have the industry provide new gun owners with the opportunity to complete a short quiz at the time of purchase that shows that the newly gun owner understands basic gun safety concepts and the need for basic training, perhaps while they are waiting for nics and then let them SELF-CORRECT it and be solely responsible for the results and see why they might need training.

 

The only thing the state should do is gently recommend that a firearms safety class be included in public schools that corresponds to appropriate age level, which should be performed by NRA-sanctioned (or industry sanctioned) instructors and to get rid of the ridiculous, unconstitutional zero-tolerance BS that prevents that type of learning to go on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that we shouldn't make laws to account for every single scenario that one could conceive of.  However, I was simply making the point that private use of a gun means something very different in the city than it does in an area where there is a driveway and a garden between your home and that of the neighbor.  It's kinda the same old safety vs. freedom dilemma.  I absolutely want my freedom with no restrictions and I think that I deserve that but I know what kind of idiots live next door and I want someone to regulate them so that I don't have to go start some sh....  I'm just recognizing this conflict, not saying that it justifies government intrusion.

 

 

 

The only regulation, or training as it were, needed here is that people are taught to be decent human beings from the time they are born.  No amount of firearms regulation or training will change a drug dealers career choice, or prevent domestic violence or change the mind of someone determined to commit a murder-suicide.  Training will not stop criminals from obtaining firearms.  That is the fatal flaw in this argument.  The root of the problem has always been social.

 

Our government has allowed this great nation to fall into a spiral of social decay by placating every liberal faction.  The bleeding heart liberals have chipped away at conservative values which promote responsibility and accountability  to the point where there is no longer a sound foundation from which many children today can go through childhood on a stable platform.  When children are raised wrong and grow up to be irresponsible adults, the liberals say it's not their fault.  The consequence of this is that we have a few generations now that believe they can do anything they want with little to no consequences because society (or "the village" made them that way and it's the village's fault, not theirs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...... but I know what kind of idiots live next door and I want someone to regulate them so that I don't have to go start some sh....  I'm just recognizing this conflict, not saying that it justifies government intrusion.

There lies the problem. Life is full of idiots. I can guarantee you that I am an idiot when it comes to certain things. This type of wishful thinking of regulating *idiots* is how we got FID, P2P, 15 rounds (will soon be 6 rounds to one up NYSAFE), OGAM .. on and on..

 

I get your point and concern. But only way to idiot proof is not let idiots have firearm. Thats exactly what NJ is doing and guess who qualifies for being an idiot in their minds - you, I and ALL of the population, except the politicians, connected and those who can afford private security.

 

Unless we get this fear of potential idiots out of minds and take a long term, objective look at 2A, we will NOT PROGRESS. Guaranteed.

 

BTW, dont want to sound cheesy.. but I am sure we all read this .... Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view, a government with the size, scope and power of our current federal and state ones, aided and abetted by the bureaucracy and court system, is potentially a far greater threat to our lives and freedom than any 'idiots' who could cross my path. In addition, idiots are generally a one or two time occurrence, if at all. The government is with us every hour of every day.

 

Therefore, although it sounds rational, I would opt not to require any training or requirements dictated by any federal or state government. It only weakens our civil position, and guarantees nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How soon before Home Suppository and Blowes will need to schedule classes for permit holders of common contracting tools.  I really am afraid of the thought that my neighbor may have an unregistered nail gun or worse.  Stupid laws for stupid people.  "You can't fix stupid"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...