Quote:
It would be an excellent way to help prevent accidents however. Again, I've seen enough yayhooism in this area that any faith I had in the common sense of other people has been shattered.
|
I've lived in Chicago and California both places that require "safety" training to own handguns. The ranges seemed like the same amount of yahoo behavior as I see in my current locale which has no safety requirements. I also see presumably licensed drivers drive like yahoos all the time. Any minor amount of training does not ensure anything but that someone is aware of the basics enough to pass a test, or worse, is presumed aware of the basics and that they will follow them just because they took a class or read a pamphlet.
Quote:
It does however, help to make sure crazies who would fail a background check can't circumvent the system.
|
The CT shooter circumvented the system, the columbine shooters circumvented the system. If someone is determined to get a firearm they will find a way.
Quote:
Again, the strong argument can be made here that you're not trying to protect from a thief, but a child.
|
So the answer is to force all firearms owners to purchase safes regardless if they have children or children ever enter their house lawfully? It's not a very strong argument for federal level regulation when it only applies to some people. Even then there are other ways of securing firearms which do not require the investment that a proper safe does. Even a proper safe is not guaranteed to keep out determined older/teenage children, as they would have multiple avenues and opportunities to defeat a safe that a thief would not.
Quote:
If instead of a NICS check i could pay a reasonable fee for a personal license that got me out of NICS checks and dealing with FFLs I would, even if the process was more in depth.
|
There are already regulations in place at the federal level that allow for exemption from NICS check if your state's carry license/permit procedure is up to certain standards.