The OK case

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-04-2017, 10:22 PM)hollodero Wrote: OK I'd like to quickly add something to the debate, not just goofing around. Your profound expertise in all kinds of killing machines have made my head swirl; it's bizarre, but that's just European sensitivity. You do stuff your way, so whatever.

Just a quick question for an outsider like me. You have driver licenses, here getting one of these takes I dont know maybe 30 hours of practice, two full days of lecture and then exams. And I think that's only fair, since cars are potentially dangerous and people could get harmed or killed if handled unprofessionally. - Why doesn't this profound logic apply to guns, though? You want a gun, you prove you can handle a gun, you either served or take a course and get your licence. You want more power, machine guns or whatever to outarm whoever, you go through some hours of proper paramilitaric training. Oh, and a short psychological evaluation might not be the worst idea, too. Then you get a licence, then you can buy a gun and protect your family from armed intruders instead of potentially harm them with your own weaponry.

Now, whoever would not be behind that, please explain why not. I want to capture the American spirit.

Just like if you go to Scandinavia, I am sure they have profound expertise in all kinds of fire axes or something. Or the Swiss and skis, or ironically, probably also firearms. 


Here you take a multiple choice test to get a temp driving license, and then you have to take a practical exam to get a proper license (in Ohio it's basically driving through a small neighborhood or something while following the laws properly, and then going through some cones forward and backward). Lectures and all that isn't mandatory.

I have no problem with people being properly taught how to handle a firearm (and you have to go through a skill test and local law lecture to get a concealed carry permit except in some states you can provide a DD 214, which is a proof of military service) but the problem comes with when you start having to go through courses, permitting, or psychological evaluations just for ownership.

1. Ownership of a firearm is a Constitutional right, so just having a person be able to say "you're not allowed to have this right" without you having potentially done anything wrong is pretty much not going to fly. Though a firearm dealer always has the right to deny a sale if they don't want to sell to you, for whatever reason.
2. Anytime you start talking permitting and the like for basic ownership, you are creeping into having a registry of gun owners, which is something that nobody want to allow to happen. They pretty much have never turned out well and as had been proven for awhile now, even if everyone was okay with the Government having a list of everyone who owns a gun, their data is hardly impossible to hack. There's been police stations hacked and all their officers personal information released on the internet fairly recently.

Honestly, much like morals, speech, toilet training, and the like.. gun ownership/safety/handling is often the responsibility of being taught from parent to child. I was shooting guns when I was 4 or 6. Ask me how many times I have ever pointed a gun, regardless of knowing it was unloaded, at another. Or how many negligent discharges I have had.

Any of your suggestions really won't solve the vast majority of gun deaths in the US. Criminals still won't follow laws. Chicago has been making it harder and harder to own a gun legally, and it's not done shit for their gun deaths.


(Also, driving licenses are mostly about collecting money. Taxes, fees, etc. Hence why it's $25.75 to "renew" your license)