- Joined
- Jan 13, 2016
- Messages
- 38,082
- Reaction score
- 22,574
- Location
- Norfolk Virginia area.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I know many here think anyone who proposes any sort of gun control is a gun banner at heart, and often they are right. But I am most definitely not a gun banner. I carry and support others' right to carry. I believe civilians should, at a minimum, be able to own any firearm that civilian law enforcement is permitted to have. I am also against gun registries, full stop.
So, keep that in mind before tearing me a new one, fellow gun owners.
I recently moved and obtained a license to carry concealed. It is a shall issue state and I just had to pass a criminal background check and show proof of gun proficiency. My military service was apparently sufficient proof of that so I didn't have to take any classes or anything. I used to be very proficient with a handgun but I hadn't fired in over a year and to be honest it was pretty embarrassing the first day I went back to a range. I had lost a lot of that muscle memory. Fortunately it didn't take me long to get it back.
But it got me to thinking, while I believe every free adult, not on probation or parole, should have the right to own any fire arm they wish, I think there is a compelling public interest that the person show some level of proficiency in its use. We require that with cars. I get it, there is no Constitutional right to drive a car. But the 2nd Amendment also refers to a well REGULATED militia. No, I don't think that refers to the National Guard. I think the militia is everyone capable of taking up arms against an enemy, foreign or domestic.
It seems to me at a bare minimum "regulated" would mean the ability to require those of us who bear arms to maintain proficiency and knowledge of gun safety. This would be in the best interest of EVERYBODY and does not deprive anybody of the right to bear arms.
Exactly what kind of training and how often it would be required would certainly be up for debate. I think there would be a benefit in requiring recertification every couple years or so. Yes, some people may not do well shooting under the pressure of being tested but if they can't handle that then they will be worse than useless in a real-life scenario.
You wouldn't necessarily have to qualify on every single weapon you own (I know some of you are collectors) but you would need to show proficiency with the category of weapons you would like to use for defense, such as pistols, revolvers, shot guns, semi-automatic rifles and such.
All right, tear away.
I am a firm believer in firearm safety and proficiency course. There is nothing anti 2nd about that, and I will argue the point till the cows come home.