SC rulings may lead to a Republican Administration

Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

Sure. But, let's compare it to driving once again. How did I learn to drive? From my parents, like most do. But that isn't sufficient for me to have a license to use the machine; I had to pass a course which was state-approved, and take a licensing exam, to do so.

Gun ownership and use by those under the age of 18 should be no different at all. The stakes are similar - people's lives and the general public safety. It prevents parents from screwing their kids up in this area.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

cjhsa wrote:
Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

Sure. But, let's compare it to driving once again. How did I learn to drive? From my parents, like most do. But that isn't sufficient for me to have a license to use the machine; I had to pass a course which was state-approved, and take a licensing exam, to do so.

Gun ownership and use by those under the age of 18 should be no different at all. The stakes are similar - people's lives and the general public safety. It prevents parents from screwing their kids up in this area.

Cycloptichorn

This is too rational to be considered.
K
O

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

cjhsa wrote:
Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

Sure. But, let's compare it to driving once again. How did I learn to drive? From my parents, like most do. But that isn't sufficient for me to have a license to use the machine; I had to pass a course which was state-approved, and take a licensing exam, to do so.

Gun ownership and use by those under the age of 18 should be no different at all. The stakes are similar - people's lives and the general public safety. It prevents parents from screwing their kids up in this area.

Cycloptichorn

Perhaps instead you should compare it to starting a fire. You were a boy scout, right? You know the proper way to build a fire (I hope). You know the safety features of building a fire, you know how big to make it etc.

Now, of course any fool can build a fire, just like any fool can fire a gun, but you were trained to build a fire properly right? You didn't need the state to certify your fire building skills and provide a license for you did you?

0 Replies

Come on guys. Parents can teach children how to use a gun. Look at how well parents have done with sex education.

0 Replies

rabel22 wrote:

Come on guys. Parents can teach children how to use a gun. Look at how well parents have done with sex education.

That's what I'm saying.
K
O

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

Sure. But, let's compare it to driving once again. How did I learn to drive? From my parents, like most do. But that isn't sufficient for me to have a license to use the machine; I had to pass a course which was state-approved, and take a licensing exam, to do so.

Gun ownership and use by those under the age of 18 should be no different at all. The stakes are similar - people's lives and the general public safety. It prevents parents from screwing their kids up in this area.

Cycloptichorn

Perhaps instead you should compare it to starting a fire. You were a boy scout, right? You know the proper way to build a fire (I hope). You know the safety features of building a fire, you know how big to make it etc.

Now, of course any fool can build a fire, just like any fool can fire a gun, but you were trained to build a fire properly right? You didn't need the state to certify your fire building skills and provide a license for you did you?

Guns are not a force of nature. The basis of most pro-gun arguments is that they do not kill people without the actions of a human.

Set a gun on the ground, it will never shoot anyone unless a human comes along. True.
Set a fire on the ground, it will never burn anything unless a human comes along. False.

Bad analogy.

I still maintain that people need a license first that requires state certification before they can own or operate a gun. I think the certificate should have to be reissued on a frequent basis (every 5 years perhaps). Being taught by parents offers zero quality control.

T
K
O

0 Replies

TKO - Move the **** out of the USA. We don't want or need you here. You don't understand why it exists.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

TKO - Move the **** out of the USA. We don't want or need you here. You don't understand why it exists.

I think I understand better than you Powderburn. As for "we," I'm sure you and your cronies don't want me here, I represent all that you hate: comprimise, pluralism, and objectivity. I don't blame you for wanting me gone, however, the government pays me enough money to make me feel pretty wanted here for my talents, and I'm pretty fond of this country despite its flaws and its fools.

I'm not intimidated by your type despite your efforts nor am I impressed. You're free to be as ignorant and arrogant as you like, I'll still welcome you in MY country.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Wait, you work for the government?

So, I'm paying you to waste time posting here?

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

Wait, you work for the government?

So, I'm paying you to waste time posting here?

Under contract yes, and as far as paying me, not this week you aren't. I'm between projects. I start my new one on Monday. I'll miss this laid back time though.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

Sure. But, let's compare it to driving once again. How did I learn to drive? From my parents, like most do. But that isn't sufficient for me to have a license to use the machine; I had to pass a course which was state-approved, and take a licensing exam, to do so.

Gun ownership and use by those under the age of 18 should be no different at all. The stakes are similar - people's lives and the general public safety. It prevents parents from screwing their kids up in this area.

Cycloptichorn

Perhaps instead you should compare it to starting a fire. You were a boy scout, right? You know the proper way to build a fire (I hope). You know the safety features of building a fire, you know how big to make it etc.

Now, of course any fool can build a fire, just like any fool can fire a gun, but you were trained to build a fire properly right? You didn't need the state to certify your fire building skills and provide a license for you did you?

Guns are not a force of nature. The basis of most pro-gun arguments is that they do not kill people without the actions of a human.

Set a gun on the ground, it will never shoot anyone unless a human comes along. True.
Set a fire on the ground, it will never burn anything unless a human comes along. False.

Bad analogy.

I still maintain that people need a license first that requires state certification before they can own or operate a gun. I think the certificate should have to be reissued on a frequent basis (every 5 years perhaps). Being taught by parents offers zero quality control.

T
K
O

Your inability to understand the point does not make the analogy false.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Children should learn from their parents when possible. The reason why is that that is who they are going to ask. Plus, if you have guns at home, it's imperative that you teach your children gun safety as soon as they are curious.

Sure. But, let's compare it to driving once again. How did I learn to drive? From my parents, like most do. But that isn't sufficient for me to have a license to use the machine; I had to pass a course which was state-approved, and take a licensing exam, to do so.

Gun ownership and use by those under the age of 18 should be no different at all. The stakes are similar - people's lives and the general public safety. It prevents parents from screwing their kids up in this area.

Cycloptichorn

Perhaps instead you should compare it to starting a fire. You were a boy scout, right? You know the proper way to build a fire (I hope). You know the safety features of building a fire, you know how big to make it etc.

Now, of course any fool can build a fire, just like any fool can fire a gun, but you were trained to build a fire properly right? You didn't need the state to certify your fire building skills and provide a license for you did you?

Guns are not a force of nature. The basis of most pro-gun arguments is that they do not kill people without the actions of a human.

Set a gun on the ground, it will never shoot anyone unless a human comes along. True.
Set a fire on the ground, it will never burn anything unless a human comes along. False.

Bad analogy.

I still maintain that people need a license first that requires state certification before they can own or operate a gun. I think the certificate should have to be reissued on a frequent basis (every 5 years perhaps). Being taught by parents offers zero quality control.

T
K
O

Your inability to understand the point does not make the analogy false.

I'm not the one that claims any fool can build a fire. Further, not all parents teach their children how to build a fire safely. How many parents demonstrate poor fire safety in front of their kids?

Just poor some kerosene on and light a match. NO.

If you really want to ay that guns are like starting a fire, I will still say that you should not be setting fires unless you are trained on how to do so safely.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

I'm not the one that claims any fool can build a fire. Further, not all parents teach their children how to build a fire safely. How many parents demonstrate poor fire safety in front of their kids?

Just poor some kerosene on and light a match. NO.

If you really want to ay that guns are like starting a fire, I will still say that you should not be setting fires unless you are trained on how to do so safely.

T
K
O

You are so close to actually getting the point of my post. Try just a bit harder and you will get it.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
I'm not the one that claims any fool can build a fire. Further, not all parents teach their children how to build a fire safely. How many parents demonstrate poor fire safety in front of their kids?

Just poor some kerosene on and light a match. NO.

If you really want to ay that guns are like starting a fire, I will still say that you should not be setting fires unless you are trained on how to do so safely.

T
K
O

You are so close to actually getting the point of my post. Try just a bit harder and you will get it.

I understood your point fine. My point though is that ultimately a gun is not fire, it's a gun. There are many things that a gun owner/operator needs to know that a parent may not be able to provide and in the interest of the user and the public, a standardized process must be put into place to both educate and certify users.

You can't be so careless with a gun, it's a liability that should not be taken so lightly. It's a responcibility and I am surprized to hear opposition to the notion that we should educate people on gun safety and document gun sales etc.

You or cjhsa may think you are qualified to teach gun safety, and even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are you'd still have to agree with me that not everyone parent is going to teach good gun safety skills. Would you want a parent with poor skills or no skills teaching their child about guns? I doubt you do.

Why would anyone be threatened about state or federal sponsored gun training/licensing?

I think the fault of liberals when it comes to guns is that they have shyed away and let people like cjhsa define what gun ownership/responsibility is and is not.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
I'm not the one that claims any fool can build a fire. Further, not all parents teach their children how to build a fire safely. How many parents demonstrate poor fire safety in front of their kids?

Just poor some kerosene on and light a match. NO.

If you really want to ay that guns are like starting a fire, I will still say that you should not be setting fires unless you are trained on how to do so safely.

T
K
O

You are so close to actually getting the point of my post. Try just a bit harder and you will get it.

I understood your point fine. My point though is that ultimately a gun is not fire, it's a gun. There are many things that a gun owner/operator needs to know that a parent may not be able to provide and in the interest of the user and the public, a standardized process must be put into place to both educate and certify users.

You can't be so careless with a gun, it's a liability that should not be taken so lightly. It's a responcibility and I am surprized to hear opposition to the notion that we should educate people on gun safety and document gun sales etc.

You or cjhsa may think you are qualified to teach gun safety, and even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are you'd still have to agree with me that not everyone parent is going to teach good gun safety skills. Would you want a parent with poor skills or no skills teaching their child about guns? I doubt you do.

Why would anyone be threatened about state or federal sponsored gun training/licensing?

I think the fault of liberals when it comes to guns is that they have shyed away and let people like cjhsa define what gun ownership/responsibility is and is not.

T
K
O

IF you were a gun owner, you would not be asking such questions.

EVERY gun owner I know understands the weapon and treats it with TLC. After every use mine is cleaned, locked and stored.

Everytime I have taken my child to the range, SAFETY FIRST.

If you are suggesting that as part of a State Licensing program, that a "certificate of training" accompany the license application, I could agree. However, I would not want the State to sponser it.

0 Replies

I disagree with woiyo on one point - I don't lock my guns away at home. Some, yes, but not all. They do me no good locked away in a self defense situation.

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

IF you were a gun owner, you would not be asking such questions.

It's getting old remind people I do own guns. Try and keep up. When I was given my first gun, I approached my long time family friend (CC Permit trained) and had him store my weapon until I could purchase safety measures for it's storage and get some gun training. He was happy to help and gave me resources to take some gun safety courses locally. Additionally, he took me to a range, and taught me some things as well as proper care for the equipment. I think the important thing here to note is that even though he was a long time experienced user and had a large wealth of knowledge, he still recognized the value of a formal education on the subject. I know for fact that he would support a state licensing program with strict standards.

Despite the education I have had including many courses on my own, I still feel the need to continue educating myself. Perhaps the folly of people like cjhsa is that they think they know everything there is to know. If I've learned anything in my life it is that education never ends. This is why I'd have people renew their license periodically (my suggestion is every 5 years).

woiyo wrote:

EVERY gun owner I know understands the weapon and treats it with TLC. After every use mine is cleaned, locked and stored.

Not every gun does however. That is the problem. I'm glad you associate with responcible gun owners. However, it does not qualify them to teach. I may be really great at flying, maybe even the best, but it doesn't mean that I'm qualified to train a pilot then give him/her a plane. It doesn't mean I can't assist or help, but I would not be the authority.

woiyo wrote:

Everytime I have taken my child to the range, SAFETY FIRST.

Safety first as defined by who?

woiyo wrote:

If you are suggesting that as part of a State Licensing program, that a "certificate of training" accompany the license application, I could agree. However, I would not want the State to sponser it.

Then who? You have to have a standard of education, so who? Why do you object? Please, give me some reasons why.

T
K
O

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

I disagree with woiyo on one point - I don't lock my guns away at home. Some, yes, but not all. They do me no good locked away in a self defense situation.

Yeah, I keep my loaded gun under my pillow.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
I'm not the one that claims any fool can build a fire. Further, not all parents teach their children how to build a fire safely. How many parents demonstrate poor fire safety in front of their kids?

Just poor some kerosene on and light a match. NO.

If you really want to ay that guns are like starting a fire, I will still say that you should not be setting fires unless you are trained on how to do so safely.

T
K
O

You are so close to actually getting the point of my post. Try just a bit harder and you will get it.

I understood your point fine. My point though is that ultimately a gun is not fire, it's a gun. There are many things that a gun owner/operator needs to know that a parent may not be able to provide and in the interest of the user and the public, a standardized process must be put into place to both educate and certify users.

You can't be so careless with a gun, it's a liability that should not be taken so lightly. It's a responcibility and I am surprized to hear opposition to the notion that we should educate people on gun safety and document gun sales etc.

You or cjhsa may think you are qualified to teach gun safety, and even if I were to give you the benefit of the doubt that you are you'd still have to agree with me that not everyone parent is going to teach good gun safety skills. Would you want a parent with poor skills or no skills teaching their child about guns? I doubt you do.

Why would anyone be threatened about state or federal sponsored gun training/licensing?

I think the fault of liberals when it comes to guns is that they have shyed away and let people like cjhsa define what gun ownership/responsibility is and is not.

T
K
O

The problem with your logic is that you want everyone to have to fall to the lowest common denominator. A common liberal belief. If one parent isn't capable of doing something, the government should step in and take care of an issue for every child.

Who gave you your first gun? Was it your parents? Why didn't they teach you how top use it properly?

If they didn't have the skills, obviously there was a place for you to voluntarily go and receive training. That is good. You took it upon yourself to go and find the training you felt you needed. Cjhsa knows how to handle fire arms and is teaching his children to do the same, just as I am with my children. Why do you feel that is objectionable?

BTW, in NYS, though you are not required to take a hand-gun training course before applying for a pistol permit, your odds of receiving one go way up if you do however. Long guns do not require any sort of training or permits. Yet, my children know how to safely handle both because I taught them how and did not require the government to step in and do it for me.

0 Replies

SC rulings may lead to a Republican Administration

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know