4 ms·
I don't understand this argument. There are not numerous cases in the US where people were trying defend themselves with good intentions, but due to their lack
by aero142 14y ago
I don't understand this argument. There are not numerous cases in the US where people were trying defend themselves with good intentions, but due to their lack of government approved firearms training, they injured someone else. Do you feel threatened by your neighbor's lack of gun training? They are just going to start shooting randomly at the darkness and hit you?
- knowtheory 14y agoReally? Because I can think of two off hand that made the news since Newtown. http://cjonline.com/news/2013-01-08/man-accidentally-shoots-wife-concealed-carry-gun http://cjonline.com/news/2013-01-08/man-accidentally-shoots-... http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-3-killed-playing-uncle-gun-article-1.1223270 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/boy-3-killed-playin...
- aero142 14y agoExactly. Your original statement was about laws and training programs that the government should require that will prevent these things from happening. In your two stories, you have a person with a concealed carry permit, and a state trooper. How much more training can you have than as a state trooper. I don't know what policy or training that we can mandate as policy that will prevent this. Gun deaths are from suicide, gang/drug related shooting, and homicide primarily. Accidental gun deaths are mostly hunting related, and still are much smaller than the above three. I don't see what your government training for "safe gun ownership" really accomplishes except feel good hopefulness and annoying people into not wanting to own guns.