Dahm vs. Morgan round 1

[Mitch Rapp]

Piers Morgan: I think the militia, the military and police should have assault weapons
Nathan Dahm: Oklahoma defines "Militia" as every able bodied man between the ages of 18 and 69.

Check and mate.
Awesome.

 

[aviator41]

I found it interesting that shortly after that comment, the segment ended. LOL

 

[ProBusiness]

OK guys, some of you are not going to agree or like this post. But you understand handgun safety and the law concerning when you can legally protect yourself with a gun.

The idea of issuing a license or not needing a license to carry a pistol (constitutional carry) to me is very scary. I have been teaching the OK Handgun License class (concealed carry as it was formerly called) and personal handgun training for a few years. What we have in OK is a LARGE number of first time handgun purchasers. When I grew up, a lot of households had guns in the house mainly for hunting. You learned safety from a dad, uncle, cousin, brother, etc.


Now days, a lot of people do not have the advantage of someone in the family or friend teaching them safety because on one in their family has ever owned a gun. They have never even held or shot a handgun. The bottom line, is that students come to class and have NO IDEA ABOUT SAFETY. The rule of never pointing a gun at someone is a brand new rule to them.

We have the Hunter Safety program for youth. Why, because they need a base line understanding of safety. Why should adults with their first handgun get a pass on being taught safety.

A lot of people do not understand the devastation to the human body caused by a bullet and think shooting someone is not a big deal.

People have told me that they would shoot to kill anyone who: 1) was in their back yard 2) was on their property (acreage) 3) tried to take their purse 3) cursed at their children, 4) that bullets bounce off of cars, 5) that their sheet rock walls in their homes will stop a bullet, 6) that is someone is jiggling their front door knob that they will shoot thru the door, and on and on. Students have asked me if the bullet would go through the cardboard that the target was stapled to. People do not understand that once they shoot a gun, the bullet will go somewhere and you have to be careful where that bullet ends up. One student hung their target on their property and when target shooting the trajectory of the bullet took it over a major highway. I have had students shoot a gun for the first time and shake so violently they could not continue shooting.

Now, I am not making fun of these students. But I offer these examples as an example of the view of the uneducated gun owner.

One of the hardest groups of people to teach about handgun safety is the older student. They know it all. In their opinion I cannot teach them anything. Yet, when on the range they are the most dangerous group as far as pointing a gun at people.

I think constitutional carry is great, but as the expense of putting innocent people at risk because 1) people do not know when they can lawfully use a gun and 2) people do not have the slightest idea about handgun safety is not a good idea.

I offer the representative (???) proposing this to sit through a few of my classes and gain some understanding that his proposal is jeopardizing the safety of OK citizens at the expense of a 8 hour class and at the min $189.95.

At the min, have them sit through at class and learn the law and how to handle a gun safely. IMO. Respectfully submitted.

 

[NikatKimber]

I DO NOT want the .gov mandating required safety classes.

Period.

If something must be done, it should be done by the shooting/firearms community itself, voluntarily.

Everyone grows up around cars, driver safety is taught in schools, it can be required by judges as part of rehab/consequences for driving charges, and we require a test to be legally allowed to drive. We even require insurance.

As we all know, there are no issues with bad/drunk/inattentive/incompetent/uneducated drivers in Oklahoma as a result.

 

[gun4hire]

ProBusiness,

There are a lot of people that shouldn't open their mouth and speak, or are not responsible enough to take care of themselves much less children. Should people lose these privileges as well? How about people that can't drive? We are free in this country unless you violate someone's civil liberties.

 

[TedKennedy]

No government-sanctioned training in exchange for the ability to exercise one's rights, thanks anyway.
Obviously there are those that for some reason are able to procreate, suck off the taxpayer tit, drive a car poorly (after passing a gov-sanctioned "test"), and a multitude of other things that endanger their fellow man's existence.
Why limit government approval to just guns? I'd be a whole lot more likely to support a law restricting procreation of welfare cases and criminals than I would a law that restricts everyone's rights.

 

[tRidiot]

OK guys, some of you are not going to agree or like this post. But you understand handgun safety and the law concerning when you can legally protect yourself with a gun.
<snip>
At the min, have them sit through at class and learn the law and how to handle a gun safely. IMO. Respectfully submitted.

So there should be a law requiring that you have to be trained to exercise your rights?

Or should we make an effort to DECRIMINALIZE the firearms culture and restore teaching people about guns at home???? After all, it worked for almost 200 years here in the US, didn't it? It wasn't until we started trying to make people afraid of guns, and make guns evil, and actively try to get people away from having guns in their homes and lives that people forgot how to use them.

So the answer is more regulation of our rights, in order to allow us to exercise our right properly. Is that right?

Shameful...

 

[rawhide]

Educated gun owners? Yes. It is the responsibility that comes with the right. That's different from "the requirement" you must fulfill to get permission.

 

[Arin Morris]

The idea of issuing a license or not needing a license to carry a pistol (constitutional carry) to me is very scary. I have been teaching the OK Handgun License class (concealed carry as it was formerly called) and personal handgun training for a few years...

I offer the representative (???) proposing this to sit through a few of my classes and gain some understanding that his proposal is jeopardizing the safety of OK citizens at the expense of a 8 hour class and at the min $189.95.

At the min, have them sit through at class and learn the law and how to handle a gun safely. IMO. Respectfully submitted.

Says the guy that profits from people exercising their rights. I understand where you're coming from. That's quite a bit of lost income. I wouldn't like it if I were you either.

 

[Gabriel42]

Says the guy that profits from people exercising their rights. I understand where you're coming from. That's quite a bit of lost income. I wouldn't like it if I were you either.

Sums it up quite nicely, doesn't it?