Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
i sent this letter my sheriff
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wawazat" data-source="post: 3617556" data-attributes="member: 35603"><p>The issue with this argument is that driving is a privilege and the right to be armed is a God given right. They are not the same argument.</p><p></p><p>My preference would be that kids take a Civics class in school that covers what our Constitution means to us, where we came from that made those ideals so important to our way of life that they had to be put down on paper. During that class there should be a section dedicated to 2nd Amendment with a minimum of 1 weeks marksmanship with .22s that covers firearm safety, range etiquette, etc. This is not intended to relieve the parents of their duty, but as a measure to take away the fear from kids growing up in a house with no firearms. </p><p></p><p>My fallback idea to the above considering the inability of most urban area schools to have the staff to student ratio to handle the above safely is that every US child should have a 2 year window after high school where they are a member of their local guard. I think this would serve multiple benefits regardless of the path that each young adult is on. First, it gives some extra time to mature before being thrown into life decisions. I went straight to college after high school and definitely wasnt mature enough to appreciate why I was really there. Nor was I mature enough to pick any focus for the next 4 years that would steer what I would do for a living for the rest of my life. Second, it is arguably the best way to learn how to function as a contributing member of a group for a higher goal than self interest. It also teaches kids how to take criticism to better themselves even if that criticism seems harsh. The most important part I think is that it instills the concept that we all have an obligation to carry the country forward in a productive direction even if our role seems small and insignificant.</p><p></p><p>As far as the licensing aspect, my class was a complete joke and made me more nervous to be on the range than any other time. I think it being a requirement to pay for anything in order to be able to defend yourself is indirectly restricting the lower income portion of our society (who probably live in areas where the right to self defense is the most important) from being able to exercise that right. What if all firearms training was tax deductible? If I could spend a weekend at Thunder Ranch a few times a year and drop myself down a tax bracket, I would definitely make it a higher priority to get professional training more frequently.</p><p></p><p>Constitutional carry is always a finicky topic. I can understand where opponents come from regarding the importance of safe handling, marksmanship, etc. if someone is going to carry a loaded firearm in public. The part I don't agree with is that the 2nd Amendment is very clear in stating the government has no right to limit our right to bear arms in any way, shape, or form. This, to me, means that any argument trying to justify the governments place in governing who can and cannot bear arms or what hoops need to be jumped through with money paid to them to be able to do so is unconstitutional. I just don't see any other way to interpret it, and I am ok with that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wawazat, post: 3617556, member: 35603"] The issue with this argument is that driving is a privilege and the right to be armed is a God given right. They are not the same argument. My preference would be that kids take a Civics class in school that covers what our Constitution means to us, where we came from that made those ideals so important to our way of life that they had to be put down on paper. During that class there should be a section dedicated to 2nd Amendment with a minimum of 1 weeks marksmanship with .22s that covers firearm safety, range etiquette, etc. This is not intended to relieve the parents of their duty, but as a measure to take away the fear from kids growing up in a house with no firearms. My fallback idea to the above considering the inability of most urban area schools to have the staff to student ratio to handle the above safely is that every US child should have a 2 year window after high school where they are a member of their local guard. I think this would serve multiple benefits regardless of the path that each young adult is on. First, it gives some extra time to mature before being thrown into life decisions. I went straight to college after high school and definitely wasnt mature enough to appreciate why I was really there. Nor was I mature enough to pick any focus for the next 4 years that would steer what I would do for a living for the rest of my life. Second, it is arguably the best way to learn how to function as a contributing member of a group for a higher goal than self interest. It also teaches kids how to take criticism to better themselves even if that criticism seems harsh. The most important part I think is that it instills the concept that we all have an obligation to carry the country forward in a productive direction even if our role seems small and insignificant. As far as the licensing aspect, my class was a complete joke and made me more nervous to be on the range than any other time. I think it being a requirement to pay for anything in order to be able to defend yourself is indirectly restricting the lower income portion of our society (who probably live in areas where the right to self defense is the most important) from being able to exercise that right. What if all firearms training was tax deductible? If I could spend a weekend at Thunder Ranch a few times a year and drop myself down a tax bracket, I would definitely make it a higher priority to get professional training more frequently. Constitutional carry is always a finicky topic. I can understand where opponents come from regarding the importance of safe handling, marksmanship, etc. if someone is going to carry a loaded firearm in public. The part I don't agree with is that the 2nd Amendment is very clear in stating the government has no right to limit our right to bear arms in any way, shape, or form. This, to me, means that any argument trying to justify the governments place in governing who can and cannot bear arms or what hoops need to be jumped through with money paid to them to be able to do so is unconstitutional. I just don't see any other way to interpret it, and I am ok with that. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
i sent this letter my sheriff
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom