Page 5 of 5
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 12:59 am
by curmudgeon3
Thinking along a little less formal-training lines ....... maybe just ask the buyer if he's familiar with the operation of the gun he's buying and if his answer is 'no', take a few minutes to demonstrate to him; then ask him if he is familiar with shooting-safety precautions, if the answer is 'no', then take a few more minutes out on the firing line to show him how to load and shoot the gun, along with the other usual safety procedures.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:06 am
by JediSkipdogg
curmudgeon3 wrote:Thinking along a little less formal-training lines ....... maybe just ask the buyer if he's familiar with the operation of the gun he's buying and if his answer is 'no', take a few minutes to demonstrate to him; then ask him if he is familiar with shooting-safety precautions, if the answer is 'no', then take a few more minutes out on the firing line to show him how to load and shoot the gun, along with the other usual safety procedures.
Now you are assuming the gun shop employee is familiar with the firearm. Yes, I've been in gun shops where they employee had no clue what he was selling. I've heard the "buy a glock, it's what the cops carry." That to me means the seller has no clue about M&P or XD or any other firearm out there.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:25 am
by curmudgeon3
JediSkipdogg wrote:curmudgeon3 wrote:Thinking along a little less formal-training lines ....... maybe just ask the buyer if he's familiar with the operation of the gun he's buying and if his answer is 'no', take a few minutes to demonstrate to him; then ask him if he is familiar with shooting-safety precautions, if the answer is 'no', then take a few more minutes out on the firing line to show him how to load and shoot the gun, along with the other usual safety procedures.
Now you are assuming the gun shop employee is familiar with the firearm. Yes, I've been in gun shops where they employee had no clue what he was selling. I've heard the "buy a glock, it's what the cops carry." That to me means the seller has no clue about M&P or XD or any other firearm out there.
Never experienced that ...... must look like a 1911 guy. Can you reveal the owner's name of that gun shop ?
(We're getting closer to a solution to this issue.) You see now why the Mothers are clamoring for more gun regulations for "that shoulder thing that goes up."
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:41 am
by carmen fovozzo
curmudgeon3 wrote:Thinking along a little less formal-training lines ....... maybe just ask the buyer if he's familiar with the operation of the gun he's buying and if his answer is 'no', take a few minutes to demonstrate to him; then ask him if he is familiar with shooting-safety precautions, if the answer is 'no', then take a few more minutes out on the firing line to show him how to load and shoot the gun, along with the other usual safety procedures.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:42 am
by carmen fovozzo
curmudgeon3 wrote:Thinking along a little less formal-training lines ....... maybe just ask the buyer if he's familiar with the operation of the gun he's buying and if his answer is 'no', take a few minutes to demonstrate to him; then ask him if he is familiar with shooting-safety precautions, if the answer is 'no', then take a few more minutes out on the firing line to show him how to load and shoot the gun, along with the other usual safety procedures.
Bingo..common sense goes a long way..
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:51 am
by carmen fovozzo
It don't take long for a person to go over the rules of safe firearm handling...it should be mandatory when you buy a gun at a gun store, and then have the customer sign off on it...liability to the gun store is now taken care of....5 freaken minutes is all you need for basic gun safety...then if someone blows your head off you could call it a accident and not neglect.
Most non gun people I know when you hand them a empty gun the first thing they do is put their finger on the trigger. I'm sure most of you guys have experienced that...
Why would anyone object to a basic safety instruction ?
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 7:54 am
by WY_Not
It should be mandatory from a business practice standpoint. Government should not be involved.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:26 am
by JediSkipdogg
carmen fovozzo wrote:It don't take long for a person to go over the rules of safe firearm handling...it should be mandatory when you buy a gun at a gun store, and then have the customer sign off on it...liability to the gun store is now taken care of....5 freaken minutes is all you need for basic gun safety...then if someone blows your head off you could call it a accident and not neglect.
Most non gun people I know when you hand them a empty gun the first thing they do is put their finger on the trigger. I'm sure most of you guys have experienced that...
Why would anyone object to a basic safety instruction ?
I take it you've never been to a gun show? I would venture 95% of the people know the rules of safe firearm handling there and only about 5% practice it. So what does having them read and sign off that all guns are always loaded and don't point them at anything you don't intend to kill accomplish? I've been muzzled swept at gun shows more often than I can count, hence why I haven't stepped foot at a gun show in more than 5 years.
Your average new gun owner doesn't go to a gun show. Usually only experienced owners go. So your idea really serves no purpose. It would be like having a person read the ORC for speeding when buying a new car and signing off that they won't do it. Heck, they'll do it leaving the parking lot of the dealership.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:17 am
by carmen fovozzo
Jedi...I'm talking about sincere people that care about gun safety....you seem to think everyone will act the same no matter what degree of training.....you either take it serious or you don't.....once you have the basics you can do what ever you want...You seem to think that any form of basic training is a waste...it's not....Being a dispatcher yourself, you should promote any form of training....even if it is just the 5 minutes at the gun range..
You seem to counter every suggestion I have....didn't realize you were a expert on all things....being a dispatcher...
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:24 am
by JediSkipdogg
carmen fovozzo wrote:Jedi...I'm talking about sincere people that care about gun safety....you seem to think everyone will act the same no matter what degree of training.....you either take it serious or you don't.....once you have the basics you can do what ever you want...You seem to think that any form of basic training is a waste...it's not....Being a dispatcher yourself, you should promote any form of training....even if it is just the 5 minutes at the gun range..
You seem to counter every suggestion I have....didn't realize you were a expert on all things....being a dispatcher...
And I think those that care about gun safety will take a training class prior to going to the range. Those that don't, nothing will change that. I've sat through numerous firearm training classes that have gone over revolvers. Personally, I rarely pay attention because I don't care for revolvers at all. My knowledge of revolvers is about as much as the NRA Basic Pistol class since I'm required to know that for training. If I could avoid that section in the class, and nobody had a revolver in my class, I probably wouldn't know anything about them. If I went to buy one and the gun dealer wanted to go over some basics with me, depending on how much time it took prior to complete the sale is how much interest I would give him. After all, I've owned and fired over 50 different guns. How much different can a revolver be? And I would venture many others would feel that same insight.
And I'm not the only one countering your required training idea. Seems to be many others on board here saying none should be mandated and it won't change anything.
And not sure what being a dispatcher has to do with it. This topic isn't related to my job or anything from a law enforcement perspective, so I take that as a snide remark towards a coordinator. Just remember that as a warning.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:34 am
by carmen fovozzo
You refer to your job a lot.....as a dispatcher.
I have been to many gun shows....I even work them now and then for OFCC....I learn a lot from different folks...I have a open mind...I have my beliefs and knowledge from growing old...sorry you don't agree with any of them..
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:36 am
by WY_Not
Carmen, nobody is countering your statements that training is a good idea. What is being countered is the notion that government has any business dictating that such training should be mandatory before one exercises their God-given, human rights that are given special protections under the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. Or that government has any business dictating content of such training.
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:37 am
by carmen fovozzo
JediSkipdogg wrote:WestonDon wrote:This thread is becoming circular. I am getting dizzy.
Carmen is just very passionate about mandated training. Just like he is about driving in the left lane.
This is getting old....Snide remarks are against TOS..
Re: HB 235: CHL applicants who are/were in military
Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 10:41 am
by JediSkipdogg
carmen fovozzo wrote:You refer to your job a lot.....as a dispatcher.
And when I refer to it it is in my experience of dealing with law enforcement matters. Not sure where law enforcement had anything to do with this thread or the discussion at hand.
carmen fovozzo wrote:I have been to many gun shows....I even work them now and then for OFCC....I learn a lot from different folks...I have a open mind...I have my beliefs and knowledge from growing old...sorry you don't agree with any of them..
And do you generally see new gun owners buying their first gun there or those that have been carrying for a while? I would venture if they are new, they are with someone (spouse, boyfriend, parent) that has firearm experience.
Also, how do you do your training when buying as a gift?
WY_Not wrote:Carmen, nobody is countering your statements that training is a good idea. What is being countered is the notion that government has any business dictating that such training should be mandatory before one exercises their God-given, human rights that are given special protections under the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution. Or that government has any business dictating content of such training.
^^^^ This times 100.
carmen fovozzo wrote:JediSkipdogg wrote:WestonDon wrote:This thread is becoming circular. I am getting dizzy.
Carmen is just very passionate about mandated training. Just like he is about driving in the left lane.
This is getting old....Snide remarks are against TOS..
And at that, since this thread is so far away from HB 235...I'm locking it.