ANother to oppose HB 1709
A bill introduced to require mandatory "firearms Safety Training and Certification" for all private gun owners. As published it is about 15 pages long so I won't reproduce it here.
Go to http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...type=B&bn=1709 and you can find links everything you need.
Quote:
Regular Session 2017-2018
House Bill 1709
Short Title: An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in firearms and other dangerous articles, providing for firearm safety certificate and establishing the Firearm Safety and Enforcement Fund.
Prime Sponsor: Representative KINSEY
Last Action: Referred to JUDICIARY, Aug. 16, 2017 [House]
Memo: Firearm Safety Training
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
beat me to it.
what a f'ing joke of a rep.
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
... shall not be questioned.
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
The other BS bills like this that I've seen exempt honorably discharged veterans but this one limits it to retired veterans.
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
Let them pass this for Chicago first as a test, and if it's successful there, we can implement it here.
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
Quote:
Originally Posted by
streaker69
Let them pass this for Chicago first as a test, and if it's successful there, we can implement it here.
Now that's funny right there.
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
I doubt that any politician would be OK with a law that required them to pass "a civics test to be revised from time to time by local militia groups" before they could be paid for their work.
In theory, it's a good idea to make sure that people know the laws and understand safe handling practices. In reality, people in power WILL abuse this safeguard to prevent more and more people from owning guns.
Offer free (state-paid) gun safety training. Pay me to teach basic firearms laws. Make that stuff available, but it's an obvious trap to give them an arbitrary veto power over an enumerated right. Once started, nothing stops them from requiring you to get 10 out of 10 shots in the X ring with a handgun at 200 yards. Nothing stops them from requiring a perfect score on a 1,000 question legal exam ("because when it's life and death, can we accept any errors at all??")
If gun safety is important (as it is), then why do these same Progressive collectivist weenies always oppose gun safety training in the K-12 schools? They demand that we pass some tests before owning guns, but they scream like scalded hogs if you try to teach gun law and gun safety to kids.
Ask the sponsors of these kinds of bills if it would be OK to require anyone accepting entitlement benefits from taxpayers, to pass a basic civics test, in English.
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GunLawyer001
I doubt that any politician would be OK with a law that required them to pass "a civics test to be revised from time to time by local militia groups" before they could be paid for their work.
In theory, it's a good idea to make sure that people know the laws and understand safe handling practices. In reality, people in power WILL abuse this safeguard to prevent more and more people from owning guns.
Offer free (state-paid) gun safety training. Pay me to teach basic firearms laws. Make that stuff available, but it's an obvious trap to give them an arbitrary veto power over an enumerated right. Once started, nothing stops them from requiring you to get 10 out of 10 shots in the X ring with a handgun at 200 yards. Nothing stops them from requiring a perfect score on a 1,000 question legal exam ("because when it's life and death, can we accept any errors at all??")
If gun safety is important (as it is), then why do these same Progressive collectivist weenies always oppose gun safety training in the K-12 schools? They demand that we pass some tests before owning guns, but they scream like scalded hogs if you try to teach gun law and gun safety to kids.
Ask the sponsors of these kinds of bills if it would be OK to require anyone accepting entitlement benefits from taxpayers, to pass a basic civics test, in English.
...and a piss test...
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
When can we run these idiots out of office?
The timing seems good now...
Re: ANother to oppose HB 1709
Quote:
Originally Posted by
streaker69
Let them pass this for Chicago first as a test, and if it's successful there, we can implement it here.
Great idea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GunLawyer001
I doubt that any politician would be OK with a law that required them to pass "a civics test to be revised from time to time by local militia groups" before they could be paid for their work.
In theory, it's a good idea to make sure that people know the laws and understand safe handling practices. In reality, people in power WILL abuse this safeguard to prevent more and more people from owning guns.
Offer free (state-paid) gun safety training. Pay me to teach basic firearms laws. Make that stuff available, but it's an obvious trap to give them an arbitrary veto power over an enumerated right. Once started, nothing stops them from requiring you to get 10 out of 10 shots in the X ring with a handgun at 200 yards. Nothing stops them from requiring a perfect score on a 1,000 question legal exam ("because when it's life and death, can we accept any errors at all??")
If gun safety is important (as it is), then why do these same Progressive collectivist weenies always oppose gun safety training in the K-12 schools? They demand that we pass some tests before owning guns, but they scream like scalded hogs if you try to teach gun law and gun safety to kids.
Ask the sponsors of these kinds of bills if it would be OK to require anyone accepting entitlement benefits from taxpayers, to pass a basic civics test, in English.
I'd bet 1/2 of the US Congress couldn't pass a non-changing civics test. And probably less than 10% of the general population, and less than 1% of those receiving gubmint benefits.