How do you feel about, "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun"?

"An armed society is a polite society"

The concept of "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun"? is not about DIRECTLY engaging an active shooter with another active shooter. It is more about having a relatively armed society, where the wolves think twice about attacking the sheep.

To use a metaphor. You have a herd of sheep and one shepherd. Wolves will attack it and pick the sheep off one at a time and the shepherd can only do so much. He cannot be everywhere at once. The wolves get fat on the sheep.

However, if you get a sheepdog, you now have someone who can go head to head with the wolves and maybe chase them off. Not necessarily fight them, but are more of a visible "deterrent." He helps the shepherd keep the flock safe.

The more sheepdogs there are, the less likely you are to have MASSIVE wolf attacks. There will always be some. But there will be less of them. And the sheep won't have to worry so much, and the shepherd won't have to sweat so much.

Now as for "Certified Training Pre-Purchase." It's a Poll Tax. It's a Tax on Poor People who are least likely able to afford a gun, and the training, and most likely to be in the Socio-Economic areas where crime is going to be prevalent (and where crime has been declining for 40 years). Poll Taxes have been deemed Unconstitutional.

Furthermore, the Right to defend yourself is the only enumerated Right (Protection thereof) we talk about which we suggest having to get training for. What about Voting? What about Speech? What about Due Process? For any other the thought is absurd. Because it is absurd.

Firearms are equalizers of force. They change Predators into Equals. They change Women who are 110-130 lbs, with a 20-40lb disadvantage into EQUALS of Men.

But Aaron, Training!!! Training is amazing. Love Training. Suggest Training. However these are "Point & click" mechanisms. If you point a shotgun at a door from the end of a hall, and pull the trigger , chances are you are going to hit the door. That doesn't require a 40 hour training course to PURCHASE (which is what many are suggesting).

Should everyone be running around with a gun on their hip? No. Should everyone be allowed to use a cell phone? No. I don't think most people should be allowed outside without an escort either though.

But Arms ownership is Protected by our Constitution. It's as simple as that. It gets A LOT more nuanced than that depending on other specific aspects, but the Framers put a hard limit and said we could "Bear Arms" which means "Carry Weapons."

This article annoys me. It forces me to once again think about a subject that I have pondered countless times. Why must so many fearful people intrude on my life? What annoys me even more is when it causes me to consider something new; something I hadn't thought of before (and no one else bothered to mention). Gun ownership is not only a freedom, it's a responsibility. Why should someone exercise the freedom of owning a gun or carrying it without taking the responsibility of learning how to employ it safely and effectively? Is it possible that too many Americans have forgotten or, even worse, never been taught the link between freedom and responsibility? Those on the Left not only want to trade their liberties for freedom from responsibility, but also insist that the rest of us (US) do likewise. Such people, fearful of responsibility, are more than happy to avoid it.

Now the painful truth is that anyone who exercises the right to bear arms, but does so irresponsibly, may find themselves responsible for great loss and injury for which they may have to pay dearly. Thus, they shouldn't need prompting from the government or anyone else to seek training and qualification, and keep refreshing their skills from time to time.

I'm sorry if you're an American, a real American, and don't need this reminder. Sadly, our schools have been infiltrated by the Left and civics classes fled under their assault

I very much would like every gun owner to be properly trained. It gets messy after that initial desire though. One reason the government refuses to require ID for voting, is the stance that it would favor those with money, or disenfranchise those without access to free ID cards. In a similar vein, we cannot create a new requirement (training) as a prerequisite to gun ownership when gun ownership is not a privilege, but a right. Even if we agreed to spend large sums of taxpayer money to create a (free) national training program and (free) firing ranges to stay current, there would be a perception of burden placed on those in poverty, especially the rural impoverished, without free access to training. So while I like the idea of training (who wouldn't?), I wouldn't advocate for yet another government bureaucracy running the training centers and spending taxpayer money.