Amendment Two to the Constitution of the United States of America;
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
Under the language of that day, 'well regulated' meant, prepared, effecient and skilled with. Nothing in the Amendment states that we must FIRST be regulated, and nothing in the Amendment says we can not keep or bear arms unless we pass some government test. There is where the word 'infringe' comes in. The Government cannot infringe upon my right to keep or bear arms.
In the days in which this was written, there was NO standing army or government controlled militia, so the arguement about the Nasty Guard and other branches of military service being what Jefferson meant is hog wash.
Do yourself a favor and find a copy of The Federalist Papers and see what the fears were from the citizens, and what Jefferson's intent was when he wrote the Constitution.
2007-12-13 00:20:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by NAnZI pELOZI's Forced Social 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
NO
The reason behind this is
#1- The government, screws up anything that they have control of.
#2 - i Personally think that our government would find some way to declare private citizens, as unfit to own guns, is they could ( it is happening on the local levels now ).
#3 - just like having to register our guns, when we would submit to safety training, the government, would know better, who the gun owners were, so if the time comes, they will have a list of gun owners & would be easier for them to take our guns away ( like hitler did in germany, before WW- II.
#4 - criminals, wouldn't take the course, so if our guns were collected, only the criminals would still have their guns & just who would be there, to protect us from the criminals , The GOVERNMENT ?
Dream on
I DON'T trust ANYONE in GOVERNMENT
2007-12-12 12:00:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by Roger W 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nope.
If any idiot can be elected to the senate or run for president (which affects the lives of everyone in the US), I don't think there should be some special training for someone to exercise another right.
There are two types of people that buy guns.
Those that buy them legally, use them responsibly, and have been trained already.
Then you have a criminal that'll just steal or illegally purchase a gun off the street. They aren't going to sit in a safety class.
2007-12-12 11:49:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by DT89ACE 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
NO, any time you let the government get involved, it costs 4 times as much as it should, entails 3 times the paperwork, which changes every 3 months, and can't be done on holidays and gets shut down whenever they can't get a budget worked out for the year. Not to mention that every class would have to have a certain amount of minorities, and probably at least 1 illegal alien in attendance.
2007-12-12 12:42:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by randy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with 'Doc H'. . . . . .
Besides, the mighty 'Gov' doesn't even require any sort of regular training to get a driver's license, and drivers out number gun owners by hundreds, if not thousands, to one!
All one has to do is pass the tests. . . . . .
ANd there are a LOT of 'em behind the wheel that shouldn't be there, either.
2007-12-15 01:06:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by Grizzly II 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Gun bans could have 0 result on terrorists' skill to devote acts of violence, different than possibly make it extra elementary for them to accomplish that, as has been spoke of above. i'm specific any terrorist could elect to confirm such legislations handed right here, in simple terms like i'm specific they are playing all the struggling with taking place now approximately lacking CIA tapes and the banning of waterboarding. in spite of everything, something which the enemies (those in Washington and hollywood, no longer the middle east) of our protection stress can do to help the real enemies of this u . s ., they look doing.
2016-10-11 04:08:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by currier 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No.
I believe that bureaucrats should receive a thorough education in the Constitution before they start their jobs and be replaced every four years.
Damned bureaucrats are even more dangerous to our Liberty than Congress!
Doc
2007-12-12 16:45:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by Doc Hudson 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well you do already to get a concealed and carry permit..... but for hunting you dont with rifles..... heres the deal..... Dick Chenney shot that guy in the face with a shotgun and nothing happened , do you think if he had a safety class that would have made a difference??
2007-12-12 13:40:37
·
answer #8
·
answered by Stampy Skunk 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
NO because that would be like taking a class in political correctness in order to exercise you first amendment rights wouldn't it?
2007-12-12 11:48:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
NO, because if they want to do that they would have to give classes on how to excercise the rest of your constitutional right's. responsible gun owner's buy weapon's from gun dealer's. the rest get them on the street because a gun dealer will not sell them one.
2007-12-12 12:13:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by ROB ROY 2
·
0⤊
0⤋