this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2025
478 points (96.9% liked)
Progressive Politics
3023 readers
320 users here now
Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)
(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Owning and knowing how to safely use a firearm is an US right. I don't agree with the current interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, but the Supreme Court said so, and nobody asked me.
I'd encourage anyone here to seriously look into purchasing a gun and a silencer.
Also, a silencer won't save your ears. Guns are still super loud and a lot of bullets are supersonic. Get a can and some hearing protection and use both.
Of course, a lot of that probably depends on where you live.
Downvoters, don't hate the guy because he is right. And now is sadly the time. Any actually patriotic American should be deciding whether they will be capable of defending liberty from their countrymen that would rather take it from them. Capable of raising a firearm against another human that disregards other humans right to exist. And if they decide that they do have the grit, now is likely their last chance to easily and legally procure a firearm and learn how to use it. There are literally masked authorities kidnapping people in broad daylight, history says a domestic conflict is coming soon.
A right, but not a requirement. One of my biggest issues with gun ownership is that we don't actually require knowledge or training in gun safety or use. That's insane to me.
It should be taught to everyone as part of the regular school curriculum.
Even recognizing how violent the world is, I doubt I would ever buy a gun.
In my view, adding guns to an environment decreases the net safety of that environment, through added fear, expectations, theft chances, etc. I think common gun owner sentiments about “Just handle it safely” miss the mark and are overly optimistic about 100% constant perfect behavior. You have industrial accidents at industrial sites, even with rules. You do not have industrial accidents outside of industrial sites.
That’s partly a factor of where I live. It’s also a factor of what I want the local mentality to be. Similarly, I’m not crossing the street to avoid people I don’t recognize.
You don't have to buy one, but I would recommend a basic gun safety course for everyone. Just knowing how to handle a firearm increases the community safety even if you don't own one.
In fact, don't buy one unless you've taken some kind of training (even just watching some online training is great, but nothing is better than hands-on practical training) AND you feel comfortable and confident in handling, storing, and using a firearm safely.
I don't really need a gun safety course if I don't use one.
Similarly, I'm 35 years out of date in my nuclear materials handling safety course. Thankfully, I do not handle nuclear materials. Arguably, most people shouldn't. I'm not going to claim nuclear materials are useless, but they hold inherent risks and only belong in particular environments.
True, but it seems like you're far more likely to come across a firearm than nuclear materials. I would also presume, that while you may not be current with your nuclear materials, you have a solid fundamental understanding of how to handle them safely. I don't use guns, but I have taken classes and have a permit for my state.
I'm speaking in generalities, so it may not apply to you. A lot of people that are afraid of guns, do not know how to handle them. Firearms are prolific enough in American society that a basic familiarization with them won't hurt. They way some posters are talking in here, you may have need for one sooner than you expect.
I do understand your point, there are lots of things that I've taken classes on that I've never used and don't intend on using.
Can you present a plausible situation this would actually happen? I’m aware of the many home invasion scenarios people envision, and I even appreciate they’re more likely in rural areas far from police departments. But “coming across” a gun, without having committed any crimes, and needing to know how to use it seems like a wild invention.
I’ve heard this theory before and never understood it. While I rejected the suggestion of learning about guns and feel it shouldn’t be necessary, I do understand some basic gun operation and safety - just off of curiosity and tangential relation to shooter video games. Having that knowledge doesn’t improve my opinion on them at all.
A hundred gun safety courses won’t improve my opinion on the number of gun owners who envision themselves as heroic but are actively irresponsible about their weapons and would never take such a course. Adding another quote-unquote “responsible” owner doesn’t help the world. It’s just a way to advertise the toy and to push someone into that feeling of power.
The other poster mentioned cops/security leaving them in bathrooms. Also you may have a person in your life that was/is a victim of domestic violence or stalking and may choose to arm themselves. I'm not telling you you need or even should get a gun. I just recommend that people take a safety course because they are so prolific in the US that you may not know where you come across one. I'm pro gun education and pro gun control, I also don't mean to come off as alarmist, like there's guns just waiting for you find all over the place.
I live in a pretty rural, yet liberal area, so there are lots of hunters around. Some farmers have a "truck gun" for wildlife/pests. So I could(and have) hop ped in a friend's vehicle and there's a weapon on the seat.
I make exceptions to my gun views in places where police response times are over 15 minutes. In those places, you're your own security, there's dangerous wildlife, and there's few easy ways for people to steal a weapon for nefarious needs. There, it's a tool with a use, just like any piece of heavy machinery.
If a specific individual has dangerous experiences with stalking, or had to make a restraining order, that's also a circumstance that I think merits an exception - but only for the victim in question, not for friends.
So, it still doesn't answer the question of why you'd ever be the one checking, clearing, loading or unloading a gun owned by someone worried about an ex-lover. Even if the gun happens to be in their house when you visit, that has nothing to do with you or your hands.
To exaggerate my point, I just don't see why you'd be saying hello to your farmer friend, spotting their shotgun above the cabinet, and then deciding to show them how cleanly you can unload it to prove that you can handle it safely. You've brought up a lot of circumstances and factoids, but they haven't developed a logical "point" where you'd regret not knowing how to use a gun.
Well, it's accurate that not all gun owners are responsible gun owners. If you come across an idiot, just leave the situation if you can. Like I said before, I'm pro education and control, the NRA is a terrible advocate for guns but has a really solid education program. A video game is a terrible training tool for gun safety.
Anything I offer would be situational or supposition and it seems like you're very solid on your stance. I truly hope you're never in a situation where you need to have use of a firearm. I know I don't want to use one.
A quick search will pull up several stories about police leaving their service weapons in restrooms. It happens, and their chain of command should reprimand them for it, but that may not change their behavior. Don't need to use it, but familiarity with the manual of arms to secure it is paramount in such a public place.
As for training- I look at it in the same vein as first aid: desperately useful for that one moment, but not otherwise.
That’s still not the scenario you suggested - since the response to finding such a weapon would be to document its location (in case the cop lies) and then report it without moving it. Putting your fingerprints on another person’s weapon when no one is at threat is a recipe for trouble.
I don’t have trouble imagining surprise situations I need to tie a tourniquet on someone. I have a hard time imagining when I need to load, chamber, and fire a gun I don’t own. Even when “good guys with guns” have tried to respond to active shooter situations, they’ve often caused far more harm than good.
Then it's a good thing that that's not what they mean. Just like how learning how to handle used needles doesn't involve shooting up heroin, learning how to handle a gun also provides the knowledge of how to ensure that you know whether a gun is loaded or unloaded, and whether or not the safety is on, and in the worst and most unlikely of cases where you actually need to pick it up to move it or something, how to do so safely.
A perfect example of the kind of situation where this would come in handy is for nurses - particularly those in hospitals and psychiatric facilities. Cops are notoriously lax in the US about checking people for weapons before delivering them into the care of medical practitioners, and nurses have had plenty of encounters with loaded firearms and other weapons in patients' belongings.
Counterargument: No guns is obviously the safest. One gun or few guns in bad hands is very dangerous, and each gun added into the environment after in the hands of good people eventually adds safety. Not to the level of no guns but more than the few.
100% valid and all good points.