Irresponsible Gun Owner of the Day: Unidentified SXSW Celebrant

I believe the addressing of the I identified individual in this instance as “pillock” makes it sufficiently clear that you are correct. Declining to observe this is a failure on the part of the reader, not the writer.

“Declining to observe this is a failure on the part of the reader, not the writer.”

Sorry, that’s not clear to me. “pillock: slang Brit a stupid or annoying person”

Proving to the crowd that they are right means proving that gun control needs to be implemented upon the civil society in whole, as this is what they want. That the person who did this is a stupid pillock changes that call?

Apologies, but if the OP meant otherwise I think he should have written otherwise in the post.

Confirmation bias. Doing something that stupid on your, miles from anybody is one thing. Doing it in the epicenter of Texas gun control, with the eyes of BuzzFeed upon you? It feeds the monster. It says, here is a prime example of the problems you complain about.

We can talk until we turn blue about how the vast majority of gun owners/carriers/users are safe and considerate, but all it takes is one example to confirm their preconceived bias.

All that noise about how women should be welcome at The Citadel/VMI/the battlefield. And there are probably a sizable number of women can who can hold their own. But all it took was Shannon Faulkner dropping out for many skeptics to argue that she was proof that women didn’t belong.

What about car and pool safety? No amount of legislation can render all activity safe. It will still be up to individuals to be safe in their actions. You would do better to support legislation which holds individuals accountable for their actions, rather than allowing individuals to blame others for their choices. It’s about people, not objects.

So many people try to deflect attention from gun safety and onto safety of every other product on the market. The conclusion can only be that gun owners are not interested in improving gun safety until all products are 100% safe. Since you know that cannot happen (although safety improvements of so many products are on-going), the natural conclusion is that gun owners want to dodge the issue of GUN SAFETY, simply because they are not interested in gun safety. The perception you create is your responsibility.

So, we should ban swimming pools because of the thousands that drown in them every year? FOR THE CHILDREN?

Again, someone who wants all the world’s safety issues to be solved before even considering that gun owners (and the rest of us) would benefit from on-going, professional training.

This is a blog about guns, can we stick to that subject?

Your point doesn’t match reality. A quick google search showed me that there is some kind of firearms training or safety event every single weekend for the rest of the year within a 3 hour drive of Austin, Texas. There is absolutely no lack of voluntary safety training made available, and clearly taken advantage of, by either people who make or shoot guns.
As an example, I can find many more, and more diverse, firearms training events than I can find drivers training events, outside of speeding ticket mitigation, that is.

Still not a coordinated national drive. Local efforts reach a statistically insignificant number of gun owners (out of 100 million). Small local events across the country reach an insignificant number of gun owners. To top it off, such frequent training as you cite is usually once a lifetime event. I am talking about recurring training and proof of safe gun handling (through a professional certifying organization.

You guys seem incapable of separating civilian initiated, civilian led universal safety programs from imagined threats of gun confiscation behind every power point slide. It is always good to learn that some gun owners are taking safety courses at least once, but it is not enough to allow non-gun owners to rely on the gun people to act responsibly.

… and yet you fail to name this organization yourself.

“and yet you fail to name this organization (gun safety) yourself.”

Now, why should I be the only one researching gun safety organizations? Would it not seem something active gun owners would be interested in? Sadly, I have only turned-up one gun safety organization that gun owners might have respect for.

“Pushing pro-gun organizations to establish voluntary recurring training, promoting such at every opportunity, rewarding people for becoming certified in gun safety/gun handling (hello insurance companies), those are things that just may bring the nation closer to greatly reducing the negligent deaths due to irresponsible gun owners.”
-You know, that exactly what the NRA does, and has been their primary focus for many decades. It is absolutely shameful that many organization on the “anti gun” side continue to deny organizations the ability to teach responsible gun ownership.

No, the NRA does not spend much time focusing on gun safety, outside NRA events. In my best world, NRA would establish a set of safety courses, recurring handgun proficiency programs and a professional certification program that is adopted by all the major gun industry lobby groups, and industry trade organizations. Why is there not a conclave where all the big names in guns get together and establish such a thing? After all these years, the gun industry continues to me selfishly focused on how to beat down “the competition”, not on making gun owning respectable.

Now, it is true that if gun owners and industry did actually create universal, widely sold and attended organization like other professions, I would be left with not much to say. Maybe then I could work toward getting some of the craziness out of the gun sense movement.

2ASux says “Sadly, I have only turned-up one gun safety organization that gun owners might have respect for.”

Fine; so put up or shut up, as the saying goes.

Put it up and we can perhaps start a reasonable discussion, starting from a common set of information. We can talk about why you like it, and compare it to others, and even perhaps come to some agreement. I’ll even start: I’ve attended a number of safety and introductory programs under the auspices of the NRA, and have generally found them to be good in discussing basic safety regimes. What about, let’s say, their basic pistol course do you think they could do better? Personally I wish they would spend more time covering the differences between how different types of safety function, which would help to reduce the possibility of negligent discharges when handing a new-to-you pistol.

Otherwise, you’re forcing me to proceed on the hypothesis that this organization of yours is extant only in your own head, so you can have something to try to berate others with. In that case, we have nothing left to discuss.

I discovered the one website dedicated to true gun safety by looking for it. Why are gun owners looking to a non-gun owner to find this information? Laziness? Lack of interest? How hard can it be?

There are hundred of uncoordinated gun safety courses taught across the country, but they don’t put a dent in the number of gun owners who need training. To go back over cold ground, virtually every profession in the country has a voluntary professional standards board. For the overwhelming majority, those professions wield nothing that can cause physical harm to a person not in the profession. Why are gun owners not clamoring for a professional standards committed that can certify gun owners as adequately trained in safety and gun handling? You wield a deadly weapon that can kill from long distance, but are satisfied with absolutely no voluntary standards and certifications for use and possession of that weapon. A bunch of random classes is not a professional standard, nor is there an agreed upon means to ensure proper levels of capability. The audience is not yourselves or your friends, the audience is that half of the population that believes you are unreasonable, scary, irresponsible, untrained, and oblivious to the world around you. I didn’t develop that reputation for you, you did it yourselves. If you do not want to present a positive image to the populace, accept your reward like an adult.

“No, the NRA does not spend much time focusing on gun safety, outside NRA events.” 100% undeniable lies. The NRA spends more time, money and energy on firearms safety education and training than any other entity on earth. They also train and certify instructors by the thousands to extend both safety and proficiency training far beyond their events.

“In my best world, NRA would establish a set of safety courses, recurring handgun proficiency programs and a professional certification program that is adopted by all the major gun industry lobby groups, and industry trade organizations.” They already have the set of safety courses, and you can retake them as many times as you can afford. Beyond basic safety and marksmanship proficiency the possibilities defy having any single governing body. Beyond the 4 golden safety rules and basic marksmanship principles there are literally dozens if not hundreds of “correct” ways to fine tune your shooting skills. Different schools exist specializing in those variations. But those should not have any bearing on basic civil rights.

“Why is there not a conclave where all the big names in guns get together and establish such a thing?” There is no point. The four rules, “squeeze don’t jerk”, breath . . . the basic rules that most shooters learned as a child or from their very first instructor have been the 100% agreed upon standard for hundreds of years. Why does some conclave need to exist to claim what has been held as ultimate truth for centuries? What possible purpose could they serve other than raising prices?

“After all these years, the gun industry continues to me selfishly focused on how to beat down “the competition”, not on making gun owning respectable.” Gun owning is respectable. They don’t have to focus on making it what it already is. Focusing on the constant attacks by “the competition” to make gun ownership sound like a sin is a better focus for their efforts.

“Now, it is true that if gun owners and industry did actually create universal, widely sold and attended organization like other professions,” Gun owners are not a profession. But we do have a widely sold and attended organization. It’s called the NRA.

“I would be left with not much to say. Maybe then I could work toward getting some of the craziness out of the gun sense movement.” Every restriction to a civil liberty has always been followed by more restrictions. There is no evidence or obvious good faith that the next restriction will be the last. It would be insane to think it would this time.

You guys just can’t get beyond paranoia that every suggestion to improve gun safety is an “infringement”. Well, get over it. Your gun rights are infringed, period. Nothing is going to turn back time to 1789. All rights listed or contemplated by the constitution are subject to constraints; none are absolute. Read some history. The constitution was not designed to control state governments. It was designed to control the central government, period. At the time, states could do pretty much anything they wanted because central government power to interfere was crippled. It was the 14th amendment that changed the relation between central government and the states. With the 14th, states were no longer sovereign and the source of power for the central government. At the point federal law, and the constitution, was pushed to the states, the government became premier and the states mere political subdivisions. Point is at the founding, the states were not prohibited from doing anything they wanted regarding gun ownership. Read a bit and you will find states banning certain weapons, and especially banning concealed carry.

But all that is background. Calling for a voluntary, civilian controlled professional organization to establish standards (and produce certified professionals) in not an infringement. Boasting a high degree of membership in such a professional organization should be sought after as proof to the country that gun ownership is not something to fear. It is simply a good promotional. You lose the battle because you hid behind barricades, let the rest of us see you project yourselves as fossilized, backward neanderthals. Believing that sticking your fingers in your ears will win the day based simply on “shall not be infringed” has not won you the majority you believe exists. The country is nearly evenly divided over more or less gun control. Advertisement sells, pictures sell, emotional appeals sell. “Leave me alone” does not sell.

Your replies grow longer and yet you say less and less.

You claim laziness on my (and our) parts; I contend that – as you yourself point out – there are too many websites relating to gun safety to reasonably determine which one you continuously refer to but refuse to name. I hate playing “bring me a rock” and refuse to do so, especially with someone behaving so petulantly.

And your attitude reminds me of somebody … yes, I remember now. “I have here in my hand a list of two hundred and five people that were known to…” Senator McCarthy.

Post the name of the website you so admire, and stop trying to change the subject. or admit that there IS no organization you would actually trust for firearm safety, and let’s go from there.

I didn’t say I trust the website, didn’t say they were the only organization promoting gun safety. I am saying there gun safety is so fragmented as to be inefficient or ineffective. I wouldn’t propose to cast any existing gun owner/industry organization as the “number one” for gun safety. What I am proposing is gun owners and the industry should want to establish a professional gun safety organization supported by all POTG and gun industry.

The website I stumbled upon is the only site I found with no affiliation or agenda other than gun safety. Is it the only one in existence? Don’t know. Haven’t had time to canvass the entire internet. No one else has identified a non-aligned, politically neutral group who is discussing nothing but gun safety measures.

Afraid I am not familiar with “bring me a rock”, but I assume it is something considered not good.

You (TTAG and readers) highlight idiots, congratulations. What is the measurable outcome? Where is the pro-action to reduce these events even further? Nothing will prevent idiots? And you are happy to live in a condition where any idiot can destroy your family? No concern for their safety? Don’t go hide behind statistics, it is a dodge. Show us the positive steps being taken to reduce to the minimum possible the number of negligent deaths. Just jawing doesn’t get it. Now, maybe I don’t really care (and who’s to know?) if the government launches a general campaign to confiscate all guns. In the meantime, I am pushing for more and better firearms training. The reasons given here for refusing to even give voluntarily improved gun safety are unworthy of a populace who believe they are superior beings because, guns.

“And you are happy to live in a condition where any idiot can destroy your family?”- this condition does not exist. You are delusional. If it did exist, the “gun death” rate would be rapidly increasing. The opposite is true.
Your refusal to look at facts, evidenced by your statement that statistics are a dodge, tells me you are unwilling to do anything to solve the problem of irresponsible use of a firearm. If you aren’t able to talk about what actually happens in the real world, maybe you should step away from the discussion.
But, as it may be, your method of reducing negligent deaths with a firearm is by reducing the availability of firearms to citizens, you won’t find a lot of space for discussion. There just isn’t much compromise with fundamental human rights.

The consistent count of 500 death annually due to negligent gun owners does not prove a decreasing threat. Any idiot with a gun can destroy you or your family through stupidity. Just because your number isn’t up doesn’t mean the risk is zero, or even near zero. We can all be thankful that the number of killings by irresponsible gun owners is low, but why do gun owners simply shrug-off 500 preventable deaths (Ok, make it 400 if you like because we will never hit zero permanently)? Guns are very different from virtually all other tools in that they are designed to puncture at a distance. There is no comparison between guns and cars, plastic bags, swimming pools and the like. If guns weren’t terrible instruments, you wouldn’t consider them the favorite self-defense weapon. It is because guns are so different that you rely on them. Shouldn’t improving safe handling be a constant effort, among all 100 million gun owners?

You (TTAG and readers) highlight idiots, congratulations. What is the measurable outcome? . . . Don’t go hide behind statistics, it is a dodge.”
Uhhhh . . . the statistics are the measurable outcome. You don’t get to ask for it then ignore its existence. All types of gun deaths are at 20+ year lows.

“Where is the pro-action to reduce these events even further?” It’s extremely difficult to promote gun safety when anti-gun folks constantly try to pass legislation and pressure local entities to prevent the education of children on the subject. None the less the NRA leads the world in this cagetory as well as required hunter safety education before hunting is allowed. There are certified trainers at every range I have ever been to. The list goes on. Just have to look for it.

“Nothing will prevent idiots? And you are happy to live in a condition where any idiot can destroy your family? No concern for their safety?” That is the condition no matter what laws and regulations are passed. It’s not a matter of happy or sad. It is reality no matter what. So I am happy that i live in a condition where I can defend my family.

“Show us the positive steps being taken to reduce to the minimum possible the number of negligent deaths.” Well, beyond the open discussion here and in forums like this, there are all of the programs I listed above just for starters.

“Just jawing doesn’t get it.” Nope, but it is an important part.

“Now, maybe I don’t really care (and who’s to know?) if the government launches a general campaign to confiscate all guns.” No, they are would be campaigning to confiscate guns from law abiding citizens only, except for the police. Criminals would simply laugh and some law abiding gun owners would wake up as criminals the next day simply because they didn’t die in their sleep, and not turn in their guns.

“In the meantime, I am pushing for more and better firearms training. The reasons given here for refusing to even give voluntarily improved gun safety are unworthy of a populace who believe they are superior beings because, guns.” I’m pretty sure you have had very little formal firearms training. You will be hard pressed to find any truly flawed entry level training, especially on the topic of safety. If you want to improve gun safety here are two ideas that we as gun owners need a lot of help in.

First, make sure you voice your opposition to shielding children from training and safety. Note, this is not about giving them unfettered access to firearms. That goes against everything we stand for. But starting with programs like Eddie Eagle, followed by safe handling and operation are absolutely key to reducing accidental deaths.

Second, the next time you see somebody suggest limiting the amount of ammunition that can be purchased, point out how that makes it impossible to maintain any standard of training. Take my family of six for instance. No single gun is appropriate for the various sizes of people going out to practice, so we have more than one. Since we are voluntarily practicing/training we need ammunition for each of the firearms we are taking. If we are practicing only safety I don’t see any argument that can be made where less than 50 rounds fired is adequate practice. If we are looking for proficiency it would be at least 200-300 rounds from each firearm. For a family of six with two firearms that is 600 rounds to practice safety and 2400-3600 rounds for proficiency PER DAY that we practice not including range time or instructor fees when we take formal classes. Limiting ammunition purchases makes the training that you are trying so hard to push (that we all want to do, just not be on a list for) impossible. It works against your argument of safety, not for it.

Here we go again….some sort of government take-over of the privileges of “law abiding” gun owners. Once and for all, can you just drop that crap? I am not, have not endorsed legislation as the tool to get a small batch of gun owners to become agitators for voluntary, recurring training. It is not enough to simply have a first-timers class, once in your life. You want the “gun-grabbers” to have a more difficult time proving their case via legislation you don’t like? Band together to establish a voluntary, civilian led and controlled professional standard that requires recurring training and certification for all gun owners. A good campaign would be relentless and seek to contact gun owners through all forms of media. The image produced would go a long way to making it more difficult for voters to put further restrictions on your gun ownership.

One important thing people of your side constantly misunderstand is the power of an impression, a visual. I do not fear revealing to you the weakness that serves to keep gun sense programs and efforts going, because you have had ample time to see, recognize, act; but, you don’t. The people you oppose win because the pictures they draw are compelling to other people who care about other people. The pictures you draw are of uncaring, insensitive hide-bound cretins. And then reinforce that picture through failure to use visuals to support your side.

The battle is emotion, folks. I am emotional about the 500 dead every year because one or more of you acted stupidly. I do not accept that 500 dead every year is “acceptable casualties”. I get boiling angry at every negligent discharge, every negligent death. Because almost all of it could be eliminated through an honest effort of gun owners to police their own, without government intervention.

Moderate safety improvements in the interest of saving lives?

You’re right. Are you willing to sign my petition to have beer set at a 3.2% ABV, nationally? It’s a simple safety measure that would significantly reduce not just motor vehicle deaths, but prevent all sorts of other dangerous drunken behaviors, including rape, hazing, binging, assault, etc.

Yo, dingdong! The “measurable outcome” is that there are not more deaths from irresponsible gun owners. What is the “measurable outcome” of NICS checks? Hint; there is none.

Another paranoid who cannot separate voluntary action from government coercion.

2Asux,

“And you are happy to live in a condition where any idiot can destroy your family?”

Any idiot can easily destroy my family WITHOUT firearms — using fire, poison, a bomb, a sword, or a car instead. Eliminating firearms from the planet will not change that FACT.

What a person can, could, or might do is not a valid basis for public policy/law — especially when those public policies/laws would violate fundamental rights.

Your risk of death from a bombing are considerably lower than the risk for negligent gun handling. There are all sorts of risks. Failing to address one does not justify failing to do any, which is the logic behind your words. You guys fly in all directions simultaneously, all airspeed and no heading. Stick to the subject at hands, negligent gun handling, and steps to reduce it further. Voluntary efforts, not government coercion. Or maybe you are just admitting you don’t consider 500 dead to be something worth losing sleep over. Until it comes home.

My entire theme has been VOLUNTARY, industry-promoted, professionalized, recurring training and certification. What is the “infringement”?

We already have voluntary, industry-promoted, professional, recurring training. The infringement comes when one is required by threat of government force to remain on a list at a cost. There have been times in my life where I have been able to train far more regularly and far more rigorously than any police agency with the exception of SWAT officers. There have also been times in my life where I have not had either the free time or extra money to hold myself to that standard. The infringement comes when ANY person is not allowed to defend themselves simply because they are low income or middle income with children.

I assure you that voluntary training is not the issue. Training (even if it is training you have already done) is FUN and the vast majority of gun owners love to go out and practice/train as much as possible. The limitations are logistical and financial. Neither of which are justifiable reasons to deny basic human rights.

The people on this blog pretty much represent themselves, only. The vast majority of gun owners admittedly do not practice enough to be proficient. How does one conclude they are training in safe handling?

My idea of gun training is a campaign where gun owners are eager to show their colors, demonstrate for the world that they operate under a professionally recognized gun safety certification protocol (like doctors, lawyers, dentists, accountants, etc.) The fact is very few gun owners take any kind of safety course, and the number of gun owners who go to Front Sight or Gun Sight is minuscule against the alleged 100 million gun owners. On this blog, people seem to be saying, “I took some training, that’s enough”. As the ol’ gunny used to scream at the troops, “If you think you don’t need any more training, you need more training.”

Actually, you are wrong, 2A is absolute, for adults. Was demanded to be, was written to be, was adopted to be, but has been adulterated unconstitutionally ever since. You are showing your ignorance.

It no longer matters what the original intent or wording of the second amendment was. 2A is correct in that it has been circumscribed and curtailed, like so many assumed rights back in the beginning. We need to face our reality and do what is necessary to overcome. It does no good to simply make assertions that cannot hold up in court.

Sometimes 2Asux looks like a gun-grabbing commie pinko lefty (red diaper doper baby), but lately he is stuck in a single gear about intentionally upping our game at improving gun safety. So long as he is talking about us taking action, and not the feds, maybe there is something to learn. If we get too comfortable, one day they will come for us and there will be no one to speak in favor.

“The people on this blog pretty much represent themselves, only. The vast majority of gun owners admittedly do not practice enough to be proficient.” And the vast majority both A) wish they could and B) still practice more than is required by most law enforcement agencies.

“How does one conclude they are training in safe handling?” Safe handling is an entirely different standard than proficient. Which is it you want to mandate?

“My idea of gun training is a campaign where gun owners are eager to show their colors, demonstrate for the world that they operate under a professionally recognized gun safety certification protocol (like doctors, lawyers, dentists, accountants, etc.)” At an expense that is impossible for any but the affluent to attain or maintain. Thus relegating a right to a privilage for only the wealthy. Doctor’s, lawyers, dentists, accountants, etc. are not practicing a right. Handy professions but not basic human rights. Oddly, doctors kill more people on accident than guns kill in all ways combined.

“The fact is very few gun owners take any kind of safety course” I call bullshit. First, you have absolutely no data to support your guess and two, i’m guessing that I know a few more gun owners than you do to base my anecdotal opinion on.

“and the number of gun owners who go to Front Sight or Gun Sight is minuscule against the alleged 100 million gun owners.” That is not, nor should it be the required standard. A basic human right does not require the ability to operate as an operator operationally.

“On this blog, people seem to be saying, “I took some training, that’s enough”. As the ol’ gunny used to scream at the troops, “If you think you don’t need any more training, you need more training.”” We all agree that we want more training and practice. But there is no need to record it, document it or and certainly no justification to deny the right based on income.

“I got my gun, I am safe. Leave me alone”. Life in a vacuum.

I’m talking about taking positive steps as a culture (gun culture) to present the picture to the country that gun owners are well trained, safety conscious, and aware that gun skills degrade over time if left stagnant. As I said over and again, virtually every profession in the nation has a standards board and a certification process THAT IS NOT MANDATED BY THE GOVERNMENT (caps for emphasis). Why do gun owners refuse to professionalize and advertise that fact? You think simply napping behind “shall not be infringed” keeps the bogeyman away. Try that in court some day. If gun owners continue to act as though every gun owner is the paragon of safety and proficiency, but don’t need to prove it to anyone, you will lose the battle you refuse to engage in. So much money is spent advertising the safety, benefits and effectivity of so many products these days, one would think gun owners would want to be out front with their message. Instead they cling to the same stale complaints about gun confiscation and government mandates.

BTW, there is also absolutely zero comprehensive, reliable data to support the notion that the vast majority of 100 million gun owners shoot more than once, or ever take a safety course.

Your original comment (
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/03/johannes-paulsen/irresponsible-gun-owner-day-unidentified-sxsw-celebrant/#comment-2565069 ) made no mention of programs, voluntary or otherwise. It was a generalized statement, to which I offered an equally broad reply. I didn’t bother reading any further because frankly I find the premise that 500 deaths in a country of ~300m is somehow indicative of a problem-let alone one that needs to be addressed in any way, shape, or form-inherently laughable.

But, by all means, have all the voluntary programs you want. Just don’t ask me to pay for them out of my taxes.

What part of VOLUNTARY indicates taxation, or taxpayer expense? Read, read, read. Then comprehend.

It is so rewarding to get you folks on record (even if not your real name, etc) as believing 500 negligent deaths are “acceptable casualties”, “insignificant statistics”. Supports your self-portrait as selfish, uncaring, smug, dismissive of lives not your own. POTG establish their own poor reputation. Media doesn’t do it, they just record it. Legislatures don’t do it, they just pass legislation to make it harder for you to add to the 500 deaths each year.

There are all kinds of voluntary programs that are government-funded through taxation. Last I checked, nobody is required to make use of welfare, for instance. You did not make any implication one way or the other in your reply to me about the public or private nature of your proposal. I was simply adding a detail to clarify my position.

And I’m glad it’s rewarding for you to get it on record that I consider 500 deaths to be statistically insignificant. I’m also an elitist, an objectivist, and a social darwinist. Furthermore, I believe that compassion for other people-when it’s predicated on nothing but our shared humanity-is one of the biggest failings of the human mind, and I believe that empathy for your fellow man belongs in the DSM-5, right alongside a belief in any form of higher power. I don’t believe in deliberately screwing people over, but if I don’t know someone on a first-name basis, I wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire. This is hardly something I make a secret of, either online or in person, so, I mean… Congrats on getting that on record? I guess?

And, uh, for your record: I held that position long before my interest in guns. I’m just an asshole.

The fact that you consider 500 lives to be significant simply indicates that you allow your emotions to overrule logical thought.

To that end, I invite you to prove objectively that human life is inherently valuable. That, independent of their value to themselves, their families, their friends, society, humanity, or the universe at large, an individual has value that can be quantified and measured, and further, that that value is nontrivial.

“A. This blog is about guns. Nothing more. Non-gun worries are for another blog” Except that when efforts to infringe on a basic human right it is more than worthwhile to point out that other rights and privileges are not infringed to the same standard. That’s not changing the subject, that’s acknowledging a double standard.

“B. “Legally required” is not something I put forward, except to point out that is a last resort”
As has already been pointed out to you by several of us there are literally hundreds of gun safety and proficiency classes every day in this country. The overwhelming majority of the are taught by NRA trained and certified instructors. All trained and certified to the same standard, all members of the same nationwide organization. The same nationwide organization that leads the world in both promoting awareness and spending on training safety. The infrastructure you are looking for is already there. The only thing it seems to lack (if I am understanding your intentionally vague point) is government over-site. To be clear, the government should never have over-site of a basic right.

“C. The picture of gun owners so calloused they care nothing about 500 negligent deaths by use of their favorite tool is not winning hearts and minds in the public. An losing regularly in the political arena.” That is because the media that you claim we should be partnering with portrays us that way. None of us deny that those 500 deaths are tragic. But tragedy on a minuscule is a terrible, horrible, morally bankrupt reason to deny basic rights to hundreds of millions of people. That’s why we constantly preach safety . . . both in small groups and on a national level.

“If promoting an image of reasonable, comprehending, caring, professional and safe gun handling is unimportant, Ok. You will earn your reward.” Said no law abiding gun over ever.

“There are plenty of people looking to take your guns. How many people to you on this blog are advocating gun owners take personal and organized responsibility for ratcheting up gun safety, and promoting that to the public? (answer: just a few)” No. Just a few are vocal about it. How many are current dues paying, organized and actively advocating . . . last count the NRA had about 5 million alone with smaller groups like RMGO, the Pink Pistols, etc. also adding to the count. Every gun owner from the dedicated blogger to the “i bought it, shot it once and keep it for home protection” gun newbie is interested in promoting safety. With numbers of roughly 1/3 of the countries population we do it as a community outside the public eye and it has effectively reduced all types of gun related deaths to a 20 year low. Better than all of the other forms of death. Without the help of the media that you so desperately want us to use. So lets look at that for a moment.

The main problem with using the mainstream media to promote gun safety is . . . they won’t let us. I’m not talking some paranoid conspiracy. Laws are being passed and there are very public movements in film, TV, social media and paper pushing to eliminate the mention, use or visual of guns from their publications. ANY mention of the NRA is usually to reference them as bloodthirsty savages who are responsible for Sandy Hook and any mention of educating the young with, “Stop, don’t touch, go tell an adult” is greeted equally with bizarre, “we won’t let the NRA turn our children into terrorists” nonsense. Hell, there are many places where a store that sells guns can’t have a picture of a gun in the window or on a small sign out front. Make no mistake, the media is extremely anti gun, and because gun safety requires contact with and use of guns they are extremely resistant to mentioning any form of safety or proficiency training. Training that requires the idea of ammunition limitations to be thrown away.

So the next time you are trolling along and see something pushing an ammunition quota as a common sense safety measure, removing the mention of gun related anything from a media source, or crucifying the NRA as killers with no interest in safety (which drives new and casual gun owners away from the worlds leading safety and training organization). . . THOSE are the people you should be preaching to. We gun owners LOVE to practice and would LOVE to both encourage the “i shot it once now it is in my drawer” crowd to join us. If you truly are looking for a way to promote more regular training . . . you are preaching to the choir more than most of the people who post here and by your own assertion, wasting your time. It is the anti-gun audience you should be posting to. Just keep the government out of it. Nothing good can ever come from the government getting involved in monitoring basic human rights. I won’t bother getting into the cost again though because you will just ignore it. Again.