Sunday, October 23, 2011

Thrift vs Responsibility is a terrible conflict to throw at an Anglo-Celt

Wisconsin Department of Justice sez in regards to the 2011 Wisconsin Act 35 (aka we get to tote guns around, now)

Act 35 requires applicants to provide proof of firearms safety training. Any one of the below listed documents will be accepted as proof of meeting the law’s training requirement:

3. Proof of military, law enforcement, or security firearms training.

  • Former military: DD214 or DD256 form showing either “honorable” or “general under honorable conditions” discharge
    or release from the US military.

Hey - I got me one o' them.

And?  Does the lege think that being in the service confers small arms proficiency?

In theory everyone who gets out of the service is a certified friggin' Rambo.  Death from above.  Etc.  In practice ... not so much.

Your average guy or gal learns the basics of firearms safety, knows how to carry and utilize a rifle.  They may fam-fire a pistol. [1]

There is nothing that says a former service member knows how to safely carry and use a concealed firearm, nor that they understand the legal and ethical ramification of using deadly force.

It's a stupid requirement. [2]  Either the regs should say 'pass a proficiency test meeting metrics X, Y, Z' or it should stay silent and let everyone carry.  

A kind of wink-wink-nudge you're in the club deal is flat-out retarded.

[1] Grunts will know all about shooting a variety of weapons.  Squids think that anything that doesn't take a team to prep and fire and a ship to carry it around and isn't really a weapon a'tall.

[2] I confess to an internal conflict.  I can carry concealed without having to pay: cool.  But I know deep in my heart that I'm never done that, have no idea what I'm doing.  Training is called for.  I guess that's what 'be a responsible citizen' is all about.  Thrift vs Responsibility is a terrible conflict to throw at an anglo-celt.

Cross posted to The Daily Brief
blog comments powered by Disqus