re: #88 Rightwingconspirator

police are our backup. One should make arrangements to be able to summon them in an incident first or simultaneous with getting that gun from the fast safe.

Yes, that’s the sort of thing that should be tested for. But even so, everything else I said stands. Police have partners, they go into situations with information. There is very little similarity between what a police officer does, or shooting situations police officers get into, and a person defending themselves at home.

I oppose a standard higher than what reality/history has proven adequate as shown by long developed police training standards. Those police go home, and they do have what they need at least to start out of the academy.

It hasn’t been shown to be adequate for home self defense because it wasn’t developed for home self defense. As I said, if it can be shown to be adequate, by cops regularly passing the home use test, then you’re right and it can be waived in general for cops. But why are you resisting testing that hypothesis?

You haven’t provided any actual argument for why the police testing is a good match for home defense. I’ve provided quite a lot of arguments as to why it isn’t. But even if I’m wrong, all that I”m proposing to do is test the home defense abilities—why is that a bad idea?

Obdicut I’m working on another Page, this about Picasa. It’s a bit of work so I’m done with this chat until next time. Have a good day.

I’m disappointed that you don’t support the idea that people who want a gun for home defense should show that they can use their gun for home defense. It is a completely common-sense, straightforward standard, and you haven’t given anything approaching a reason for why it shouldn’t be a standard. If what you’re saying is true, then there wouldn’t be a problem because all the people in the current training programs would pass it.