re: #61 Rightwingconspirator

I never said it was a be all. I very clearly stated many times now it’s a sensible starting point. You are a lil bit puzzling there.

POST is not just training it has tests as part of the course. I still don’t see the evidence it’s not a good starting point.

Okay. So it’s a good starting point for home-defense, some other, more crisis-oriented stuff could be added, and then people could pass a test for that.

What’s the problem?

So you want the kind of experts that actually administrate POST firearms classes and tests to do that all over again adapted for home, as if we are certain we have the necessity.

It is not just my opinion, though.

As if skills taught for one circumstance don’t translate at all. as if muscle memory about handling and safety and shooting would have to be re taught just because it’s a house not another indoor location. As if use of force rules go out the window at home. Rules on engagement.

No, some of that will translate. Not all of it.

But again, if you are confident it will all translate, why are you resisting the idea? If what you are saying is true, POST-trained people will just past the test with no problem.

Sorry, just not there with ya. Just don’t see the need. Gun accident rates have been declining a long time. Misindentity shooting by people trained at or at about the POST level are just not a big portion of gun tragedies.

So you’re fine with the current level of accidental shootings in the US at the moment, and misidentity shootings? You don’t think we should improve that, at all?

The main thing that is so bizarre about your furious opposition here is that if you are right, POST-trained people will simply pass the test. What is the big deal, if you believe they’ll pass the test, in testing them? Can you please answer that question?