Home Categories About
argument top image
Should we have gun control? Should we have gun control?
Gun ownership should be controlled Gun ownership should be controlled
Guns should not be restricted in any way Guns should not be restricted in any way
Only the state should be allowed firearms Only the state should be allowed firearms
A bump stock ban is needed A bump stock ban is needed
Stringent background checks for gun ownership should be mandatory Stringent background checks for gun ownership should be mandatory
Mandatory training should be required for gun ownership Mandatory training should be required for gun ownership
Gun ownership should be limited to those over 21 Gun ownership should be limited to those over 21
Assault weapons should be banned Assault weapons should be banned
There should be a waiting period for gun ownership There should be a waiting period for gun ownership
The Second Amendment is a fundamental guarantee of individual liberty The Second Amendment is a fundamental guarantee of individual liberty
Guns don't kill people, people kill people Guns don't kill people, people kill people
Banning guns will ensure only criminals have access to them Banning guns will ensure only criminals have access to them
Gun control is a public health issue Gun control is a public health issue
Debate Mini Map

Should we have gun control?
Back to question

Gun ownership should be controlled

(1 of 3) Next position >

Mandatory training should be required for gun ownership

All gun owners should be effectively trained on how to be a responsible gun owner
Gun Control Guns
Nicholas Kristof
< (3 of 6) Next argument >

Context

We need to undergo training to use a potentially dangerous power tool on a construction site. We need driving lessons before we can drive a car. Given how dangerous guns are, it only seems right that we should have training for those too.

The Argument

Teaching gun owners the best practices surrounding gun ownership, like checking the firearm to see if it is loaded, keeping one's finger off the trigger until you intend to shoot, and safe storage practices would significantly reduce gun-related accidents and prevent accidental discharges. It would also keep the Second Amendment intact.[1] Switzerland has a stringent firearm training programme and, correspondingly, a far lower rate of gun deaths than the US.[2]

Counter arguments

It would violate the Second Amendment by imposing economic restrictions. Not many people can afford a $100+ training course. If the government makes these course a mandatory part of gun ownership, it would only be the middle-class and the wealthy that would purchase guns. This is against the spirit of the Second Amendment.[3]

Proponents

Framing

Individual rights are not unassailable. Only certain people can be trusted with certain rights.

Premises

[P1] In other industries we make training obligatory for reasons of safety. [P2] Guns are dangerous. [P3] They should only be available to those with training.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P3] This would amount to a violation of the Second Amendment.

Further Reading

Rudolph, Kara E., et al. “Association Between Connecticut’s Permit-to-Purchase Handgun Law and Homicides.” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 105, no. 8, 2015, pp. 49–54. Crossref, doi:10.2105/ajph.2015.302703.

References

  1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/11/06/opinion/how-to-reduce-shootings.html
  2. https://www.businessinsider.com/switzerland-gun-laws-rates-of-gun-deaths-2018-2?r=US&IR=T
  3. https://www.ammoland.com/2014/06/mandatory-firearms-training/

In the Wild

This page was last edited on Monday, 26 Oct 2020 at 15:07 UTC

Explore related arguments