TexasCHLforum.com

Crossfire wrote:

Katygunnut wrote:

mr surveyor wrote:along the same lines, should firearms proficient 35 year olds that never "hunted" be required to take the "Hunter's Safety Course" with 12 year olds in order to get a (rather expensive) hunting license?

Some times the "rules" really don't make sense.

I've never hunted (animals), and I am fairly proficient with firearms having served in the Army during Desert Storm and given the fact that I have been shooting rifles and handguns for over 20 years.

I recently decided that I want to get into hunting. After doing some research on various hunting rules and restrictions, I quickly decided that I should probably take the Hunter Safety Course just because I have no experience in the field and could use that level of education. I am not "required" by the state to take the course due to my age, but I still feel compelled. It does not bother me at all that there will be 12 year old's in the same class and I'm sure that some of them will be more educated than I am about some aspects of what we are learning.

So I guess my answer is that a similarly situated 35 year old "should" take the course. I don't know that I would make it a "requirement", but I do know that their lack of knowledge should give them ZERO excuse if they negligently injure someone or violate a law while they are hunting.

The Hunter Education class is not so much about firearms proficiency as it is about safety in the field, and following the various laws regarding hunting. How to identify different birds, how to field dress a deer, what to do if you get lost in the woods - that sort of thing.

mr surveyor wrote:along the same lines, should firearms proficient 35 year olds that never "hunted" be required to take the "Hunter's Safety Course" with 12 year olds in order to get a (rather expensive) hunting license?

Some times the "rules" really don't make sense.

baldeagle wrote:I see people driving cars every day that make me very nervous. I drive defensively to avoid getting involved in their potential accidents. I've driven a semi commercially. I had never driven commercially before but had some experience driving a semi on a farm. I rented a truck, took the test and passed and got my CDL. I suppose some experienced truck drivers would have been bothered by that. I've seen truck drivers that I would avoid like the plague. They follow too close at too high a speed and don't pay attention to their driving.

This is America. Until you prove you can't be trusted with something, if you can pass a basic proficiency test you get the license and you are free to go.

There are two possible approaches to governing. You can either require some proof of proficiency and leave people alone if they qualify or you can try to legislate every possible contingency to make things "safe" for the rest of us. The former looks a lot more like freedom than the latter.

As an individual you have choices as well. You can hang around the incompetent people or you can avoid them. You can attempt to educate the incompetent people or you can ignore them. None of those choices are "right" or "wrong". They're simply choices. I don't like people much, so I avoid crowded places and don't go to many public events. That's just me. Other people love to be in big crowds and around lots of people. You apparently don't like incompetent gun handlers. So you have choices. You can either avoid them or attempt to teach them. But what you should never try to do is impose your choices on everyone else. (I'm not suggesting that you are suggesting that we do that.) If we are going to maintain any semblance of freedom in America, we're going to have to accept the fact that some people won't be as conscientious about things that we care about as we are.