2nd Amendment "rules" should apply to the 14th Amendment

[montana]

First, I think you are vastly overstating the case to say that "with a better trained populace the odds would be much better than an armed, untrained populace." Unless you have hard data to show the % improvment that would result?

No data, but are drivers more capable after drivers ed and passing their test or is that a waste of time too?

Second, you are attempting to create a false narrative by describing the stuation as "better trained versus untrained." Many CC holders are very well trained, probably much better than what your government standards would produce.

Once again, I can only give a parallel, are tested and trained drivers of automobiles better than untrained? Why would firearms be any different. I know hunter safety has had a very good tract record compared to the past.

And third, your proposed government training could be expected to produce shooters no more capable than the police, who -- even when they're on the scene, as in Dayton and the incidents posted above by DNS -- typically stop the shooter only after he's killed and wounded many people.

Right back at you, now you are attempting to create a false narrative by describing the situation as trained versus untrained. If anything the gun owners would be much safer to themselves and others after proper instruction, or do you believe classes like drivers ed are a waste of time. All of this is conjecture but come on.

:confused: When has inadequate training ever been a significant issue?

A person who has learned the fundamentals of firearms or a person who has never fired a gun. Which person do you think would be able to respond better under a life or death situation? If you think there is no difference then there really is no more to say.