Should the blind be able to own firearms?

originally posted by: eisegesis

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: eisegesis

Shotguns can be tough if your attacker catches you off guard and tries to wrestle it from your hands. A small pistol would not be hard to aim by pressing it against the individual.

You are in bed all alone and blind, and you hear your front door get kicked in and people moving towards your bedroom, you reach for your shotgun and wait...I can't see that as a bad thing to have at that point in time.

I think its safe to assume they would have an extremely accurate idea of where any window or door was located.

Point and shoot.

The pea under my mattress is do you really know who is busting down your door at three in the morning? Couldn't it just be your drunk brother Harry on a coke binge?

All of that works if the door gets kicked in....what happens if wifey gets off late from a shift or comes in late from an evening with the girls, fumbles with the keys in the lock, and makes a crapload of noise coming in? BLAMMO, right? All that without ever identifying the target being targeted. That sounds hella safe to me.

a reply to: Phage

Not even if they fulfill the requisites? Wouldn't that be unconstitutional?

Free speech doesn't include shouting Fire in a crowded theatre either…

EDIT: Crap, someone grabbed it before I edited. I think I got myself confused on your stance Phage.

a reply to: intrptr

No.
But obtaining a permit to carry a concealed weapons is allowed in most (all?) states. If you fulfill the requisites. I haven't found one which specifies being sighted.

originally posted by: eisegesis

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xtrozero
A GSD service dog would work pretty well too.

So...

No guns for the blind? That is your stance without compromise?

Seems a little biased towards who the second amendment applies to?

Yes...it is, and justifiably so. Just like you can't just yell "FIRE" in a theater even though the 1st Amendment exists, I believe there are indeed justifiable limitations on the 2nd Amendment that would exist in the name of general safety for the populace as a whole.

originally posted by: Phage

A GSD service dog would work pretty well too.

Maybe, but then you got to buy it, feed it, walk it, craw round on your hands and knees looking for the poop etc...a shotgun doesn't need much care... and they can always say...

That's right, this sweet baby was made in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Retails for about $109.95. It's got a walnut stock, cobalt-blue steel, and a hair trigger. That's right... shop smart: shop S-Mart... You got that?

a reply to: Xtrozero

and they can always say...

And in the dark they could be holding a...marital aid?

BTW, the dog can be helpful for more than scaring baddies.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: intrptr

No.
But obtaining a permit to carry a concealed weapons is allowed in most (all?) states. If you fulfill the requisites. I haven't found one which specifies being sighted.

It does, however, require that you be able to identify a target. Unless that target is going to yell to the blind person that he is indeed a hostile target, that becomes EXTREMELY difficult to do. As I said, I'm well aware that you can take a blind person to the range, tell them which direction is downrange, and all but aim the weapon for them, but that is not the same thing as being able to functionally use a firearm safely. It's just not.

originally posted by: bullseyelqcs
Maybe...maybe not. But that said, maybe you want to take a stab at my earlier question about limiting the firearms blind people can own.

You know, I'm not going to decide what they can own or not.... I'm not smart enough to make the right decision...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xtrozero

and they can always say...

And in the dark they could be holding a...marital aid?

BTW, the dog can be helpful for more than scaring baddies.

Damn Phage don't you hate it when we allow people to have choices in what they want...

a reply to: bullseyelqcs

It does, however, require that you be able to identify a target.

Does it?

Oregon:

Demonstrates competence with a handgun by any one of the following:

(A) Completion of any hunter education or hunter safety course approved by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife or a similar agency of another state if handgun safety was a component of the course;

www.oregonlaws.org...

Take a safety class (meet the non-felon and other stuff) and you're good to go.

a reply to: Phage

I haven't found one which specifies being sighted.

Common sense.

How about a test to determine ability? Have them pin the tail on the donkey. If they can do it, the prize will be a loaded gun.

"Hey buddy, you mind? Point that thing somewhere else."

a reply to: intrptr

See above.

originally posted by: Phage

At worst it might require a closer look at what "demonstrating competency with a handgun" entails.

I agree but it is such a sticky wicket when one talks about a right and not a privilege.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Yes. Yes, it is.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bullseyelqcs

It does, however, require that you be able to identify a target.

Does it?

Oregon:

Demonstrates competence with a handgun by any one of the following:

(A) Completion of any hunter education or hunter safety course approved by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife or a similar agency of another state if handgun safety was a component of the course;

www.oregonlaws.org...

Take a safety class (meet the non-felon and other stuff) and you're good to go.

Part of that requirement is that you attend a firearms handling class. Part of that class is learning how to safely fire your weapon. At a target. Down the range.

Now, I don't know about you, but I find it hard to imagine that a blind person would be able to pass that part of the course on thier own.

I collect some firearms as a investment and some as shooters.

I have guns i have not fired in over 30 years.

One is a rare Spreewerke P38 on a FN frame.

Only 1500 were ever made and many of those were captured by the Russians at the end of WW2 and are not around any more.

if i went blind i would still keep my collection.

Of the guns in my collection the average value has went up over 500% since i got them some as much 1500%

a reply to: bullseyelqcs

Part of that requirement is that you attend a firearms handling class.

It doesn't say that. It says a safety class.

I have a motorboat. Last year it became a law in my state that I take a boater safety course to operate my motorboat. I did. On the internet. That's it. I got a card to prove I'm a safe boater. If I was blind I would be a safe boater.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Phage

I haven't found one which specifies being sighted.

Common sense.

How about a test to determine ability? Have them pin the tail on the donkey. If they can do it, the prize will be a loaded gun.

"Hey buddy, you mind? Point that thing somewhere else."

And the blind should be allowed to exercise just as much common sense as the next responsible gun owner.

There are A LOT of idiots with 20/20 vision who own guns.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bullseyelqcs

Part of that requirement is that you attend a firearms handling class.

It doesn't say that. It says a safety class.

I have a motorboat. Last year it became a law in my state that I take a boater safety course to operate my motorboat. I did. On the internet. That's it. I got a card to prove I'm a safe boater. If I was blind I would be a safe boater.

Go Microsoft narrator!