I think a written test like in a driving test where you have to prove knowledge of safety and basic knowledge like assuming all firearms are loaded and not pointing it at people, not having your figure on the trigger until you are ready to fire etc. Also some range time under the supervision of an instructor to demonstrate that you know the basics of shooting before you get let loose on firearms.
They shouldn’t be too onerous to pass for anyone with an average IQ. And if the government did try to use unfair means to try and stop people getting licences by charging an absurd amount for the licence or making the test harder than it needed to be then the law should be constitutionally prohibited to introduce any law that violates the ‘shall issue’ concept. If you are not mentally incompetent or a criminal, the state should find it legally impossible to deny someone a licence, whilst also reasonably restricting access to idiots and criminals who should not be put in charge of dangerous machinery or equipment. I believe it should be at the same standard and levels required to get a driving licence. The state would have a tough time being able to stop people being able to drive a car on an arbitrary whim and it would be the same for guns.
Of course, if they tried to ‘reform’ this law in order to make it nigh-on impossible for a normal person to own a gun, then that should be resisted with full vigour because that would be incredibly suspect as far as their motivations are concerned.
Where is this in the Constitution?
Where is this in the Constitution?
What is the cut-off point for *idiocy*? At what point is an American just too damn dumb to be allowed keep his or her Constitutional rights?
Who will pay for the IQ testing? I would imagine, since you have thought this through so thoroughly, that you would go with WAIS-IV. This is questionable, as the test is not normed to determine ability to handle a firearm safely. But, for a raw score, I am thinking that is the direction you would go. How many psychologists will have to be hired to administer and evaluate?
Then there is the hard part. What is your cut off for *too stupid, let’s thin the herd*. Do you have a points range or will you go by standard deviations?
You don’t get to toss out such nonsense that people believe makes sense on a *feeling* level. Sooner or later, someone will dismantle your argument.
I can’t help but notice your spelling of ”vigour”. Where are you from?