It isn't about making things convenient. It's about an opportunity to take guns away from someone who shouldn't have them. Just because you can't prevent all undesirable people from owning guns doesn't mean you shouldn't take steps to prevent it and enforce the law. This makes society safer, that is the compelling social interest.
What makes a person "undesirable" in terms of exercising their Constitutional rights? We already have the NICS system intended to prevent felons, loonies, known substance abusers and suchlike from buying firearms legally... so who
else do you want to prevent from owning a firearm?
If someone is truly an idiot, like the woman in this story, would a safety class have prevented her from doing what she did? Doubtful.
Education will prevent accidents. Right now, ignorant people have accidents with guns. The number could be reduced by requiring education. This is just common sense.
Again, you have offered
no proof, only assumptions. If you wish to turn a Constitutional RIGHT into a licensed PRIVILEGE (that has to be renewed every 5 years), you should have to show that it has an
actual, real-world
proven,
substantial positive effect on society as a whole (at a minimum!). At this point, you have offered no such proof.
Indeed, even if there were such proof, and none has been presented, one could argue that licensing a right in this manner is still Constitutionally dubious.
There are people who are "undesirable" in terms of free speech after all... like neo-Nazi White Supremacists. We could change your statement thus:
It isn't about making things convenient. It's about an opportunity to take political speech away from someone who shouldn't have it. Just because you can't prevent all undesirable people from spreading their dangerous ideology doesn't mean you shouldn't take steps to prevent it and enforce the law. This makes society safer, that is the compelling social interest
Well, society would be safer if Neo-Nazi White Supremacists could not legally spread their ideology... so are you OK with a 5 year renewable Free Speech card?
I'm guessing the answer is "no". Neither am I. If you're going to respect one Constitutional Right, respect them all.