For the record, as I've explained in this thread already, this ALREADY IS a requirement in several states and municipalities. It's a requirement in the city where I live. Our U.S. Constitution specifies state's rights and the Feds don't have many nationwide regulations related to firearms; Republicans and Libertarians are REALLY against trodding upon state's rights, as is the SCOTUS, because our national Constitution protects state's rights so it's complicated.
And, yes, the NRA sucks. The NRA exists solely to collect money to line their own pockets; if we had nationwide sensible regulations that could be enforced, the NRA would no longer be necessary and the NRA operates on fear so they have to generate a lot of fear to generate more cash. So if they spin a story, "requiring safety courses impedes our rights under the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution" and they spread that fear as a "slippery slope," it's amazing how many people get all freaked out, "well, but the NRA says this is BAD and that the Nazi Government is gonna come take my guns!"
In Chicago, Toni Preckwinkle, the Cook County Board President, just imposed a $25 tax on gun licenses (Chicago requires gun safety courses to obtain a gun license, btw), which would contribute to the cost of gun violence. The NRA is fighting that fee, saying that the fee is impeding the 2nd Amendment. Never mind that there is already sales tax, and never mind that the gun already cost a lot of money; no, the NRA will fight ANYTHING just to stay in existence, "see, this is why we're here! So send us some money or you'll all lose your NRA protection!" They're like a really corrupt labor union.
So when boat-boy
@
Satyr
says "I doubt that will happen," he's most likely saying that because we have the above-mentioned complications and opposition. Yes, it's logical. Yes, it's not unlike a license to drive a vehicle. But, this country isn't logical because we have these crazy corrupt money-hungry rich lobbyists who send lots and lots of campaign money to politicians.