No, you are when you say that there exists a standard for fingerprint ID biometrics, yet not a standard for proper firearm safety tests/training and evaluations. I mean, you just invented that standard about fingerprint IDs on the spot, didn't you? It was right off the top of your head, wasn't it? So if you're using the military as the standard by which you measure gun safety, then you must also use the training soldiers are required to have before handling a weapon. Otherwise, your argument looks like doublespeak bullshit. So you require the military and police to start using something before you will feel comfortable using it. Yet, police and soldiers have to undergo rigorous gun safety and training tests, so shouldn't that standard also apply? I mean you're saying you refuse action until the police and military do something, yet you aren't apply that standard across the board. So your argument ends up looking like a bunch of cherry picked sophistry. If that cognitive dissonance is something you are OK with, fine. I don't even think you realize you're doing it.