DiFi and Chuck are extremists. You're correct that they would take it to a level of infringement. We're never going to be rid of extremists, but I don't think you counter an extremist by going off the deep end in the other direction.
Except that real citizens are already having their rights greatly impaired by people just like DiFi and Chuck U Schumer. When one of them becomes Atty General or President or some other position of great power they will impose such restrictions on the entire country.
And that is why we fight for the full measure of our rights as guaranteed us in the Constitution. Why should I and other law abiding citizens compromise away our rights? Every time we do compromise, there is yet another demand made of us.
If we agree that some unspecified form of "reasonable" training is ok and we'll submit to it, I know with 100% certainty that the very next day there will be calls for ever greater amounts of restrictions on my rights.
Would you agree to some kind of "sensible" voter knowledge test? You and I could come up with something we'd both agree is "reasonable", but as soon as you let a dedicated party hack have some power in the arena you can kiss your voting rights goodbye. So why even agree to giving up any of your voting rights in the first place?
I'm not familiar with places that already do have training requirements because I don't live in one of those places. Are the prices set by the government or private facilities? CCW classes where I live are very affordable and provided by state licensed trainers. Considering the relative price of guns, I don't see a single qualification class as being much of an impediment.
The government sets minimum number of hours and tasks required. If 8 hours of training is required, and if live fire is required, the applicant is going to have to pay a professional for that training. If 16 hours of training is required, it is going to be even more expensive. That's how it is done. In addition, do you have 16 hours available to go to training? Do you have 30 hours? It isn't difficult to see that much of the population can be quickly eliminated by these training requirements, and the most likely to need a defensive weapon are the least able to afford the training.
As for the delay, a person could take their safety class at any point prior to purchase. It doesn't have to be the day that they actually purchase it. I took my first safety class when I was 7 years old and have had other classes since, many before I bought my first firearm.
So when my sister discovered a stalker's footprints in the snow outside her living room window, how long do you think is reasonable before society deems it allowable for her to purchase a gun or possess a borrowed gun? Furthermore, what are the real world statistics showing that there is in fact a problem with people who are unaware of the basics of gun safety?
Every new firearm is delivered with safety instructions. Every retail seller will show the buyer how to safely operate the firearm. Free training is available, as is professional training. Manufacturers have extensive safety information on their websites, as does the NRA. YouTube has probably thousands of hours of videos on gun safety and how to operate every imaginable make and model of firearm.
The real problem is not the typical law abiding gun owner but the violent criminal who is committing intentional acts of violence.