Okay, briefly, because some guys get impolite about this:
“assault weapon” is a legal term only, and means a gun with military-style fittings. Not really deadlier in any way than a standard hunting rifle, just has things like folding stock, scope or silencer attachment points, etc.
“shot gun” is a long gun that fires biggish plastic shells full (usually) of little-to-medium-sized metal pellets. Good for hunting deer or anything smaller.
“assault rifle” means more than one bullet per trigger pull. not generally legal, but can in fact be chambered in .22 just like a…
“rifle”, which is a long gun, generally anything that isn’t a “shotgun” is a “rifle”. There is a wide variety of rifles, of which a .22 is probably the smallest and least deadly round–most people use .22 for target shooting.
Years of practice. What does a knee-jerk reaction get you except for more of the same? It’s important to maintain a level head when discussing this lest you give people confirmation for their beliefs.
Yeah, well, some parents also don’t want their kids immunized or taught sex ed. Tough shit. I’d never even thought about this before, but now that you’ve brought it up, I think that gun safety would be a great thing to teach in schools.
This.
This is what I did with my kids, and it worked exceptionally well. If friends were over and it got mentioned in conversation about hunting or whatever, and the other kid was, “Wow, your dad has GUNS??” my kids’ response was typically, “Yeah - let’s go play on the trampoline…” or whatever. The response of my kids was similar to how they’d respond if the kid had asked if we had mayonnaise in the refrigerator.
Of course, I was a 4H shotgun instructor, and CCA licensed, so I was pretty versed in safety, and instilled that into my kids. We even had neighbors bring their kids over for safety demonstrations. It was very cool to see the recognition dawn on these kids that it’s a tool, not a monster.
But before that happens, someone will come into the thread to make a declarative well-poisoning.
~
All safes and lockers aside, free, simple cable-type gun locks are often available from places such as police departments and public safety offices. Each year at a Chili Fest we go to the police have a booth where one of the things they hand out are literally handfulls of free gun locks (I’ve got a small pile of them…somewhere).
~
Personally, between the two of us Fierra and I have a large number of guns, but only 4 are loaded; the rest have the ammunition locked up. But then the last time someone under the age of 18 was in our house for any reason was…let me think, sometime in the 1990’s? If things were different, so would our storage requirements be. I am always careful with where I leave my handbag, which has my Glock in it, in public; suffice to say it never leaves my shoulder, grip, or lap. But since I typically carry unchambered even if Super Toddler steals my bag, takes my Glock, puts it to his head and pulls the trigger, nothing’s going to happen.
Actually, that’s not true - they said zero harm in the quotes you gave. Harm is not equal to risk. A bottle of mercury sealed hermetically represents zero harm; it does not represent zero risk.
Well if they spoke in absolutes like that then they were wrong. Perhaps you should start a thread talking to them about it.
Your quotes said “harm” and not “risk”.
And if he must “admit” and not “disown” that those nuts are on his side in the debate, which nuts are your going to admit and not disown are on your side in the debate? Should I prepare a list?
Seriously, Blake, you have a good, no, excellent reputation for fact and logic when I’ve read your threads over the years. You’re one of those posters whose threads I bother to read in GQ. But I think you might be starting off on the wrong foot a bit here.
Huh. I never even thought about gun classes in schools. Not a bad idea - I wonder if you could make it an elective? It seems a much smarter idea than this terror of guns right now in school.
It would have to be demonstrated how dangerous guns can be, of course - I don’t want any kids going around thinking that guns are only toys and fun. But the fact is, there is a coolness and fun factor to guns, and in safe environments why not take advantage of it?
Generally I am neutral on the gun issue, but fuck, they are here to stay. Cat’s long since out of the bag. We need to deal with them, not shut our eyes and ears and pretend they don’t exist.
As for legislation, unfortunately while we may be able to stop mentally ill people from getting guns, I don’t think there is any way to stop the congenitally stupid from getting them. I think that’s a lost battle. I just think the gun education is going all the wrong way, as has been said here. The more you put something out of reach on a pedestal, the more the kiddies want to play with it.
IMO, make it opt-out. Everyone takes it unless your parent signs some kind of form to pull you out of class.
People stupid enough to leave loaded guns where their children can get them end up with fewer offspring who reach the age where they can reproduce in turn.
Out my way in PA, nearly every high school has evening elective classes at least once a year for 12-and-ups teaching the state Hunter Safety course. That’s about the extent of it, unfortunately.
The NRA does something called the Eddie Eagle program, which does go to schools if they are invited. No guns are brought to the school, no incompetent DEA agents are involved, it’s straight education on what to do if you find a gun. I think that schools could do the same thing at negligible cost.
I admit to a total knee-jerky reaction when it comes to the NRA. I am not sure I’d want a bunch of huge gun proponents - sometimes, it seems, to the point of insanity - handling it. Really I’d like some third party middle ground, but that’s not likely to happen.
It would be best if the schools were to do it, yes.
Airman Doors made a good point upthread, but it could be expanded somewhat by pointing the finger of blame at a media which absolutely glorifies and basks in reckless and criminal gun use. But before one can cast all the blame on gangsta rappers and their criminal trash culture, I can point to my uncle who, at about age 8, took my grandfather’s gun and was practicing quick-draws - like his heroes, cowboys, did - and shot a hole in the ceiling of the bedroom.
FWIW I’ve sat in on an “Eddie Eagle” demonstration, and if anything I found it to be somewhat anti-gun. The NRA instructors were very clear and unambiguous about the danger of guns, they did not even once sell up hunting or target shooting; it simply didn’t enter into the equation. The message was almost pounded into the kids - “don’t touch - run away - tell an adult.” I spoke to the folks running the program afterwards and commented that they showed no positive gun use, and the man I spoke to got very serious, and said (words to the effect of) “The single best PR the NRA can have is fewer kids being injured or killed in accidents. My single most important goal with the NRA is to make sure no kid ever gets hurt picking up a gun and having an accident.” And that made a lot of sense - it’s in the NRA’s best interest to help stop the accidents.
I just think the gun education is going all the wrong way, as has been said here. The more you put something out of reach on a pedestal, the more the kiddies want to play with it.