Poll: Teaching children to shoot guns

[Bobular]

Classes on firearm use seems silly to me.

Don't use this gun. Now I'm going to show you how to clean, maintain and operate this gun. But don't use it.

Kids are idiots, they don't think like adults. Yeah we all know that some kids are different and will be mature enough to use a firearm but I personally wouldn't trust a kid with anything that can be used as a weapon near me. If I see bunch of kids in their PE uniforms and one has a cricket bat I'm going to treat them as a threat as I know kids can start just randomly swinging the bat as they walk, not paying attention to their surroundings and hit me by accident and that's just a bat.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

When I was a kid, my dad and I used to plink with a little .22 air rifle. Here, most cartridge-firing guns are tied to a license holder who is the only person allowed to fire them, and they have to be secured at all times when not in use, so although my dad owns more powerful guns it was always obvious to me that they were dangerous and not something for me. That said, I could have graduated to cartridges myself, and I know some friends who did even as children by joining shooting clubs. I didn't feel I was good enough to really justify picking it up as a serious sport, and I already knew that long term I wouldn't live in the countryside, so I would never need a gun for any other reason.

From an outsiders perspective, the real problem here seems to be the idea that guns are toys. It doesn't really matter if they're toys for adults or children, it's still kind of a weird way to think about an object which is designed to kill things. While we can debate the utility of guns for self-defence (another concept which is weird from an outside perspective) even "self-defence practitioners" still treat guns as tools.

There's nothing wrong with wanting your kid to know how to use a gun to a particular end, whether that be sports, hunting, pest-control or (if you absolutely must) self-defence, and there's nothing wrong with making that learning fun, but treating fun as the primary purpose strikes me as a bit backwards. There is no conceivable reason in my mind as to why any child needs to know how to fire a machine gun, and the mere act of allowing them to do so seems to me to be teaching them precisely that guns are toys, that they don't require any particular respect. You can throw in as many gun safety talks as you want, but children can easily spot the difference between what an adult tells them and how an adult actually behaves.

I'm from "outside", from Europe, and I've got no trouble getting how a gun can be useful as self defense - what the hell is weird about that, particularly when compared to "pest control"? Like, seriously, how can a gun even be useful for pest control? Must be some specific way unknown to most people.

Depends on the " pest".
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/22/aporkalypse-texas-feral-pigs

I don't think you want to let that get close to you..

Spoiler: he is just lookin for a hug

 

[MeatMachine]

I'm from "outside", from Europe, and I've got no trouble getting how a gun can be useful as self defense - what the hell is weird about that, particularly when compared to "pest control"? Like, seriously, how can a gun even be useful for pest control? Must be some specific way unknown to most people.

"Pests" can refer to any number of invasive, property-damaging animals. For farmers and ranchers, rabbits (for example) can be just as bad as rats, and cannot simply be trapped and released. In some areas like the American southwest, there is also a lot of dangerous wildlife, such as venomous snakes, mountain lions, and as the poster above me demonstrated, javalina; though they aren't super common to stumble across, wary outdoorsman in rural areas (and we have a lot of rural space here) never want to be unprepared for an encounter such as that.

As for self-defense, it's often believed that people who own and carry firearms for self-defense are either paranoid or romantically obsessed with the spirit of old west justice. Generally, the folks I know who own guns for self-defense think that it is pointless and naive to take a gamble and just say that you'll either never really need it, or that you can rely on law enforcement to show up on time to stop violence. That, and Americans have historically always been distrustful of government control and the "monopoly on legitimate violence" sort of thing, given that our country was founded with very strong measures against restricting individual, micro-level affairs.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I'm from "outside", from Europe, and I've got no trouble getting how a gun can be useful as self defense - what the hell is weird about that, particularly when compared to "pest control"? Like, seriously, how can a gun even be useful for pest control? Must be some specific way unknown to most people.

"Pests" can refer to any number of invasive, property-damaging animals. For farmers and ranchers, rabbits (for example) can be just as bad as rats, and cannot simply be trapped and released. In some areas like the American southwest, there is also a lot of dangerous wildlife, such as venomous snakes, mountain lions, and as the poster above me demonstrated, javalina; though they aren't super common to stumble across, wary outdoorsman in rural areas (and we have a lot of rural space here) never want to be unprepared for an encounter such as that.

As for self-defense, it's often believed that people who own and carry firearms for self-defense are either paranoid or romantically obsessed with the spirit of old west justice. Generally, the folks I know who own guns for self-defense think that it is pointless and naive to take a gamble and just say that you'll either never really need it, or that you can rely on law enforcement to show up on time to stop violence. That, and Americans have historically always been distrustful of government control and the "monopoly on legitimate violence" sort of thing, given that our country was founded with very strong measures against restricting individual, micro-level affairs.

Where I live in Texas, all of the above are very common. My sister was bit by a rattlesnake, my neighbors dog was eaten by a mountain lion, Coyotes will take out your chickens, cats, dogs and rabbits and those hogs will eat all your crops and destroy everything if you dont fend them off.

 

[MeatMachine]

Where I live in Texas, all of the above are very common. My sister was bit by a rattlesnake, my neighbors dog was eaten by a mountain lion, Coyotes will take out your chickens, cats, dogs and rabbits and those hogs will eat all your crops and destroy everything if you dont fend them off.

It mostly depends on whether you are inside of town limits, and what town you live in. Central Tucson, for example, you'd only ever really see the occasional coyote or snake around the big washes.

Move just a little bit out into the fringes or outskirts, and it becomes a very serious risk that your child could get mauled by a pack of javalina while walking to the bus stop in the morning. Almost happened to me on 4 occasions.

 

[vashthblackseed]

If I had the power to exert my will upon national law, I would decree that all children between 5 and 18, who lives with one or more individuals whom owns a firearm must attend classes. Children between the ages of 5 and 10 are required to participate in a yearly class that focuses primarily on identifying the differences between toys guns and real ones; how to properly hold a gun in order to minimize risk to oneself and other; and how to locate and activate the safety should it be present. In addition, demonstrations show what can happen to something/someone being shot (Personally I'd make a puppet/doll with a replaceable watermelon chest that the kids get to know over duration of the classes. On the final day, the watermelon puppet/doll gets shot in the chest with an over powered handgun.) With parent/guardian signed consent, children between 11 and 18, also learn how to clean, fire and whatever other basic knowledge someone should have if they are going to handle a firearm. (Note: My only experience with firearms is what is depicted in the various medias and NERF.)

In addition, the classes can neither be funded nor run by member of the NRA; however, all teachers must be license by the appropriate government branch. Teachers would be required to renew their license every other year which they would be required to pass psychological test.

Then again, if I had this kind of power, gun control wouldn't even be in my top 10 mandates.

 

[Drops a Sweet Katana]

For safety and to instil a healthy respect for firearms, yes. It should be something controllable, like a .22 bolt action rifle or possibly an AR-15 if they're older. I feel that you need to be in control of potentially dangerous things to fully appreciate the responsibility of operating them, kinda like how learning to drive instils a respect for cars and the responsibility of being behind the wheel.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I'm from "outside", from Europe, and I've got no trouble getting how a gun can be useful as self defense - what the hell is weird about that, particularly when compared to "pest control"? Like, seriously, how can a gun even be useful for pest control? Must be some specific way unknown to most people.

It's weird because in order to use a gun for self-defence, your gun has to be readily available at short notice. In other words, your gun has to be unsecured. In real terms, having unsecured guns lying around is a terrible way to actually make you safer.

Shooting is a fairly common way to cull small agricultural pests (particularly rabbits and foxes) and in some cases invasive species (like grey squirrels). You can do this with an airgun but it's tricky to get close enough, so shotguns are preferred by farmers since it's still fairly easy to get a shotgun license. Professional exterminators will generally use small calibre rifles but these require more skill and are harder to get a license for.

We don't have wild pigs in the UK, but on the continent they do so I guess that's another concern.

 

[The Lunatic]

I think you should educate children on guns, if you have them in your house.

Obviously, there's ways of doing this, handing them a mag and AR-15 and saying "Go for it" to a 5 year old, is probably not the best one.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

No. Hell No. You don't let children drive. You don't let children smoke. You don't let children cook. You don't let children shoot. I was born in the US but whenever I see people argue in favor of this kind of thing it just makes me scratch my head. There's the argument of what constitutes a 'child' and I think the safest bet is to just wait until the kid is in their late teens. It's not a bad idea to know about gun safety but anything practical just seems dangerously excessive.

 

[Droopie]

I think people should know how to defend themselves in whatever environment is relevant to them. If you live in a gun-ridden area, you should be taught the basis of handling a gun responsibly and learn what to do if in a situation where someone else is using a gun dangerously. If you live somewhere where gun violence is rare, it seems like an irrelevant skill to have (unless you plan on moving somewhere where you'd need to defend yourself, in which case I do think learning about gun safety and use is good preparation for the worst).

Children definitely need to be taught how to defend themselves. Guns are not necessarily needed for this, but it's good knowledge for anyone who lives somewhere where gun violence is a high risk. But I don't think anyone who isn't old enough to take sex ed is old enough to learn how to fire.

 

[Vicarious Reality]

Use the same rule for fuckin, you can practice at 15, but you can not own a gun or kid until you are 25

 

[MeatMachine]

I don't think it's a good idea. Guns are not toys for children.

 

[theevilgenius60]

They should be taught as I was from an early age. Respect the gun but don't fear it. It's a tool, but like most tools it can hurt you. Safe handling training any general marksmanship can save a life, so I'm all for it being taught early. At the very least, the ideas of how to safely handle one should be told and shown, if not in a hands on way, to kids as soon as they're cognizant(if you're in an area where a kid might happen across a gun)

 

[Wakey87]

Don't see anything wrong with teaching kids to shoot, but common sense should dictate with what can use.
Here in the UK the only guns you can get are manuely cycled with the exception of shotguns and .22's so it's not much of an issue, but even then I'd stay away from anything other than single shot firearms until their late teens.

 

[kiri3tsubasa]

I was about 10 when my dad took me and my younger brother (7-8 at the time) to a gun range and we went shooting. At the time it was mostly .38 Special and .22LR. When I was 12 I got comfortable with my Grandfathers Springfield 03A3 which fired 30-06. Good rifle, sucks that there are no ranges near me to shoot in. But on that subject, I have no problem with kids learning how to shoot guns and learn about gun safety. If anything, that would reduce the number of accidents we have such as people who forget to clear the gun of all ammo before cleaning.