Dad upset about kids shooting guns at Pasco Bible camp

[jpak]

http://www.kndo.com/story/15272400/dad-upset-about-kids-shooting-guns-at-pasco-bible-camp

RICHLAND, Wash. -- One Richland father is upset after learning that swimming, hiking, and crafts were not the only activities offered at the week long Junior Camp put together by Riverview Baptist Church in Pasco.

He also learned his 8 and 11 year olds shot weapons at a gun safety class. "They told me that they had semi automatic weapons there, hand guns, and .22's," says Randy Sawrski.

Sawrski immediately called his ex-wife who signed the registration form and knew about the training. He says she didn't find anything wrong with the class, and gets to make such decisions.

"All it takes is one accident, and it will all come to an head....It scares the daylights out of me," says Sawrski.

<more>

[Lint Head]

1. New bumper sticker, "Kill for Christ!"

[PavePusher]

49. Yeah, I'm sure that's what they were teaching.

You could always cite your evidence, of course....

[Lint Head]

71. The Crusades.

[PavePusher]

82. Just a little past it's sell-by date, huh? n/t

[krispos42]

65. It took you a whole 3 minutes to think of that, huh?

[Lint Head]

72. It took you 2 1/2 hours to think of a reply.

[krispos42]

74. Oooo, snark fail... again.

[PoliticAverse]

2. How many bibles did they shoot ? n/t

[Hangingon]

3. This seems to be a dispute between the man and his x-wife.

He apparently saw an opportunity to embaress her and took it. How does this fit with the purpose of this forum?

[rfranklin]

5. It gives the poster below a chance to chime in...

Everybody should get a chance to chime in!

[iverglas]

12. do you think you've fooled anybody?

Nice try, though.

Schwalbach says the one day of shooting teaches kids respect and how to properly treat a weapon.

He says there were 122 kids who went to the camp and 43 councilors who shot with them one on one.

Sawrski also was concerned that the instructors had no special certification to teach such a class to children, but in the state of Washington, it is not required.

I guess if parents didn't want their kids involved in this, they could have declined to send them to the camp. Or sought an exemption from the activity, just to mark their kids out like. Sorta like Jewish parents having their kids excused from bible class at school ...

Not all parents want their kids to learn how to use firearms. Anybody got a problem with parents deciding?

C'mon, bring on the "sex ed" oranges. Learning how to use a firearm is absolutely essential to a child's future health and success, just like learning how to prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, I know.

[friendly_iconoclast]

57. Sawrski can hie himself to court and attempt to get his custody agreement changed.

I'm sure your amicus brief on his behalf will be quite interesting reading.

Unless and until the custody arrangement between him and his ex gets changed, I've no doubt that you would advise him
to scrupulously obey it.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ileus]

4. Good on the camp for teaching gun safety and passing on an American tradition.

[rfranklin]

6. Jesus was especially fond of his six shooter...

"They cling to their guns and Bibles," said Barack Obama on the campaign trail.

[ileus]

9. Faith needs a backup.

[rfranklin]

10. I liked the part of the Bible where Jesus shot it out with the Romans...

Too bad he didn't have that 30 round clip!

[PoliticAverse]

11. David didn't pelt Golaith with bibles... n/t

[rfranklin]

53. David was not a Christian...

Jesus came later.

[spin]

55. Some of his disciples carried swords ...

<< John 18:10 >>
Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant's name was Malchus.)

Chances are Peter was carrying a Roman Gladius which is a short sword that can be easily concealed.



You can watch a video of a a modern replica of the Gladius at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wECmH7q33sA&feature=player_embedded

Let me assure you that at close range in skilled hands, such a sword is very bit as deadly as a .45 auto. It was the handgun of its day.

[Francis Marion]

137. Luke 22:36

"Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."

Or in modernese, "Sell something you don't need and buy a CMP Garand, or an AR15."

[iverglas]

13. ah, "American traditions"

I guess the Quakers just aren't part of "America". Or their traditions don't count.

Not all "traditions" are things that all people wish to see perpetuated.

There's nothing wrong with learning to use firearms (in my own opinion; Quakers might differ).

Semi-automatic firearms and pre-teens, under the supervision of people with no certification? And I do wonder what their security arrangements were.

If it's guns it's good, I guess. No room in the agenda for any exceptions or nuances.

[gejohnston]

27. what does this have to do with Quakers?

I doubt dad is one.

[iverglas]

43. one man's tradition

is another man's abhorrence.

The claim that the activity was a good o' 'murrican tradition is completely irrelevant to the suitability of the activity or the manner it was carried out in this instance, or to the objection of any individual to their own child participating in it.

[PavePusher]

50. I grew up as a Quaker.

Plenty of guns around.

[iverglas]

52. so did Richard Nixon

[ProgressiveProfessor]

76. Some correction on your comments

The article stated "Sawrski also was concerned that the instructors had no special certification to teach such a class to children, but in the state of Washington, it is not required."

That is not the same as "people with no certification". No where does is say if all or any of the range personnel were certified. The leading instructor certification agency in the US does not have a "child instructor" rating or certification.

As you like to say, words matter.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Upton]

8. Dad is a wimp...

yup..

[iverglas]

16. ah, you know him, do you?

Please, tell us more. Enquiring minds.

[Union Scribe]

48. Yup +1

[Remmah2]

80. Not the only wimp either. nt

nt

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

20. Well now, that wasn't ignorant and condescending...

An eight year old learning to shoot is not abnormal. In most of this nation that is about the point when they learn - some start learning even younger - my daughter took her first trip to the range at 7.

[Katya Mullethov]

23. It's called

"Artisan distilling" and "sustainable living" .

"moonshine and chickens in the back yard"

[rrneck]

39. Gah! Outstanding!

:rofl:

[gejohnston]

24. I shot guns at eight

there were no Bibles or moonshine. I live in the sticks, but no chickens. I did do some reading on how to raise them. To me, the real freaks are suburbanites that drive four wheel drives, that never leave the pavement, ten miles to sit on a stationary bicycle.

[hack89]

26. My kids started at 8

and I am an educated atheist liberal - how do I fit into your world view.

[ileus]

31. my son shot his first deer last year at 6...my daughter started at 5

I started them both off at 5yo shooting my 22's....

[Walk away]

38. I am an educated atheist liberal who thinks that letting your eight year old shoot a gun is crazy.

That is where you fit in my world view.

You asked.

[rrneck]

40. I am an educated atheist liberal

and I got my first gun when I was six.

[AtheistCrusader]

96. 'zactly.

It's actually pretty common, among parents who shoot.

[hack89]

41. Why? What age is appropriate? nt

[We_Have_A_Problem]

54. Great - that's your view.

Others do not see it the same way.

It isn't like anyone is suggesting they shoot unsupervised. You've got to teach them sometime.

[iverglas]

87. and it's the father's view

So why are people attacking him, a total stranger, in this forum?

Oddly enough, nobody who thinks his view is reasonable has been attacking the mother of the children for making a different choice.

Strange how that works.

[AtheistCrusader]

97. I see no need to attack him. But if he wanted input on this sort of thing

perhaps he should have retained custody.

Edit: is crazy an attack?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=449840&mesg_id=450004

[gejohnston]

116. Attacking him?

It is not his view, but the hysteria he put behind it. I doubt his opinion on guns has anything to do about his rant. It looks more like he was attacking the ex because of an on going post divorce petty pissing match, and the shooting was an easy target. Then he can go to family court and claim "see, she is an unfit mother."
Joint custody is common. It seems that he has zero custody, which raises its own red flags about him. Mentally and emotional abusive come to mind.

[iverglas]

120. just no respect for persons or truth whatsoever

People like you, I can only assume, see the word "guns" in proximity to some negative comment, and are then unable to see what is really there, and can see only what you want to see.

"Hysteria"? You sure do see some funny things.

As for all your baseless insults against the man in question, go say them to his face. It's the only HONOURABLE thing to do.

Your behaviour in this post is absolutely atrocious, totally beyond the pale.

[gejohnston]

121. if I could, I would tell it to his face

I doubt I'll ever meet him.

How is hysteria an insult?

I have been around US type divorces to see these pissing matches in action enough to question anything either side says. My parents were no different. Like I said, joint custody is common in Florida. When one has zero custody, that raises a red flag. That is not a baseless insult. 50 years ago maybe, but not today.

As for no respect for the truth and baseless insults......... what is that cliche about pots and kettles?

[iverglas]

125. yeah, that's really brave; phone him

As for no respect for the truth and baseless insults......... what is that cliche about pots and kettles?

I don't know. Were you wanting to say something? Perhaps you'll have something to back it up with, if so.

[AtheistCrusader]

95. My parents were both Union Democrats, through and through.

I was taught to shoot at 6, with a .22 long rifle. When I showed I could handle it properly and safely, it was given to me. (though I did not have possession of it unless we were at the gravel pits.

different children exhibit different levels of competency at this sort of thing. Somewhat ageist of you to assume all 8 year olds are incapable, let alone younger.

[iverglas]

104. my giggle for the afternoon

Somewhat ageist of you to assume all 8 year olds are incapable, let alone younger.

Yes, and just imagine, the poster very probably feels the same way about 8-yr-olds drinking and driving -- and not even at the same time!

:rofl:

[AtheistCrusader]

107. I drove my first vehicle about the same age.

Drinking, specifically deliberate impairment, and combining it with another 'adult activity' is a bit of a non-sequitur for comparing other activities to shooting a firearm.

[one-eyed fat man]

117. 8 and 10 year olds driving

Was actually quite common. A child that age could easily learn to drive a tractor to pull a hay wagon at walking speed. Just stay between the rows of hay bales while the older, stronger siblings and adults pitched the bales on the wagon. A typical bale weighs somewhere between 30 and 60 pounds depending on the varieties of pasture grass, how dry it is and how tight the baler packs it.

As a boy you knew once you got into middle school the gravy days were over and you'd be letting your kid sister drive while you tossed and stacked those bales. Figure a bale of hay per BEEF cow per day and you'll get an idea of how much you have to put up to get through a winter. Horses get by on less; dairy cows a bit more.

While the initial investment in equipment is greater, the decreased labor cost in producing the big round bales is the reason you see them dotting pastures in the summer these days. Using small square bales will usually result in low feeding losses if fed properly. It is possible to distribute small square bales in daily amounts throughout a pasture without too much hay being trampled or wasted. This can be advantageous in that it further distributes manure throughout the pasture. The downside to using small square bales is the high labor requirement. Handling and feeding costs are two to four times more expensive than for large round bales.

[iverglas]

127. I'll bet you just have no idea how many children have been killed

while operating farm equipment, or hanging around farm equipment operated by others.

Great example you picked there. Responsible parenting, yup.

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4828a2.htm

I'm beginning to think I've been dropped into some old folks' home in central Asia or something.

There are people in the US who actually live in cities and towns, right?

[one-eyed fat man]

133. When we came to the US in 1954

We came to the farm owned by my father's great-aunt and her husband.

"Great example you picked there. Responsible parenting, yup."

Kids pitching in with chores to help support the family was the norm. Everyone had responsibilities and tasks to complete. Even at a young age we KNEW our contribution was real work and valued. Even a 5 year old girl gets the picture when the peck of green beans she picked and snapped are part of supper. We learned responsibility. I dare say when I came home from school, all the adults in the household were already there and there was a list of things I needed to have done before supper. There was no lack of adult supervision. Latchkey kids left to their own devices to to engage in mischief is more of an urban phenomenon.

Farming has always had some element of hazard. Getting between an ill-tempered cow and her calf is on the short list for learning what 1200 pounds of cow can do to a 100 pounds of human. Farm machinery is still dangerous, despite the improvements in the past 50 years.

There are lots of people who live in cities and towns, they can have it. I like farm life; I like the country; and I like the people who live on the land. I'll take an evening sitting on a farmhouse porch listening to the quail calling over a luxury apartment balcony hearing whatever thumping crap is emanating from some idiot's megawatt car stereo seven floors below.

[beevul]

134. 8 year olds drive on farms across america ALL THE TIME. N/T

[iverglas]

138. READ POST 127 N/T

[beevul]

139. What about it?

The entire nation isn't a city or town.

Farms - the kind that actually produce food in any significant quantity and arent corporate farms- don't exist in cities.

They're family owned and operated, for the most part. Handed down from parent to offspring, usually.

And the people that work them, start at a young age.

Thats how it is.

[one-eyed fat man]

115. Guess what's for supper?

Guess how it got that way? Were we a lot more responsible as kids in 1954? When I grew up, if your parents couldn't trust you with a pocket knife by age 8, a .22 rifle by age 10, and your own shotgun by age 12, you were pretty much a failure in the eyes of adults as well as your peers. Did our parents and peers have higher expectations? There was a loaded shotgun behind the kitchen door so Mom, Aunt Emily or anyone who was handy could shoot whatever was trying to get in the chicken coop or raid the kitchen garden. I kept my guns in my closet.

[Fred Engels]

136. I am an educated atheist liberal who thinks people who are afraid of guns are

deluded and stupid.

[ileus]

30. they're missing because the 8yo's shot them.

[SteveM]

34. I wish you would follow the advice of your...

name.

I learned to shoot by 8, hunt by 11, had my own guns by 13.

For a deeply prejudiced soul, couldn't you come up with something more than "moonshine and chickens in the back yard?"

[friendly_iconoclast]

36. Ahem. The guy that wrote *this* sent my brother and I to camp, where we learned to shoot

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1741452

FYI, we were eight and nine, respectively, and living in a large city.

Kindly take your prejudice and "walk away" with it.

[iverglas]

44. well at least you aren't claiming to be an educated atheist liberal

... damn lot of them that there seem to be around here ...

sent my brother and I to camp

Educated atheist liberals know what the objective case of a pronoun is, and when to use it.

But hey, that guy seems to have a bit of a head on his shoulders there. Maybe you could offer his words up more often for the benefit of some of your friends here (perhaps even ponder them yourself?) --

Mr. Russell needs a history lesson on our Founding Fathers. They compromised on slavery among other things. They recognized God but were careful to keep God out of politics. Women had no say and very few rights. All of the power was in the hands of Male, White landowners. The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are amazing ground-breaking documents. But to read 18th century documents in a 21st century context is to demean those brilliant Founding Fathers.

Good stuff. Say hi to him. My mum's 81 and gets me to write replies to all the right-wing racist filth her "friends" email her ... maybe we should introduce them ...



typo fixed

[friendly_iconoclast]

58. And still he let his boys learn about, and shoot, guns.

Possibly because he carried a handgun while working with registered mail as a postal clerk at night while in college, he
realized that "abstinence-only" is a foolish idea under any circumstances, and especially so when dealing with potentially
dangerous items.

Neither of my parents held with deliberate ignorance as a parenting technique.

Another example:

Instead of letting my head get filled with the usual "Plastic Paddy" wharrgarbl about the Irish famine of the 1840's,
he gave me Cecil Woodham-Smith's The Great Hunger to read. I was 13.

[iverglas]

61. and my parents gave me Tolstoy's Resurrection when I was 12

I'd gone through Ivanhoe (you know, the one written in 1819) when I was eight.

Possibly because he carried a handgun while working with registered mail as a postal clerk at night while in college, he realized that "abstinence-only" is a foolish idea under any circumstances, and especially so when dealing with potentially dangerous items.

So how old were you when he instructed you in the correct technique for shooting up heroin?

[friendly_iconoclast]

68. Slacker. Rostand's Cyrano de Begerac at 7.

Admittedly, I didn't get a lot out of it, but I found it highly amusing to pester my older sister by reciting Christian's ghostwritten letters to Roxanne to her in a loud voice. (Why yes, I was quite an annoying child...)

In any event, your analogy fails as heroin has no socially worthy use, and even you have conceded that firearms may have legitimate uses on occasion. Anyway, Mom put paid to any idea whatsoever that heroin use was glamorous by schlepping (*ahem*) my brother and I
to see "The Panic In Needle Park"....

[iverglas]

81. if you keep begging, I'm going to have to give you bacon

In any event, your analogy fails as heroin has no socially worthy use, and even you have conceded that firearms may have legitimate uses on occasion

Oh dear. I actually haven't "conceded" anything, for starters, so yes, you can stick your demagoguery up that gun barrel. I have stated that there are various legitimate uses of firearms.

A legitimate use is not a "socially worthy use". Sports shooting is legitimate. Calling it "socially worthy" would be stretching the point to snapping.

Using heroin is a personal choice -- but's a potentially dangerous one, so surely a child should be prepared to do it safely (you know, clean needles, etc.) in case s/he decides to exercise that choice.

Isn't that what we're saying about guns? Using guns is a personal choice -- and I'll let you complete the sentence, and the analogy.

Your assertion about the analogy in question was pure question-begging. Shake a paw, now.

[PavePusher]

51. Vile bigotry much?

Stereotyping, the New Progressivism?

[one-eyed fat man]

114. Little tip....

Chickens in the yard have a way of becoming Sunday supper. Meat does not need to be refrigerated until after it is dead. Can't get any fresher than pluck it and chuck it onto the grill. Can you vouch for the wholesomeness or freshness of the plastic wrapped crap in your grocery cart?

I can look out the window and see several tons of future hamburger peacefully munching on grass in the lower pasture. Where does your food come from? Are you morally superior because you hire your killing done?

[Marengo]

135. At the age of 9, I found a Marlin .22 under the Xmas tree. A gift from my Marxist mother

We also lived on a farm, had chickens in the back yard, and brewed homemade beer as well.

Freaks were we?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. may I suggest that Dad not send his kids to that camp next year.

how hard is this, people?

[iverglas]

18. you've missed all your colleagues' charming posts

Useful to read a thread ...or even the actual story ... before commenting.

The father is non-custodial and does not have a voice or vote in where his children go to camp.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

19. ah,

I can see why. carry on.

[AtheistCrusader]

98. Bummer for him.

Maybe he should change that.

I've seen non-custodial parents complaining about the custodian authorizing the child to receive sex ed in public schools.

Same answer: tough noogies. Want input? Maintain at least partial custody.

[iverglas]

17. the amusing thing

is that "father's rights" is probably something dear to the hearts of at least some here ...

:rofl:

[friendly_iconoclast]

35. So is "freedom to choose"- even things that I personally wouldn't.

Bible camp? Bleh. At the YMCA camp I went to, we had grace before meals, and that was it.

[iverglas]

46. what does that have to do with the post you replied to?

I was pointing out that the so-called father's rights movement is part and parcel of the whole thing that the "gun rights" movement is also part of.

As for bible camp ... when my grandmother died about 15 years ago, we went through my grandfather's desk (he'd died some 15 years earlier, but she had left many things undisturbed) and found a postcard I had sent from church camp, oh, many years before that. Now, my church was one of those "liberal" ones, and was in Canada, so there was no shooting there or at the Girl Guide camp I went to later. My grandfather was a lifelong soloist in his congregation, and the bible reading at his funeral (which we had co-officiated by the new minister there and the RC nun and Mennonite church music director who had ministered to him in the nursing home) was the one about "a prince among men", which he was.

Anyhow, the postcard said the usual "having a good time" stuff, and concluded with "but there's a bit too much praying for me".

Anyhow anyhow -- church camps are actually what is available to people of limited means. They are largely staffed by volunteers, and tend to have basic facilities not running to the horseback riding and computer programming that private camps offer. I would not fault anyone offhand for sending a kid to a church camp when it is quite possibly the only such opportunity available to them. It certainly was to me.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

126. Really?

I was pointing out that the so-called father's rights movement is part and parcel of the whole thing that the "gun rights" movement is also part of.

On what planet? The two things have nothing to do with each other.

[iverglas]

129. 1 + 1 =

the racist, misogynist right wing.

I hope that's clearer for you now.

[one-eyed fat man]

119. Even in Canada

when a child is born there is rarely any doubt to who the mother is. On the other hand, paternity fraud, or "mamma's baby, daddy's maybe" is alarmingly real. A 1999 study by the American Association of Blood Banks discovered that in 30 percent of 280,000 blood tests performed to determine paternity, the man tested was not actually the biological father of his children.

There is a long common law precedent that if the woman is married when she has a child "it is caught in his trap" and man bears the burden of supporting the child. In an unfortunate number of cases, men have paid years of child support only to find out later that the children they thought were theirs were in fact fathered by another man.

DNA tests are often used to establish paternity and force a man to make such payments. It is also argued that if such payments are allowed to stop merely because DNA tests disprove fatherhood, it would be a serious loss for the child thus the demands he be still forced to pay. Most of the time the men involved have absolutely no recourse whatsoever.

[iverglas]

130. what is this, random thoughts in a random subthread day?

Or were you just proving my point?

[iverglas]

131. btw ... plagiarize much?

Yeesh.

[Remmah2]

21. It's pretty much standard at Boy Scout and Cub Scout Camp too.

Along with bows and arrows and safe handling of pocket knives.

yup

[iverglas]

22. handguns and semi-automatic weapons?

Hm.

[gejohnston]

25. that sounds more like the guy being

an ass making cheap shots at his ex wife. That shows that he has no class. That said, I learned on a revolver my older brother bought in Germany.

[hack89]

28. Sure - this is what my kids learned on

.22 caliber - lightweight, little recoil

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruger_10/22

[Remmah2]

33. not semi-automatic; Pre-Assault Weapons.

Evil bullet hoses with barrel shrouds and uber high capacity bananananan clips.

Sheesh............

[We_Have_A_Problem]

37. Don't know what kind of handguns...

...but I'd be willing to bet the semi-auto's were Ruger 10/22's. It is about the most popular .22lr rifle out there. Yes, it is semi-auto. So what? The technology is over 100 years old.

[X_Digger]

42. My camp had semi-auto rifles

Ruger 10/22 rifles, got my marksmanship badge with one.

Our den leader carried a handgun for copperheads, rattlesnakes, and water moccasins. A few of us got to shoot it, but it wasn't officially part of the merit badge.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

77. Neither are particularly different than bolt action and pose no additional risk

[AtheistCrusader]

99. I'll teach my son on a Ruger 10/22 or a Marlin Pappoose.

Both 'semi-automatic' weapons. Not exactly death machines.

Well, maybe to rabbits and pocket gophers.

[DissedByBush]

29. I guess he wants his kids to be ignorant

He wants it so that if his kid ever finds a gun unsupervised he'll look at it with curiosity, try to figure out how it works, look down that tube while holding the trigger...

Shooting is the safest organized sport in the country.

High school football players suffer 40,000 concussions per year.

High school football averages 3-4 fatalities per year.

Many more suffer permanent spinal cord injury.

Gymnastics and cheerleading are pretty dangerous too.

Sport shooting deaths on appropriate supervised gun rages such as this are very rare, especially involving children.

His son is probably more likely to die boating on the lake.

[ileus]

45. more childrens deaths = more post = good news...

[iverglas]

47. I guess there's one ignorant person here anyhow

He wants it so that if his kid ever finds a gun unsupervised he'll look at it with curiosity, try to figure out how it works, look down that tube while holding the trigger...

"Ignorant" being one way of describing people who make unfounded statements portraying strangers as stupid and evil solely in order to advance theirown agenda, without any regard for the individuals in question or the basic principles of civil discourse.

Me, I guess he wants to teach his children the attitude toward firearms that he wants to convey to them, and if that involves teaching them to use firearms, he wants to be involved in the decision-making process and be satisfied with the competence of the instructors and safety of the situation.


High school football players suffer 40,000 concussions per year.
High school football averages 3-4 fatalities per year.

Did this man say he wanted his 8- and 11-year children playing contact football? No? Do you have a point? No? No.


His son is probably more likely to die boating on the lake.

His son? I didn't notice the sex of the children in the article. Did you read the article? Didn't think so.

[DissedByBush]

59. His attitude

"Me, I guess he wants to teach his children the attitude toward firearms that he wants to convey to them"

His attitude is pretty clear, he didn't like the fact they were dealing with firearms at all. The comment about the instructors is common, just something to bitch about to make it look like the program is unsafely run.

"Do you have a point? No? No."

Look forward a few years, he probably won't be freaking out about them playing any of those sports. But he freaks out about a very safe gun instruction.

"His son? I didn't notice the sex of the children in the article. Did you read the article? Didn't think so. "

In the English language, when the sex is unknown we default to the male.

And a funny thing from the article:

"They decided next year, they will stick to .22 rifles and no longer teach kids gun safety with semi-automatic weapons."

I guess nobody makes .22 rifles in semi-automatic weapons? Only the two most popular ever are semi-automatic, the Rugger 10/22 and the Marlin.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DissedByBush]

69. Nice sidestepping of the issue

The guy was obviously horrified his kids were exposed to guns.

His ex-wife was reasonable, didn't see a problem with it.

He is the standard example of those who prefer ignorance and horror stories over actual education.

It's kind of like the abstinence-only movement, tell the kids the horror stories and keep them ignorant, don't actually educate them.

And then be surprised when it doesn't help at all.

[Name removed]

83. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

111. Is this another example of your commitment to civil discourse?

[DissedByBush]

124. Interesting debate tactic

Throw around the word ignorant instead of discussing the issue.

I've seen the type, the guy fits the mold. It's a safe bet.

It is not at all likely you are right, that he simply wants to be sure the firearms instruction is done by properly-licensed instructors.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

128. You may not...

but the rules of grammar remain.

[Atypical Liberal]

32. I shot every year at Boy Scout Camp.

Of course, by the time I was in Scouts I had been shooting for a couple of years already.

When I took the hunter safety course at Boy Scout Camp, I scored a 100%. Everything the instructor taught us I already knew, from my father.

[krispos42]

66. And that's why you've been shooting up an ACORN office once a month...

...at least, until the RW shut it down last year.






Oh, wait...

[spin]

56. The lessons his kids learned might save their lives ...

all children should receive some education on gun safety. Since there are well over 300,000,000 firearms in the United States, chances are they will be exposed to one during their life.

[iverglas]

63. "chances are they will be exposed to one during their life"

and it will be essential that they pick it up and start shooting!

You do realize that this is the "lessons" the kids were learning, right?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

75. Any you know this how?

[iverglas]

84. any chance you feel like reading the converation you're joining?

What I replied to was:

The lessons his kids learned might save their lives ...
all children should receive some education on gun safety.

My reply was that the children were learning shooting.

I know this because it's what the fucking article was ABOUT.

Learning shooting is NOT learning gun safety.

Children may be taught "gun safety" appropriate for an 8-yr-old -- the kind that might "save their lives", the statement to which I was replying -- by teaching them IF YOU SEE A GUN DO NOT TOUCH IT AND CALL AN ADULT -- without teaching them shooting.

I'm always willing to help someone understand, but I sure wish it wasn't necessary so bloody often.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

88. When you have a some knowledge of what was being taught, get back to us

Gun safety and shooting are inextricably interlinked. You start and end with safety. Shooting sports have a great safety record. The article referred to it as a gun safety class repeatedly

I am always willing to help someone understand things when they do not seem to be able to comprehend the written word

[iverglas]

90. what utter bullshit

Gun safety and shooting are inextricably interlinked.

For four-year-olds?

Read your statement and see what utter bullshit it is.

The article made it plain that the children were being instructed in shooting.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

93. What an inability to see beyond your prejudices

- Article repeatedly said gun safety
- Sport shooting and safety are indeed inextricably interlinked

[iverglas]

105. what a web you weave yourself

... entrapping nobody but yourself.

Article repeatedly said gun safety

Article said:

"He also learned his 8 and 11 year olds shot weapons at a gun safety class."

Shooting weapons IS NOT an integral part of "gun safety" for an 8-yr-old, which can mean exactly what I have said it can mean: see gun, do not touch, call adult.

Gun safety is an integral part of shooting lessons.
Shooting lessons are not in integral part of gun safety.

Disagree with that if you ... want to look like a fool.

Sport shooting and safety are indeed inextricably interlinked

Gun safety is essential for sport shooting.
Sport shooting is not essential for gun safety.

Are you seeing it yet? Maybe if you took off the goggles and earmuffs.

But no, I know you see it. You just like getting tangled in your own webs.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

110. I suggest you review posts #100 and #101

AtheistCrusader is quite correct, at that age showing them the destructive power is considered an effective deterrent against improper use/treating it like a Hollywood prop.

What became of the civil discourse you claim to champion?

[We_Have_A_Problem]

113. If we were discussing 4 year olds...

...you might have a point. Since we weren't, you don't.

[AtheistCrusader]

101. Again, I disagree.

Nothing reinforces that 'don't touch' rule, like knowing what a gun will actually do when you pull the trigger. There's a certain level of awe involved.

[AtheistCrusader]

100. Nope.

No better way to instill awe in a person as to what a firearm can do, than to have them fire a gun.

Most of the 'oops I shot my brother' scenarios we see in the news, are first shots ever. They don't understand what the gun will do, the effect to the target, the noise, the recoil, etc.

Showing a child that it isn't a hollywood prop is a good thing.

[spin]

118. They are far more likely to pick the gun up and have an accidental discharge ...

if they have never had training.

Any firearm training for kids that I am familiar with, involve a lot of discussion on gun safety before the kids actually fire a weapon.

The link in the OP says:

The pastors at the church didn't want to give an on camera interview but they did talk to KNDU. Pastor Mike Schwalbach, who is the children's pastor at the church and runs the camp says the gun safety class is something they've been teaching since 1987. Schwalbach says the one day of shooting teaches kids respect and how to properly treat a weapon.

He says there were 122 kids who went to the camp and 43 councilors who shot with them one on one.

***snip***

The pastors at the church did address concerns . They decided next year, they will stick to .22 rifles and no longer teach kids gun safety with semi-automatic weapons.
http://www.kndo.com/story/15272400/dad-upset-about-kids-shooting-guns-at-pasco-bible-camp

It sounds like a great class to me and I am concerned that the kids will no longer learn safety with semi-auto weapons. Such weapons are very common in American society. Training with such weapons can reduce the accidents caused when an untrained individual drops the magazine out of the semi-auto weapon and believes that it is unloaded, not realizing that a round may still be in the chamber.

[krispos42]

64. Which is riskier... the swimming or the shooting?

Hmmm...

[iverglas]

67. which is more important that children learn how to do?

Swim or shoot?

I think we all know the answer to that.

[krispos42]

70. How about both?

no reason it can't be both.



However, I am pointing out that the father is worried about the dangers of his child learning how to shoot, but not about the swimming. So what is motivating this father to speak to the press about this? A custody dispute with the child's mother, a fear of the dangers of gun, or a lack of fear about swimming pools/beaches?

[iverglas]

78. how about answer the question?

It was: which is MORE IMPORTANT for children to learn how to do?

Children fall into bodies of water and drown. Knowing how to swim (or otherwise survive) is actually pretty important.

What's important about a child knowing how to shoot?

However, I am pointing out that the father is worried about the dangers of his child learning how to shoot, but not about the swimming. So what is motivating this father to speak to the press about this? A custody dispute with the child's mother, a fear of the dangers of gun, or a lack of fear about swimming pools/beaches?

Why not ask him? I'm sure he's in the phone book. I prefer not to speculate when there simply are no grounds for it. I do not think it's unreasonable for a parent to object to a child being taught to shoot at the age of eight, and I can think of all sorts of reasons that are absolutely within the purview of a parent's discretion. If the parent doesn't have choice in the matter, as this parent doesn't, there's no reason they should not speak out.

You know nothing whatsoever about the swimming arrangements at the camp in question (if there even is swimming, I wouldn't know). So how you could comment negatively about a parent's failure to object to them (assuming failure to object), I don't know.



typo fixed

[Remmah2]

92. You have simply stated what many of us already know.

Children are safer around firearms than water.

[AtheistCrusader]

102. He surrendered his right to say shit about it, when he lost or gave up custody.

He might try to use this to obtain custody, and that's fine, but in the meantime, his opinion means no more than the opinion of a passer-by on the street.

[iverglas]

106. and this is responsive to anything I said ... how?

Oh, right.

Not.

[AtheistCrusader]

108. quoting

"I do not think it's unreasonable for a parent to object to a child being taught to shoot at the age of eight, and I can think of all sorts of reasons that are absolutely within the purview of a parent's discretion. If the parent doesn't have choice in the matter, as this parent doesn't, there's no reason they should not speak out."

And in speaking out, his opinion means no more than any passerby on the street.

[iverglas]

122. so the fucking fuck what???

And in speaking out, his opinion means no more than any passerby on the street.

That is NOT RESPONSIVE to anything I said.

As I said.

It's fascinating that anyone would say that a parent's views about what goes on in their children's lives mean no more than those of any passerby on the street though.

I have absolutely no doubt that the same thing would not be said by the same people in just about any other situation you can imagine.

[AtheistCrusader]

123. Like what?

Substitute authorization for a child to attend sex ed in a public school at that age. We had permission slips for it. Non-custodial parent objects to the class? Tough shit.

How about a field trip to an art gallery that might contain 'objectionable to some' material? Tough shit.

Or a strenuous activity like a half marathon? Tough shit.

Non-custodial, no responsibility for the kid, no input. Beyond an aired opinion, of course.

[krispos42]

109. It was a gun safety class at the camp.

At least, that is how the paper reported it.


It probably was a "use the gun safely" class, as opposed to a "don't touch the gun" Eddie Eagle-style class.


The article said there was swimming. At work, can't write much.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

73. Both. For some summer camp is the only time they get to do either

[iverglas]

89. how about you answer the question?

It's right there in the subject line of the post of mine you replied to.

I have no interest in what you taught your children.

My question was which is more IMPORTANT for children to learn: swimming or shooting.

Tapdance all you like, the fact is that children are infinitely more likely to need swimming skills (witnesss all the blathering in this forum about children drowning) than to need shooting skills (which children, quite simply, do not need).

[ProgressiveProfessor]

94. Your question assumes a binary position that is not reasonable nor all that rationale

The two are not mutually exclusive and your attempt to phrase a hypothetical question that way is laughable.

I did not bring up children into this, why did you?

Gun safety skills are arguably more important for urban youth than swimming. Damn shame, but the truth in the inner city.

[iverglas]

103. if you don't want to answer the question

all you need to do is say so.

Oops, I guess you have.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

112. It has been corrected by several of us...

And in an urban environment gun safety may well be more important

[Remmah2]

79. I taught my children both.

and my wife agrees that it is a good idea.

But I suspect you consider that a problem.

[iverglas]

85. how about you answer the question?

lather, rinse, repeat

[Remmah2]

91. If one lives in a desert, a life preserver is rather useless.

Dispatching rattlesnakes from a houses crawlspace would seem more important. Seeing as how policepersons drop firearms in public and leave them in toiletrooms, being safe around firearms would seem rather important. What about a child with a desire to grow up to be a law enforcement person rather than a lifeguard?

Not the answer you wanted? But it is a correct, logical answer.

[spin]

132. In Florida I would like to see kids trained in how to swim and how to safely handle a firearm ...

Surely you don't have a problem with safety training for firearms in a state like Florida where every other home has one firearm or more. If so please explain why it is a bad idea.

I can understand why it might not be necessary in a nation like Canada. The best estimate I can find shows that on the high end there may be 3,800,000 firearms owners and 11,000,000 firearms. (source: http://www.nfa.ca/node/72) In the United states more firearms were purchased by civilians in 2009 than exist currently in Canada. (source: http://www.ammoland.com/2010/01/13/gun-owners-buy-14-million-plus-guns-in-2009/) We have 90 guns for every 100 people. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/08/28/us-world-firearms-idUSL2834893820070828)and there are at least 235,000,000 firearms in this nation. (http://gunsafe.org/position%20statements/Guns%20and%20crime.htm)

[iverglas]

86. deleted, double post