Should we have toy gun buybacks?

[spin]

Gun buyback for kids? It’s about toys . . . and pizza
Updated: September 6, 2011, 6:30 AM

This was a different kind of gun buyback program.

The guns being bought back from the streets weren’t 9 mm handguns or Glocks. Instead, they were Nerf guns or toy pistols.

***snip***

“It makes them too comfortable, holding that gun,” said Leonard Lane, president of Fathers Armed Together to Help, Educate, Restore and Save. “Then there’s no fear holding the real gun when they get older. We want to put that fear back into our children, teaching them what guns can do, how they affect their community.”

“A toy gun today, a real gun tomorrow,” said Charles Cina, owner of Bona Pizza. “That’s what we want to stop.”
http://www.buffalonews.com/city/communities/east-side/article546659.ece

EDITORIAL: Toying with gun control
Buyback program for squirt guns illustrates absurdity of feel-good laws
Thursday, September 8, 2011

Nerf guns and water pistols are the latest target for the gun grabbers. Community activists in Buffalo, N.Y., started a toy-buyback program on Monday designed to instill a fear of firearms in the city’s youth. It’s also a way to accustom children to the real restrictions they’re likely to encounter in adulthood.

As reported in the Buffalo News, a group calling itself Fathers Armed Together to Help Educate Restore and Save and a local pizza joint are rewarding toddlers willing to trade in a plastic assault rifle with a delicious slice of pizza. They hope it’s an offer too good to refuse.

There’s little need to dwell on the absurdity of such a scheme. It’s more useful in providing insight into the liberal mind that sees the availability of guns as the direct cause of murder and mayhem on the streets. They believe such problems will disappear if handguns are banned. If only it were that simple.

***snip***

That’s why more and more children today are denied the pleasure of playing traditional games like cowboys and Indians or cops and robbers. Their baseball games aren’t scored so that everyone can be declared a “winner.” Grades are inflated or not kept, and everyone is promoted. At the head of this movement one finds the California Assembly, which held a committee debate Tuesday on Senate-passed legislation that would regulate the acceptable colors for BB guns. Squirt-gun registration can’t be far behind.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/8/toying-with-gun-control/

[ScreamingMeemie]

1. Are they going to buy back legos, sticks, clay and hands too?

Anyone who has had children realizes that, whether you buy them a Nerf gun or not, they are inventive...and they will just create their own. My son once made a fairly good representation of .38 special using Play Doh. What a silly, silly event.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

21. I remember having several "Lego Guns" and "Kinex Guns" that actually fired.

With a couple of thick vegetable produce rubber bands, I used to make some pretty good lego guns that actually used the trigger to fire things. They were darn accurate to. I was always excited when mom came home with fresh asparagus... it tasted nasty but had like 3/8" wide rubber bands. :evilgrin:

Also great for making toy guns were kinex. Since the kinex pieces were "spear" shaped they made quite dangerous projectiles... easily firing 50+ft or going through cereal boxes. You could make really nice multishot kinex rifles.

And erector sets... I'm not even going to go there.

[Turbineguy]

2. All alcoholics

started out drinking water. It's a fact.

[-..__...]

5. Mothers milk...

is a gateway beverage.

[Turbineguy]

8. I rest my case.

[Cool Logic]

3. Pitiful...just pitiful.

[iverglas]

4. my my, it's an opinion piece from the Washington Times

Why, in the new "guns in the news thread", I was just copying the guidelines that right-wing sources not be used for subjects of discussion ...


"At the head of this movement one finds the California Assembly, which held a committee debate Tuesday on Senate-passed legislation that would regulate the acceptable colors for BB guns."

Yes, there's just no rational basis for such legislation at all, it's all a bunch of useless politicians playing nanny. Oh, and fathers and small-business owners, who knows what their agenda is, eh?

Doesn't all that gun safety stuff we hear so much about involve teaching kids that guns are not toys?


Nobody ever remembers poor Pellet Gun Bill ...

[spin]

9. Are Canadian children allowed to own toy guns? ...

If so, you need to pass a law to register all such evil toys and of course any toy firearms that have a barrel length of less than 105mm will have to be prohibited.

There is a great opportunity for a person with your background to write or advise on the necessary legislation to stop the proliferation of toy guns in Canada if it doesn't already exist.

[iverglas]

10. is someone suggesting that any children anywhere not be ALLOWED, by law, to own toy guns?

Didn't think so.

[spin]

15. Well you could start a movement to ban toy guns in Canada ...

Think of all the good you would accomplish.

You might be able to stop any incidents that might occur in Canada like the one you mentioned in your post above. Poor Pellet Gun Bill ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x10520

Who knows, your movement might be picked up by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Just imagine how many young lives have been destroyed by advertisements like this ...

[iverglas]

16. you could start a movement to ban pink polka dotted socks where you live

I will if you will.

[spin]

38. So do you agree that toy guns are relatively harmless for children, ...

and that offering a toy gun buy back program is slightly ridiculous?

In my opinion a far better plan than a toy gun buy back would be to teach gun safety in school and to allow the students to shoot either real firearms or high quality pellet guns under close supervision. Of course, the shooting portion of the course might be voluntary as many parents would oppose express opposition.

Pellet guns can be EXTREMELY accurate as shown in the picture below:


Russia's IZH 46 is a 10-meter target pistol capable of world-class accuracy. Here, not one but five pellets have sailed through the 10-ring. Such a pistol groups top-quality target pellets in five one-hundredths of an inch or less at 10 meters

(I actually own one of these Russian target pistols and it is indeed as accurate or more accurate then my .22 caliber rimfire target pistols.)

Of course many very accurate pellet rifle exist if you oppose teaching a child how to shoot a pellet pistol. I chose the picture above because I couldn't quickly find a picture of a pellet rifle and a target.

[iverglas]

46. double-barrelled questions don't work on me either

So do you agree that toy guns are relatively harmless for children, ...
and that offering a toy gun buy back program is slightly ridiculous?

I think the harmfulness depends entirely on the circumstances. I think children who see gunplay around them on the streets, whose older siblings or uncles or parents or neighbours possess or use firearms inappropriately, are not good candidates for playing with guns. They are most likely to mimic the behaviours they see around them and this will reinforce the likelihood that they will replicate those behaviours.

And no, I do not think that Eddie the Eagle will have much influence as compared to those influences. I think this is abject nonsense and I will say so every single time you come out with it, no matter how many pretty pictures you post and how many times you say it. People who use firearms for criminal purposes are not using them unsafely, they are using them criminally, and gun safety courses just have bugger all to do with criminal behaviours.

Schools are not propaganda mills for firearms enthusiasts. Period.

As far as the buy back program, I think it was apparent that some kids are getting a message conveyed by adults in the community in a position to get that message across, and are getting stuff that is useful and valuable to them in terms of their chances of succeeding in life in return for things that are not really. So I hardly see anything harmful about the program.

Sure has got some people all riled up though.

[spin]

61. So you would rather have children develop an unhealthy fascination ...

with firearms as they have never been exposed to any except those they see on TV or in the movies.

I have had occasions where I have been cleaning a handgun after shooting and a child who had never seen a handgun in real life walked into the room and asked, "Wow, is that a REAL gun? Can I hold it?"

On the other hand, I have had children who have been exposed to firearms walk into the room and play little or no attention to the handgun I was cleaning. Some have asked, "Is that a Smith and Wesson revolver? What caliber is it?" Some mention their own shooting experiences. I had one young girl tell me that she had shot her first deer several months before when her father took her hunting. She was very proud of her experience and most likely will grow up to be a very responsible gun owner.

You mention:

"I think the harmfulness depends entirely on the circumstances. I think children who see gunplay around them on the streets, whose older siblings or uncles or parents or neighbours possess or use firearms inappropriately, are not good candidates for playing with guns. They are most likely to mimic the behaviours they see around them and this will reinforce the likelihood that they will replicate those behaviours.

I don't believe any children, no matter where they live, should be "playing" with real firearms. Whenever a child is handling or shooting a firearm they should be under strict adult supervision. Any parent who does own firearms should secure his firearms to deny access by children and take the time to teach his own children firearm safety. This training should include real live fire practice on a range once the child is developed enough to handle the weapon.

I started to teach my daughter firearm safety when she was nine years old. We went to the range and I started her shooting using a .22 caliber single shot rifle. A year or two later, I bought a S&W .22 caliber Kit Gun with a four inch barrel for her to use on the range as it one of the few handguns small enough for her hands. Before I took her to the range I gave her extensive safety training on handling this revolver. She knew the names of every external part of the revolver and how to field strip it and reassemble it before she ever fired her first shot through this revolver.



She had numerous friends over to our house over the years and never asked me to allow her to show them her handgun (which was locked up). She loved shooting but was not really fascinated with firearms. She became a very good shooter and always has handled firearms in a very safe manner.

The Eddie Eagle program may have some limited value for very young children, however I believe a much more advanced course in firearm safety should be offered in high school. In our society in the United States there are at least 300 million firearms in civilian hands many of which are handguns. The chances of a child being exposed to especially a handgun and also to other types of firearms is far higher here than in Canada.

I would not consider such courses to be "propaganda mills for firearms enthusiasts. I don't consider driver safety courses to be propaganda for the car industry either.

I'm sure that the kids who were involved in the toy gun buy back program got a message and that message was, "all guns are always bad." One of the children apparently learn the lesson well as he said, “I learned that you shouldn’t have guns and stuff,” Tarence said. “It gives kids an education not to play with bad things.” Yup, guns are BAD THINGS according to the promoters of the gun buy back program. No propaganda there!

You mention:

"As far as the buy back program, I think it was apparent that some kids are getting a message conveyed by adults in the community in a position to get that message across, and are getting stuff that is useful and valuable to them in terms of their chances of succeeding in life in return for things that are not really. So I hardly see anything harmful about the program."

Well we do agree that they definitely got a "message". I don't really see how getting a pizza, a soft drink, a notebook, a dress shirt and a Marvel Heroes folder is really going to increase their chances of success in life. I would have thought the promoters would have passed out a nice healthy salad instead of the pizza, a glass of cold water or fruit juice instead of the soft drink and the Marvel Heroes folder is a strange choice for anyone promoting nonviolence.



I will agree that the dress shirt was a good idea.

[Abin Sur]

62. Mjölnir and admantium claws

So much less violent image-wise than a Nerf... :rofl:

[iverglas]

63. so you would rather make false statements about me

that make the slightest effort to speak civilly.

Okay. That's as far as I had to read.

[spin]

68. In most cases I feel that I am far more civil than you are ...

however that is just MY opinion.

You undoubtedly are far more sensitive then I am. I have a very thick skin. Being very sensitive is an admirable trait.

[iverglas]

72. if you try not making a false personal allegation

in every post you type, your mileage just might improve.

[spin]

73. But that is your opinion.

and in my opinion is a false personal allegation. However, as I said, I have a thick skin and am not as sensitive as you.

Perhaps I need to take sensitivity training. I'm sure that you will agree.

[iverglas]

76. no, it's fact

and it has nothing to do with being "sensitive", unless you want to pretend that objecting to false accusations is "sensitive".

[spin]

82. Oh damn, I guess I failed to be sensitive once again.

I just have to take that class.

[Glassunion]

77. That would depend.

If we are talking white on pink then I'm all for it.

But if we are talking black on pink, then that's just absurd.

[iverglas]

81. sigh

On the bad ones, the polka dots are pink.

Those are the kind that antisocial people are attracted to.

[TheWraith]

26. Uh, yes, actually. That's the law in New York City.

Sales of toy guns are banned there. Any store caught selling one is subject to a fine of $5,000. And some members of the NY City Council want to increase that to $50,000 as well as banning possession.

[iverglas]

30. try answering the question

But cripes, you couldn't even tell the straight story on your tangent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22025-2005Apr2.html

"Fake guns are extremely dangerous and have created fatal situations for both the police and the public," Commissioner Gretchen Dykstra said in a statement Friday.

Although there is no standard reporting of crimes involving toy guns, state Attorney General Eliot L. Spitzer's office found 12 incidents, between 1998 and 2003, of city police shooting at someone with a toy gun that was mistaken for an actual firearm.

In 1994, a police officer shot and killed a 13-year-old boy who was playing with a toy gun in a stairwell of the Gowanus Houses in Brooklyn. Two teenagers were killed in 2000 while using toy guns to rob an undercover officer in Brooklyn. And in 2003, police in the Bronx shot a former corrections officer after he waved a fake pistol.

The law allows the sale of toy guns as long as they are brightly colored and can be easily identified as fakes. Even so, such laws do not necessarily solve the problem, a fact to which CVS can attest: Three of its Minnesota pharmacies were held up earlier this week by two teenagers using toy guns. Police said the youths had painted over the red marks the state requires on toy guns.

You do know that the reason for these laws has nothing to do with the proper socializing of children, right? That this is a total red herring in this thread?

Have you not read the sad tale of Pellet Gun Bill?

[TheWraith]

34. Nice job moving those goalposts.

You asked: "is someone suggesting that any children anywhere not be ALLOWED, by law, to own toy guns?"

I pointed out that in NYC it's illegal to sell toy guns, and that it has been proposed to ban possession. In other words, I answered your question exactly; now you're trying to get out from under the fact that yes, people DO want to do that.

[petronius]

6. The reasoning about toy guns seems pretty specious to me, so I doubt

that aspect of the event will have any positive impact at all. Of course, private entities are free to do whatever they want with their time, money, or pizza slices...

Reading between the lines, though, it sounds like there was more going on here than just 'leave a toy - take a slice'. Giving out school supplies, positive adult interactions, and a chance to play safely with like-minded kids all sound like good ways to kick off the school year...

[iverglas]

11. damn those fathers

and their evil agendas. ;)

[petronius]

84. Nefarious indeed, but never fear - the twisted cabal of

Fathers Who Give A Crap^TM can't escape the ever-vigilant and steely-eyed gaze of the Washington Times!

One thing I would hope was available at the event, and I have no idea if it was or not, is some information about what to do if one encounters an actual firearm. Don't touch, call an adult, etc. Perhaps most importantly, making sure that kids know it's safe and desirable and 'cool' to speak up or leave if a friend starts playing with a firearm...

(Note for the OP: any snark from me about the WT is directed entirely at that slag-heap of a paper, and not at you or your perfectly valid decision to post the link.)

[ileus]

7. Nerf guns kill people.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

18. Only when a shotgun is concealed inside of them...

[SteveM]

12. Now, substitute "toy gun" with "toy balloon," and "real gun" with "real condom."

How did GOP prohi' miss this one?

[iverglas]

13. the right way to do it

http://chickenhead.com/nra-kkk/

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

14. "We want to put that fear back into our children" ... that seems incredibly (and willfully) ignorant

Fear often stems from the unknown. I think it would be far more prudent to teach the kids (whom show an affinity for toy guns) a healthy respect and knowlege of firearms and the dangers of misuse.

Instead these parents are trying to seed fear and ignorance. Kids won't always be young and "afraid"... and when they outgrow childish fears yet still have an ignorant allure to guns, their problems will be compounded.

[iverglas]

17. "Fear often stems from the unknown."

On the other hand, fear often stems from fact.

How's about we teach kids safe venomous snake handling in the schools?

While we're at it, surely they should be taught to drive as soon as they're tall enough to reach the pedals on a compact car.

We wouldn't want a 12-year-old finding a car with the keys in the ignition and not knowing how to drive it safely.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

19. Good examples...

"How's about we teach kids safe venomous snake handling in the schools?"

Better than letting them try to handle them with no training at all. I think that if kids are going to do something they ought to at least be prepared. I'm not advocating that kids be allowed or not be allowed to handle venemous snakes... but if there is going to be such a possibility then at least train the poor kid.

As for cars, I think Wyoming allows 12 year olds to drive under supervision with Learner Permits - and a number states star kids driving at 14. I know when I was 12/13 my grandpa would let me drive his truck around his farm or in an empty parking lot. I even had a baseball coach let us drive his 5.0 mustang around the parking lot after a game when I was twelve.

[iverglas]

22. pretty piss poor response

How's about we teach kids safe venomous snake handling in the schools?
Better than letting them try to handle them with no training at all.

Damned lot of dumb false dichotomies around here today.

How about we teach them that venomous snakes are dangerous and they should not attempt to handle them?

No, I know. We should give them toy venomous snakes so they can learn that venomous snakes are the source of hours of fun.

if there is going to be such a possibility then at least train the poor kid.

Why would there be such a possibility? When would a kid (or once grown up) need to handle a venomous snake?

Why would there be a possibility that a kid will ever, as a child or an adult, need to handle a firearm?

As for cars, I think Wyoming allows 12 year olds to drive under supervision with Learner Permits - and a number states star kids driving at 14.

Yeah. Thanks for reminding me which side of the border to stay on. Yeesh.

Surprised you didn't mention kiddy kars. Of course, kids who play with toy cars do learn that cars are for other things besides running into people with ...

[Abin Sur]

23. A few possiblities spring to mind.

Why would there be a possibility that a kid will ever, as a child or an adult, need to handle a firearm?

Hunting. Target shooting. Having a job as a security guard or police officer. Joining the armed forces. Self defense.

All distinct possibilities, yes?

[iverglas]

25. nope

Those are choices. Not needs.

No one ever NEEDS to handle firearms, unless they happen to get caught in a draft.

[TheWraith]

29. Nobody, ever, needs self defense?

So people CHOOSE to, say, have a violent or abusive ex? Or a stalker? Or live in a bad part of town because they can't afford better? Or they choose to be gay deep in a red state?

[iverglas]

32. please

[TheWraith]

35. Thanks for admitting that you can't offer a valid counter-argument. nt

[jmg257]

78. They certainly seem to choose whether to arm themselves or not...if

Legal to do so. Seems like a choice, not a necessity.

[Abin Sur]

37. Some other choices

Driving a car. Reading a book. Eating ice cream. Getting married.

No one ever NEEDS to do any of those things...they're choices, every one of them.

[iverglas]

47. indeed they are

Do they teach the eating of ice cream in the schools in your area?

I know this driver's ed thing comes up all the time. This is NOT taught in the schools where I am. People who want to learn to drive do so in their own time and at their own expense.

Reading books may be a choice, but being able to read road signs, safety instructions, and just things in general is a basic skill that virtually all people need in order to feed and house themselves in later life. Not sure what your point was there.

As for getting married -- yup, a choice. Were you referring to sex/family life education in schools? Well, I guess the huge social interest in averting pandemics of unwanted pregnancies and disease just outweighed other factors. This is information that kids need while they are kids.

Not seeing a huge social interest in having children know how to use guns, myself.

[Abin Sur]

53. In response to someone advocating firearms training for children,

You asserted that there was no possibility that an adult would ever need to handle a firearm...so why teach it to children?

I was speaking of choices in general in my previous post, not necessarily skills taught in school. Since that's what we're now focusing on, please allow me to refine my list a bit. Here's a short list of things taught in most public schools (Canadian ones as well, one presumes).

Literature
Team sports (various)
Algebra
Biology
Swimming
History
Chemistry
Physics

One can feed and house one's self (your criteria for a needed skill) without the slightest knowledge of any of these subjects. The exercise of skills involving these subjects is a choice, not a need...so why teach them to children?

As for a "huge social interest" in having children know how to use guns, I certainly wouldn't make it a requirement in public education, but rather an elective...like so many other subjects that make for a well-rounded education.

[iverglas]

64. sorta like golf

As for a "huge social interest" in having children know how to use guns, I certainly wouldn't make it a requirement in public education, but rather an elective...like so many other subjects that make for a well-rounded education.

I know someone who got credit for bowling in university. In fact, she was apparently required to get credits in some "sport" or other. I thought and still think this is utterly bizarre.

I hold no brief for team sports. I do think that children need to be encouraged, very strongly, to be physically active, and the schools are the logical place to do this since it is where they spend many of their waking hours and they have the resources and facilities (space, for starters) that are needed for this.

"Life skills" are reasonable adjuncts to academic instruction, in a society where children no longer spend large parts of their lives with their parents, learning to acquire and prepare their food, care for their home and their stuff, and so on.

Shooting guns is not a life skill. Period.

The other subjects you list -- these are all preparation for some occupation or another, apart from being generally useful to some extent in adult life. (I refer to the Pythagorean theorem quite frequently when considering interior renovation and design, for instance.) You can play the literal mind with "feed and house" all you like. I got extracurricular instruction in French when I was 8 yrs old, which started me on the road to my first university degree. In a high school French class, we did extracurricular theatre of the absurd and other reading, and that led to my second major for that degree, in philosophy. With that degree, I went on to law school, and a couple of satisfying and/or lucrative careers that required language and critical thinking skills. One just never knows. Children do not have vocational/career paths planned out at the age of 8.

And you know, society really does need chemists and historians and geographers and all the rest. It needs musicians and artists, if it is to survive as the kind of society it now is. And those things need to be taught from young ages if the necessary body of knowledge and skills is to be acquired and built up.

Society does not need children who know how to shoot guns, or adults who learned how to shoot guns as children. It just doesn't.

As far as well-rounded education goes: when you convince academe that playing with guns is on a par with playing an instrument, you let me know. I'll put instruction in shooting guns on a par with, oh, instruction in the art of collecting baseball cards, myself. And as far as an appropriate use of public funds in any capacity in public schools: nope, unless perhaps it is totally extracurricular like any other hobby or sport, although again, such a club/team strikes me as rather more expensive and resource-intensive than the chess club or the school paper.

[Abin Sur]

69. Actually, my high school had golf as an elective. To which I say why not?

Shooting guns is not a life skill. Period.

Who asserted that it was? That doesn't preclude it from being an elective, does it?

The other subjects you list -- these are all preparation for some occupation or another, apart from being generally useful to some extent in adult life.

What percentage of adults who took physics, chemistry, algebra, and history use those subjects in their occupation? 5%? Less? As for being generally useful in adult life...how? How does the average adult use their knowledge of physics in their day to day life? Mind you, I'm not saying that these subjects shouldn't be taught in public school! Knowledge of these subjects makes for a well rounded individual.

I got extracurricular instruction in French when I was 8 yrs old, which started me on the road to my first university degree.

I took 4 years of French in high school, which led to my being able to order in restaurants when I spent a week in France 4 years ago...and that's the only time I've used it in 30 years. I suspect my experience is much more common than yours. Again, this is not a criticism of the teaching of foreign languages in public schools.

Society does not need children who know how to shoot guns, or adults who learned how to shoot guns as children. It just doesn't.

It also doesn't "need" people who can play tennis, and that's offered in high school.

As far as well-rounded education goes: when you convince academe that playing with guns is on a par with playing an instrument, you let me know.

Poor analogy. Competitive shooting is a sport, not an art.

I'll put instruction in shooting guns on a par with, oh, instruction in the art of collecting baseball cards, myself.

Shooting is an integral part of many Olympic sports. Collecting baseball cards...not so much. It also takes a wee bit more skill, wouldn't you agree?

And as far as an appropriate use of public funds in any capacity in public schools: nope, unless perhaps it is totally extracurricular like any other hobby or sport, although again, such a club/team strikes me as rather more expensive and resource-intensive than the chess club or the school paper.

Compared to other sports such as football, the cost is a pittance.

[iverglas]

75. tennis, golf ...

Like I said: extracurricular, dandy.

As part of a curriculum designed to involve kids in physical activity, the phys ed program, tennis would qualify. Shooting guns does not.

Shooting is an integral part of many Olympic sports. Collecting baseball cards...not so much. It also takes a wee bit more skill, wouldn't you agree?

Who cares? The fact that something takes skill is not a reason to teach it in schools. Chess takes a lot of skill. It is offered in schools as an extracurricular activity.

Compared to other sports such as football, the cost is a pittance.

Football should be banned from the face of the earth. At least where I am it is not quite the subject of the insanity that surrounds it where you are. It is not instructed or practised before high school at all. Soccer is increasingly popular, along with volleyball and basketball, for team sports for both sexes. All of them (once the facilities are built) are extremely low-cost in terms of equipment. And all of them can be played informally much more readily than football. Or hockey ...

Varsity sports are a different matter from physical activity; intramural sports are more what I've had in mind here as being an "extracurricular activity". Still not the same thing as an elective part of curriculum.

[Abin Sur]

88. I think I used the term "elective" too freely

As I think about it, it seems more logical to offer shooting as an extracurricular activity.

As for football, while I haven't the slightest interest in it personally (I'm a bit unusual here in Colorado in that regards), banning it seems a bit, er, harsh. It's the most popular sport in the country, after all.

[Maine_Nurse]

70. Of course shooting can be a life skill...

aside from the countless thousands of people that use firearms to obtain food, there are also careers where it is a requirement. Protecting your life during a violent encounter might also be considered a life skill.

[iverglas]

79. there are careers where handling anthrax is a requirement

The fact that something is a requirement for a career does not mean that it should be taught to minors in schools.

Protecting your life during a violent encounter might also be considered a life skill.

Dandy. Tell anybody who may want to own a gun for that purpose when they are old enough to do so that they should get some training at that time.

the countless thousands of people that use firearms to obtain food

You want to offer courses in hunting in locales where that is a necessary life skill? Dandy. Nothing to do with kids in downtown Buffalo.

[Abin Sur]

92. Do you stand by your statement?

As I noted in another post, I live in Colorado. Here's the relevant law:

POSSESSION

It is unlawful for any person under 18 to possess a handgun, and it is unlawful to provide or permit a juvenile to possess a handgun, with exceptions for attendance at a hunter’s safety course or firearms safety course, or engaging in lawful target shooting, or hunting or trapping with a valid license, or traveling with an unloaded handgun to or from any of these activities, or while on real property under the control of the juvenile’s parent, legal guardian or grandparent and who has the permission of the parent or legal guardian to possess a handgun, or while at the juvenile’s residence and with permission of parent or legal guardian possesses a handgun for self-defense.

Source: http://www.nraila.org/statelawpdfs/COSL.pdf

So while a minor may not purchase a firearm, they may be given one by their parent or guardian. As regards rifles and shotguns, they are treated no differently than an adult. As regards handguns there are some restrictions, but as noted in the bold portion, it is perfectly legal for a minor who was given a handgun by their parent or guardian to use it at his or her residence for self-defense.

Here's your quote: Tell anybody who may want to own a gun for that purpose when they are old enough to do so that they should get some training at that time.

Minors (in Colorado at least, and almost certainly in many other states as well) may own firearms such as AR-15 rifles and Glock pistols. Given that, do you now urge such minors to get gun training?

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

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

[Abin Sur]

95. Please answer the question

You said: Tell anybody who may want to own a gun for that purpose when they are old enough to do so that they should get some training at that time.
(the purpose in question being self defense in a violent encounter)

I then demonstrated that minors in the state of Colorado are, in fact, old enough to do so.

Your response to this knowledge is to ask me how I can look in a mirror without crying. That's...odd, to say the least. Let's try to stay on the subject, shall we?

Do you stand by your statement or not?

[iverglas]

97. please find a gun

up the barrel of which to shove it.


statement: Tell anybody who may want to own a gun for that purpose when they are old enough to do so that they should get some training at that time.

"question": do you now urge such minors to get gun training?

response:

I do not now urge and have never urged and never will urge anyone to get gun training. My statement referred to "anyone who may want to own a gun". I do not urge anyone to own a gun. Specifically, I do not urge anyone to own a handgun or other firearm for "self-defence" and in fact I strongly discourage it. Also, I do not urge anyone who is not a mature adult to own any firearm, and in fact I strongly discourage it. Accordingly, I do not urge anyone, and in particular anyone who is not a mature adult, to get gun training.


You took a statement of mine and acted in public as if it meant something it did not mean on its face and could not have been interpreted to mean by any twist.

Do you stand by your ugly demagoguery?

That's a rhetorical question: one to which the answer is known.

[Abin Sur]

98. My, we are testy this morning!

I never asserted that you urged anyone to own a gun. But you did urge those who wish to own a gun for self-defense to get training (an excellent idea, btw).

Post #70: Maine_Nurse says, "Protecting your life during a violent encounter might also be considered a life skill."

Your reply in post #79: "Dandy. Tell anybody who may want to own a gun for that purpose when they are old enough to do so that they should get some training at that time."

Your statement in post #97: "I do not urge anyone, and in particular anyone who is not a mature adult, to get gun training."

These statements are completely contradictory. I'm not twisting your words in any way, I'm quoting you in context.

Please be honest enough to acknowledge this. It does lead to a more productive conversation, after all.

[iverglas]

99. you just keep going and going

Your reply in post #79: "Dandy. Tell anybody who may want to own a gun for that purpose <"Protecting your life during a violent encounter"> when they are old enough to do so that they should get some training at that time."

(a) You may infer from the use of a word like "dandy" to preface a remark that the remark that follows is, at least to some extent, facetious. I suggested that the individual to whom I was speaking tell anyone he liked to do what he thought best (essentially, a polite way of saying what I was actually thinking). Nothing whatsoever to do with me.

And of course we can't pass this by without heading off what might be a little equivocation here.

The statement to which I was responding was this:

Protecting your life during a violent encounter might also be considered a life skill.

The reference was to the "life skill" of protecting one's life.

It was not to gun safety or anything else.

(b) "Old enough to do so" is not a reference to any statutory age. The fact that some backwater jurisdictions allow immature individuals to possess firearms has nothing to do with my statement or the meaning of that phrase in my statement.


Your statement in post #97: "I do not urge anyone, and in particular anyone who is not a mature adult, to get gun training."

Yup. Just like I wouldn't urge someone who wants to promote dog fighting to get dog handling training.

I could not care less whether someone who wants to use a firearm for "protecting <their> life during a violent encounter" is trained to do that. Could not care less. It is a matter of the most supreme indifference to me whether such a person gets training in the use of a firearm for "protecting <their> life during a violent encounter". I have no interest in such persons in that regard whatsoever.

So I DO NOT URGE such persons to get training for that purpose. As I have clearly said several times now.

Your ugly demagoguery is just as much a failure now as it has been all along.

[Maine_Nurse]

39. Lets not forget that...

in many, mostly rural, areas of the country, most households have firearms in them. So little Johhny is bound to experience firearms at home or when playing at a friend's house. Might be a good idea if little Johhny had a clue. Or I suppose we could just lock him in our safe basement forever.

We had firearms safety training in early grammar school and were able to join the school rifle club (yes, we fired real .22 rifles)in 4th grade. We did (and do) not have the firearms safety issues (or firearms crime issues) that less-rural (and less acclimatized to guns areas) have.

People don't HAVE to have sex, so by the logic of some of the anti-gun/anti-gun safety crowd, we shouldn't have sex education or health class information on STD's either, right?

[iverglas]

48. you own your own logic, thanks

It's junk logic but it's your very own, and you're welcome to it.

People don't HAVE to have sex, so by the logic of some of the anti-gun/anti-gun safety crowd, we shouldn't have sex education or health class information on STD's either, right?

Actually, people do have to have sex, or the species will become extinct. Remember?

And a large proportion of children / youths will have sex. Always have, always will.

Is playing with guns an innate biological urge?

[rl6214]

90. I taught each of my three sons how to drive at the age of 11 or 12

I own a Toyota Landcruiser FJ40 and there are wide expances of open space here in West Texas and Southern NM. We head out to the desert and I taught them how to drive. Made it quite easy when it came to them actually getting their drivers licenses.

[gejohnston]

27. Things like that has not changed that much since I was a kid.

15 with a learners permit, although you can get a restricted license at 14 under certain conditions.

http://www.drivinglaws.org/teen/wyteen.php

[spin]

42. My son in law learned how to drive off road when he was 12 ...

and he learned to love driving. He currently drives an 18 wheeler. In the last five years he has driven well over 2 million miles. He has been driving a semi for 15 years and has never caused an accident. One fool did run into him.

His truck is currently broke down with a major engine problem in Alabama and that's how many miles he has put on it since it was new. Fortunately he drives for a company as this repair will likely be very expensive. Unfortunately, unless his company gives him another truck to drive, he will lose some pay waiting for the repair to be accomplished. He will only get $50 downtime a day from the company.

[spin]

24. I have found that children who have been exposed to firearms ...

and taught gun safety actually have far less fascination with firearms than those who have not.

Often those who were exposed to firearms do own firearms as adults, but they view them as items to be used as tools for hunting or other shooting sports such as target shooting, much as a golfer views his bag of clubs. It is true that many who learned about firearms in their youth own and even legally carry them for self defense. However, they often have good reason to do so.

In many posts I read here, I find those who are opposed to gun ownership who say that gun owners love to sit around and fondle their firearms and imagine how they will use them to kill some poor fool who gives them some excuse to blow him away. I suspect that those who post these fantasies are people who have never owned a firearm and never handled firearms or shot them when they were young.

Interestingly enough, I grew up in a home with a father who opposed firearm ownership and a mother who had once used one to stop an attack by an individual who wished to rape her.

When my father died when I was 16, I convinced my mother to buy me a single shot bolt action .22 caliber rifle. I practiced a lot with it as I lived on 29 acres of land. I had no instruction and I was at the best a rotten shooter.

I joined the Air Force and had to qualify with a rifle on a yearly basis and I did, but I never achieved an expert rating. I hated the excursions to the rifle range but my wife pointed out to me that I always seemed to have enjoyed them afterward.

I left the service and my wife and I were living in Tampa Florida. There were rumors of a prowler in our neighborhood and since I work the late night shifts, my wife was worried. I bought a used handgun from a co-worker and he took both my wife and I shooting to learn the basics. I admit before I actually went to the range, I did fondle the handgun and did imagine the damage it could do.

But actually going to the range and shooting the weapon stopped all the fondling and the Walter Mitty fantasies. I learned that shooting a handgun is extremely challenging. I traded the used handgun off on a much more accurate handgun and did a lot of reading on how to shoot. After years I finally became, in my opinion, fairly good at shooting a handgun, but many who watch me rate me much higher.

Today after 40 years of shooting, I own a small collection of handguns. I do pull them out of the safe when I go shooting and clean and oil them after shooting or yearly, but I have little interest in sitting around fondling them. I do carry one for self defense but I have absolutely no desire to ever have to use it to stop an attack by someone who intends to seriously hurt or kill me.

[iverglas]

28. "those who are opposed to gun ownership"

If you'd stop using that meme, and blowing that straw around, you might have something more worth reading to say.

Undoubtedly there are some people who are opposed to gun ownership. Do they propose outlawing it, for starters? Many people who are opposed to abortion do not recommend outlawing it, just as a quick example. So who cares what their personal preferences are?

Perhaps there are a few who propose outlawing all gun ownership. Who cares? Really -- who cares? Are they somehow more worth referring to every 10 minutes than people who propose, say, to outlaw eating meat? Why spend time doing battle with lunatic fringes?


In many posts I read here, I find those who are opposed to gun ownership who say that gun owners love to sit around and fondle their firearms and imagine how they will use them to kill some poor fool who gives them some excuse to blow him away. I suspect that those who post these fantasies are people who have never owned a firearm and never handled firearms or shot them when they were young.

Great big pile of used straw.


The idea that great masses of kids in inner-city neighbourhoods need to be introduced to the joys of shooting is just nonsense. Shooting is a fucking hobby. There are a lot more useful (and less costly) hobbies for kids in that situation.

And the idea that teaching anybody to shoot is going to keep them from engaging in crime is just lunacy. People do NOT engage in criminal activity because they have not been taught to shoot. People who decide to engage in criminal activity really do not give a flying fuck about the fine points of the care and feeding of firearms. Lordy.

[TheWraith]

31. You complain that someone talking about strawmen is actually a strawman?

That's... rich, considering how often you personally and others here use EXACTLY that argument that anyone who uses firearms for anything more than subsistence hunting (presumably followed by moral repentance for having touched an evil, evil gun) is basically a psycho in waiting, eager to shoot somebody at the first chance they get.

Does this mean the next time it's pointed out that you're using that kind of allusion, you'll apologize for it?

[iverglas]

33. I complain when someone tells a complete falsehood about me?

Yes I do. Here's the proof.

[TheWraith]

36. Try addressing what I actually said.

Do you deny suggesting that gun owners are potential murderers who want to shoot people?

Do you deny others here suggesting that?

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

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

[ProgressiveProfessor]

55. Regardless of what you think, not everything posted here is about you

Hoyt, Jpak, Mike, and others are here too and also post against gun rights

[iverglas]

65. notwithstanding your pointless blithering, post 31 was ABOUT ME

and it was filthy and false.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

67. For you to complain about blithering, falsehoods and filth is truly droll

I believe the short hand term is PKB

[rl6214]

93. Filthy and false?

oh come on, get over it. You are not that high and mighty.

[spin]

40. I used that term because more descriptive terms often get a post deleted ...

here in the gungeon.

And exactly why is my theory wrong about why those who oppose RKBA often state that gun owners sit around foundling their guns and dreaming about how they will blow someone away? I know many actual gun owners and I have never visited one and found him playing with his firearms. You just ignored my theory and called it a pile of straw.

Are you insinuating that inner-city kids are less responsible than rural kids when you say:

"The idea that great masses of kids in inner-city neighbourhoods need to be introduced to the joys of shooting is just nonsense. Shooting is a fucking hobby. There are a lot more useful (and less costly) hobbies for kids in that situation.

Target shooting is an excellent hobby that teaches many valuable lessons in self discipline and concentration. Of course, it can also teach safety and respect for firearms. It would seem to me that such lessons might be very positive for all children despite where they live.

How can you say for sure that teaching someone to shoot will not keep them from engaging in crime. Shooting is a martial art and I know a number of kids who learned other martial arts such as judo and jujitsu and they not only were taught how to fight but to never use their skills to bully or attack another person.

Frequently children or young adults who have never had the opportunity to learn a martial art do bully and attack others. Perhaps we should teach judo in schools as well as shooting. We might see crime decrease considerably.

edited for typo

[iverglas]

52. your experiences are not the sum total of reality

and your constant repetition of your experiences as if they did represent the sum total of reality, be they about the gun owners you know or the child sharpshooters of your aquaintance, just doesn't change that fact.


Are you insinuating that inner-city kids are less responsible than rural kids when you say:

Really. Is that really the only interpretation you could think of when you read what I said:

The idea that great masses of kids in inner-city neighbourhoods need to be introduced to the joys of shooting is just nonsense. Shooting is a fucking hobby. There are a lot more useful (and less costly) hobbies for kids in that situation.

Sad.


How can you say for sure that teaching someone to shoot will not keep them from engaging in crime.

How can you say that I did that?

The absolutely ridiculous assertion would be that teahching someone to shoot will keep them from engaging in crime.

Giving a kid an outlet for energy, an opportunity for creativity, a chance to acquire a skill, is a good thing. There are so many possibilities that can be offered to kids for those purposes that involving them with guns, particularly when they live in an urban neighbourhood where there simply is no ready access (physically or financially) to the means to pursue that hobby, makes about as much sense as teaching them to golf.

[spin]

66. My life is based on my experiences as is yours ...

When it comes to firearms I have far more experience with these weapons and with gun owners then you do. When it comes to the laws in Canada, you have far more experience than I do.

When I discuss firearms I often mention my personal experiences as I post my opinions. When you discuss firearms you often express your opinions and sometimes you have mentioned your experiences.

If I was replying to a post on Canadian law, I would be posting my opinion. If you replied to the same post you would be not only expressing your opinion but using your experience and knowledge you obtained from years of practice in the field.

Of course, other people who are as knowledgeable as I am about firearms may disagree with my views, just as other legal experts with your same level of experience in Canadian law may disagree with your views on the subject.

If anyone was to read my opinions on Canadian law and consider them superior to yours, I would consider them somewhat foolish.

You comment:

Giving a kid an outlet for energy, an opportunity for creativity, a chance to acquire a skill, is a good thing. There are so many possibilities that can be offered to kids for those purposes that involving them with guns, particularly when they live in an urban neighbourhood where there simply is no ready access (physically or financially) to the means to pursue that hobby, makes about as much sense as teaching them to golf.

Target shooting is extremely challenging and rewarding and it doesn't matter if you are large or small, tall or short or male or female. It definitely does give a kid a hobby that he can enjoy for a lifetime and a skill that he could use simply for sport such as target shooting competitions and hunting or even for self protection if necessary.

Your comment about how there is "no ready access (physically or financially)" to the shooting sports may be true in your area of Canada but I find it interesting as it reveals how little you know about shooting in the United Sates.

For example in the U.S. there are often indoor and sometimes outdoor shooting ranges in urban areas. For example, a Google search will reveal a number of them in the Tampa Bay area of Florida which is the "second most populous metropolitan area in Florida and the 19th-largest in the United States."
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_Bay_Area)

The ranges I shot at in the Tampa Bay area offered yearly memberships which were extremely affordable. Once you had purchased a firearm plus the hearing and eye protection all that is necessary is the ammo. If you decide to shoot .22 LR rounds you can buy 500 rounds of quality ammo for around $35 and often much cheaper on sale. I knew many people who were far from well off that enjoyed shooting on a regular basis.

[iverglas]

71. my posts are not based on my personal experience

unless they are, if my personal experience happens to be relevant to something, in which case I say so.

Your personal experiences just plain are not relevant to the situation under discussion in this thread, from what I can tell.

A little girl who has killed a deer (I'm sorry, but that just grosses me out) is not similar to children growing up in a low-income, high-crime urban neighbourhood. So your experience with that child has nothing to do with the experiences of those children or the adults in their lives.


Your comment about how there is "no ready access (physically or financially)" to the shooting sports may be true in your area of Canada but I find it interesting as it reveals how little you know about shooting in the United Sates.

For example in the U.S. there are often indoor and sometimes outdoor shooting ranges in urban areas. For example, a Google search will reveal a number of them in the Tampa Bay area of Florida which is the "second most populous metropolitan area in Florida and the 19th-largest in the United States."

The news report is about Buffalo. Anything else?

This gives you options on both sides of the border:

http://www.google.ca/search?q=buffalo+ny+shooting+range&num=30&hl=en&safe=off&sa=G&complete=0&prmd=imvns&source=univ&tbm=plcs&tbo=u&ei=0wJwTu_2BMbG0AHFr_2fCg&oi=local_group&ct=more-results&resnum=1&ved=0CCwQtwMwAA&biw=1024&bih=640

Let's take the first one with a Buffalo address:

http://www.buffaloguncenter.com/ ... no, turns out to be a store.

So we have to go outside Buffalo it seems: http://www.niagaragunrange.com/

Safety Glasses - $1.99 (You may bring your own)
Hearing Protection - $1.00 (You may bring your own)
Gun Rentals - $15.00 per gun. (You may bring your own)
Ammunition will be checked before entering range for rifle & shotgun.
All gun rentals must use our ammunition. No Exceptions
First time visitors should review our Range Rules.

Non-Membership Range Rates
50 Yard Range: Pistol / Rifle / Shotgun / Muzzleloader:
$17.00 First Hour (Per Person / 1 Hr. Minimum) and $4.00 Every 15 min after.
*All persons entering the range are required to pay the range fee.

Single Membership 1 Year $350.00 with a $6.00 visit fee for unlimited range time.
Family Membership 1 Year $450.00 with a $6.00 visit fee for unlimited range time.

So it's located out of town, and it will cost either $17/hour or $350-$450/year, plus equipment rental, to use.

Now compare that to the cost of a soccer ball and some knee/elbow pads. Or some art supplies. A room in a community centre for drama classes or chess or heck, even photography/videography with shared equipment. Not much of a contest, I'd say.

[Abin Sur]

74. Why would it gross you out?

A little girl who has killed a deer (I'm sorry, but that just grosses me out)

Why? Unless the idea of the same little girl eating meat of any kind grosses you out, why would you find the idea of a child acquiring wild game repugnant?

Suppose a little girl on a farm killed a chicken or a pig...would that gross you out as well?

[iverglas]

96. children and personality development

To me, "little girl" doesn't mean a 12-yr-old. Perhaps that is what the poster meant.

Before they start killing animals, children need to have reached a certain level of emotional maturity and personality development, and in particular to have acquired empathy and then the ability to deal with moral conflicts. They need to be old enough to cope with the feelings that killing a living being prompts in any normal person.

Remember indigenous peoples and their virtually universal rituals to honour the spirits of the animals they kill and all that? Every normal person feels some conflict about killing an animal. The reaction of most adults to having to euthanize a pet is an indication of that.

Children also need to be old enough to participate in the decision as to whether they will participate in the killing of animals. Two of my siblings became vegetarians in their early teens, and many years later still are. Their diet until then was pretty much not within their control and responsibility, and their personalities and brains were not yet developed to the point that they were equipped to make such decisions. To have inducted them into killing animals themselves before that age would, in my opinion, have been inappropriate and unfair.

I doubt that many here approve of young children killing animals for sport, be it squirrels or the neighbour's cat. A child needs to be old enough to grasp the moral complexities and ambiguities of killing animals, and to distinguish one type of killing from another, before they are taught to do it. Teaching a child to kill animals before a certain age is a good way to raise a psychopath.

Having animals as pets is an important way that children learn empathy. Exposure at a young age to animals being killed can cause confusion. Do remember that in the good old days when little kids were involved in all the things that went on on farms, for example, people also beat and starved their dogs and horses ... and women and children and enslaved people ... and did other things to and with animals that we regard as unconscionable.

These days we recognize that children ought not to be exposed to all aspects of adult life at young ages, in order not to interfere in their development of healthy personalities and not to produce sociopaths. Empathy is an enormous element in that development.

A "little girl", or boy, should not be reacting to the death of an animal with pride. It is not sentimentality to prefer that a young child react to the death of an animal with grief, it is recognition that if a child does not achieve that level of empathy, it is at risk of developing into an adult with problems.

People without empathy join the Tea Party when they grow up.

[spin]

85. If I remember correctly the range I was shooting in the Tampa Bay area ...

had a range fee of around $150 per year and a $1 fee every time you went shooting. Most regular shooters had eye and ear protection and their own firearms. No firearms were rented. Range time was unlimited. The range was located near the center of the city. I went shooting weekly and that would total out to $202 for 52 visits or less than $4 per visit plus ammo. I was a member so I'm not sure what the single day fee was but I believe it was $10 for unlimited time.

That was five years ago. The rates might be higher today. There were far more expensive indoor ranges in the area. Some had rates similar to the ones you found in the Buffalo area. Some had air conditioning in the shooting area of the range, but the one I shot at didn't.

Deer hunting in the area I live at now is very popular and most people hunt for food as this is one of the poorest counties in Florida.

I'm sorry if the story about the young girl shooting a deer grossed you out. I should have thought more before I mentioned that as I realize that you are a very sensitive person. It was very inconsiderate of me.

When I lived in the far more urban areas of Tampa, many people left the city and hunted game in the more rural areas. Hunting is a very popular sport in Florida and some game such as wild hog can be hunted year around. While I never hunted, many of my co-workers and friends did when I lived in the Tampa Bay area.

[Abin Sur]

20. You can only buy something "back" that you owned in the first place

In any case, a program to purchase squirt and nerf guns from children so as to allow a fear of guns to be instilled into them is silly beyond words, but what the heck...it's their money.

Speaking of gun "buybacks"...I've always thought it would be fun to go through the crowd at one of these events with a few hundred bucks in my pocket and offer double whatever the program offered if someone had something worthwhile to purchase. From what I've read, most of the guns turned in are junk...but there might be some treasure mixed in.

"Ma'am, I'd be happy to give you $200 in cash for your artillery Luger, rather than the $100 grocery voucher they'll give you!"

[spin]

41. I would imagine that some of these truly valuable firearms ...

end up not being destroyed and instead find their way into gun collections.

That may be one of the reasons gun buy back programs still exist as they very often basically just another "feel good failure".

[Uncle Omar]

43. c

All guns need destroyed

[oneshooter]

44. And if you take them up to be destroyed.

How are you going to pay for them?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[spin]

49. Welcome to DU ...

Of course I disagree with you that all guns should be destroyed. My mother and my daughter are quite possibly alive today because they had access to handguns. That does color my views.

Many people here oppose firearms because of tragedies that these weapons caused in their lives. I can understand this and I feel sympathy for them and the victims.

I believe that we can reduce violent firearm crime by enforcing existing laws and improving them. Obama has expressed the same belief.

President Obama: We must seek agreement on gun reforms
President Barack Obama Special To The Arizona Daily Star | Posted: Sunday, March 13, 2011 12:00 am

***snip***

Now, like the majority of Americans, I believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. And the courts have settled that as the law of the land. In this country, we have a strong tradition of gun ownership that's handed from generation to generation. Hunting and shooting are part of our national heritage. And, in fact, my administration has not curtailed the rights of gun owners - it has expanded them, including allowing people to carry their guns in national parks and wildlife refuges.

The fact is, almost all gun owners in America are highly responsible. They're our friends and neighbors. They buy their guns legally and use them safely, whether for hunting or target shooting, collection or protection. And that's something that gun-safety advocates need to accept. Likewise, advocates for gun owners should accept the awful reality that gun violence affects Americans everywhere, whether on the streets of Chicago or at a supermarket in Tucson.

***snip***

That's why our focus right now should be on sound and effective steps that will actually keep those irresponsible, law-breaking few from getting their hands on a gun in the first place.

• First, we should begin by enforcing laws that are already on the books. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System is the filter that's supposed to stop the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun. Bipartisan legislation four years ago was supposed to strengthen this system, but it hasn't been properly implemented. It relies on data supplied by states - but that data is often incomplete and inadequate. We must do better.

Read more: http://azstarnet.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_011e7118-8951-5206-a878-39bfbc9dc89d.html#ixzz1XsJ0sVAd

The entire editorial is well worth reading. Unfortunately, it has not received the attention that it deserves from either liberals or conservatives. The conservatives have a vested interest in promoting the false claim that Obama has plans to ban and confiscate all firearms and the liberals often favor new draconian gun laws rather than simply working to insure the enforcement of and the improvement to existing laws.

Once again as with so many issues that we face in our nation, we are merely threading water and not making progress in swimming to the other shore. It's a lot of fun to debate issues and take an uncompromising stance but it is not very productive.

[Abin Sur]

59. Do you have a means by which you propose to accomplish this?

Every gun...that presumably includes those possessed by the world's various police and military forces.

[iverglas]

100. wind 'em up

watch 'em go.

They just can't help themselves. ;)

Welcome indeed. Do you plan to stay around long enough for us to witness a miraculous conversion??



edit ... I'm always put in mind of one of my faves ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=142566&mesg_id=142792

or conversely

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=245448&mesg_id=245844

[AtheistCrusader]

45. I bet I can get a lot for my trebuchet.

[sylvi]

50. Do they even make toy "assault rifles" anymore?

As reported in the Buffalo News, a group calling itself Fathers Armed Together to Help Educate Restore and Save and a local pizza joint are rewarding toddlers willing to trade in a plastic assault rifle with a delicious slice of pizza.




This used to be a popular toy when I was a kid. Pretty realistic-looking, except for the magazine.

[Abin Sur]

54. Sure they do

Except now they're called "Airsoft" and they cost $250

[Katya Mullethov]

56. Easily converted into a machine gun

And yet more insufferable putzes .

Lord Kelven , on his way to GS15 .

[-..__...]

58. Proof that we should rely on and trust the "experts"...

for authoritative and accurate information...

Fast forward to 1:16 for epic fail and lulz!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rEuTwYALho

:rofl:

[gravity556]

80. "Easily converted to machine guns" my pasty white ass!

The pin holes in the receiver are in the wrong place to mount a trigger group, it would take hours with a mill to properly machine the internal spaces AND the lower is smaller than a real one, meaning that a real upper capable of firing a real bullet, won't fit. But facts have never stopped the F-Troop from panicking the ill informed before, I guess.

[Katya Mullethov]

86. But he said it really .....really...... slow

I would have put the quote in but wanted to save all those periods for making fun of him . It isnt as if he actually believes what he is saying . He doesnt . If he would have felt it important to at least rehearse it a little I would feel better about paying him for doing what he does for a living . Which wouldn't help that much , after observing what he actually does for a living .

[gravity556]

87. Yeah, he did sound a bit like he had a xanax and vodka lunch.

[-..__...]

57. Ever watch "The Green Berets" with John Wayne?

In the scene after one of his men is killed, the Duke picks up the mans "M-16" Marauder and smashes it to pieces against a tree...

[Abin Sur]

60. You just made me laugh. Thank you.

[Glassunion]

83. We already had toy gun buy backs.

Remember the LA gun buy back?

Somone brought in a shopping cart full of toy guns and the LA PD carted them out for a photo op.

We can all sleep easy knowing these movie props are off the street.

[rl6214]

89. My German Shepherd LOVES my full auto Nerf Gatling Gun

She tries to catch all the darts as they are flying across the room. My kitten plays fetch with one of the Nerf darts, she'll run after it when you throw it then bring it back and drop it in my hand. My pets couldn't do without my nerf guns.

[Francis Marion]

91. Yes!

No kid 'needs' a rotary or detachable box magazine-fed Nerf dart gun.

Should buy 'em all back in exchange for fair market value in play money.

Squirt gun registration: immediately, yes. After all, water gun ammunition can be used to make hydrogen bombs.

The education, political indoctrination, and social engineering of our kids is simply too important to leave to their families.