More Active Posts
Front Page
School weighs gun courses
 |
 25 Comments |
The state of West Virginia is weighing a measure that would allow seventh- through ninth-graders the option of learning in school how to handle a gun and hunt safely. Supporters of the bill hope it will boost interest in hunting, thereby increasing state revenues from hunting licenses, which have declined in recent years. Although the instruction would be supervised and students would be using disabled weapons, is this the sort of thing schools should be incorporating into their curriculum?
 |
Topic: WorldMagBlog |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: education, gun control, guns, schools |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Don?t blame racism
It’s a great idea. I’m a cop, and am often asked about how parents should teach their kids regarding guns. I usually explain that there are several schools of thought: tell the kids not to go near them upon penalty of (fill in the blank), or, and this is what I advocate more often than not, teach them about the gun(s) and provide rules for handling, use, etc.
I was taught at an early age how to handle guns, and I never felt the urge to “sneak a peak” or anything like that.
This program, which I hope is an elective, might be the key that keeps some undisciplined kid from mishandling a firearm with tragic results.
“[I]s this the sort of thing schools should be incorporating into their curriculum?”
No.
It’s an easy “A” for the kids who have already been taught. Kids who would be hunting probably have a male relative or friends who can teach them; there must be private lessons available (they have them in Jersey if you buy a gun) if you are so inclined.
When we have a national school crisis to the point that we needed NCLB to even come into existence, the focus should be on reading, writing and learning skills kids can use to support themselves. One would think the good people of West Virginia who live in a poor state would want more for their kids than a hunting license.
This is an outstanding idea. When I was in the service, the drill sergeant said the best marksmen would be the ones that never fired a weapon before, because they would “listen”. You want to teach children, the best time is when they are young. Before they “already know everything”. It works with other things (you know what I mean). Teach them while they are still impressionable to the dangers and are willing to listen.
Great idea!
Rather than just hunting, they should teach target shooting with pistols as well as shotguns and long guns. They should also use real guns. The course could easily be taught by local police, military or gun club.
That should drive the whack job crazy and give them another thing to protest and terrorize.
I guess I don’t get this because I live on the left coast. Not a lot of hunters around here. But my boys can take surfing, skateboarding or beach volleyball as a PE options, so I guess guns in West Virginia might make sense.
I think as an elective it’s a good idea. When I was in Jr High and High School I was on the rifle team. I even (gasp!) brought my target rifle and ammo to school on practice days…. (Not to mention carrying a pocket knife every single day of my life.)
Makes sense to me. Schools have always offered a combination of academic classes and those that teach practical skills. I already knew how to sew, but I had to take sewing class in middle school, and I did learn a few new things (like how to handle knit fabrics). We also learned some basic shop skills, working with both wood and metal, and how to take apart and reassemble a lawn mower motor. (I did think the cooking class was a waste of time, especially when we used canned pudding and packaged frosting.)
Learning gun safety is certainly a good thing. I guess they won’t actually be learning to shoot a gun, if they’re using disabled weapons, but I found the class I took (as part of an “outdoor woman” weekend sponsored by state DNR in Michigan) very helpful, both to realize that actually hitting a target is nowhere’s as easy as it looks in TV and movies, and that it was something even I could learn to do (I’m pretty uncoordinated).
My boys all learned gun safety in Boy Scouts with BB guns. Everyone was happy–especially the younger sister who inherited the BB guns and now shoots in the back yard.
They eventually worked their ways up to rifles, but not handguns.
I don’t like guns unless they squirt water.
I spent a couple of years in ROTC in college and was a crack shot and drill team leader. The chief benefit of this training was in enabling me to realizing how stupid it was, compared with other feats of obsessive precision, such as piano or violin. Later on, I was a natural at hitting beer cans in the woods with a pistol, proving that even sissies are good shooters. The teens who are interested in deadly weapons may be disappointed in the blanks, and I doubt that these gun classes will be popular unless supplemented by other cool stuff like map reading, the principles of war, and famous battles.
Scroopy,
You are right. The course could be much more than shooting. It could be history, miltary strategy, the Art of War, How to skin and cook any animal you hunt, etc. Good suggestion.
NJLawyer,
Think of it this way. If it is offered as a PE course, then it doesn’t take any extra time out of the school day. In addition, the hand-eye coordination needed for using rifles is actually useful in more cerebral tasks. Being active outdoors for part of the day also helps kids learn–increased oxygen to the brain and all that.
We need to improve academic instruction and offer fun and challenging activities outside the classroom. It’s not an either/or situation.
I think it’s a great idea.
Countries with a far higher percentage of weapon ownership/gun safety instruction than the US have a far lower rate of gun accidents (Switzerland, for example).
Many kids who play first-person shooter video games would be surprised at the difference in real life.
I like the idea of hand-eye coordination, another PE option (I took marksmanship in college–real guns, real ammo), etc.
The only thing about this I don’t like is that it’s a vehicle to increase state revenue (through the possible increase in hunting licenses they hope to generate).
Are you guys all agreeing with each other? I’m scared!!!!
I wish ball state had a rifle team.
I am astounded at the number of students at bsu whos ignorance of guns is actually DANGEROUS.
As a part of the airsoft team, i have been shot multiple times from people who, in their ignorance, exercise terrible muzzle and trigger control.
a conversation i’ve heard more times than i care to admit is:
NEWBIE: “is it loaded? lemmie check.” *pull trigger*
ME: “ouch.”
i think this class would be a great idea.
Kristin: The state of West Virginia is weighing a measure that would allow seventh- through ninth-graders the option of learning in school how to handle a gun and hunt safely. Supporters of the bill hope it will boost interest in hunting, thereby increasing state revenues from hunting licenses, which have declined in recent years. Although the instruction would be supervised and students would be using disabled weapons, is this the sort of thing schools should be incorporating into their curriculum?
Frank: I see a couple of major flaws in the thinking behind this course.
First is the hope that government revenues — i.e., hunting licenses — will increase as a result. Now there’s an idea. Exploit gummint schools for an increase in gummint income. Why not just put cigaratte vending machines or sell lotto tickets in the student lounge? Then the State can then teach classes on safe smoking and responsible gambling!
But worse than that is the reinforcement of the idea that gun ownership is primarily about hunting, not defense of self, family and community from violent criminals and tyrants.
The second amendment is about citizens owning and being proficient in the use of military rifles. It has nothing to do with the right to keep and bear sporting goods.
If they insist on teaching a class in safe gun handling, couch it in the idea of the citizen militia, not the citizen deer hunter.
Q: Will the disabled students be allowed to use working guns?
Q: How will this class teach eye-hand co-ordination if they’re using disabled guns?
Q: How will this class teach eye-hand co-ordination if they’re using disabled guns?
actually, according to FrontSight (an online shoting newsletter) “the best way to improve your accuracy is to improve your muscle memory. The best way to improve your muscle memory is to practice shooting without ammunition.”
I don’t see a problem with it, but would like to compare it to a list of other such courses available. I’d bet there are several courses the hard-line education group would have trouble with as well.
With the removal (I suspect) of those sexist shop classes, there are few options for a brain break of any kind where the hands-on learners can shine—worthless, disabled guns aside which could be changed to fully functional electronic models.
I think it’s a fine idea. We have driver’s ed in our school day, so why not? In Wisconsin, you must take a hunter’s safety course to get a hunting license - I believe. My son has already started taking an interest in his daddy’s guns, and my husband has started teaching him respect of the weapon. My son will be 5 tomorrow.
Talk about lobbing a softball post! This one was way too easy.
When I was growing up long ago in Montana, we could take a rifle target-shooting course, using I think a 22-calibur rifle with live ammunition. It was a P.E. elective. I had previously used a shotgun to hunt ducks and geese with my father.
I took the course, enjoyed it immensely, and did very well. Part of the course was about gun safety and responsibility. (Of course, in those days, kids were not coming to school with their own guns and shooting each other.) But basically, yes, I think it is a good idea, especially where hunting is a popular and useful sport.
High-school shooting classes used to be common. There are high schools that still have shooting ranges in the basement.
Respect for guns and an attitude of self reliance (both in self defense and providing meat) are excellent things to instill.
Frank’s comment about self-defense reminded me of one of the lessons I learned in my gun safety course, that I had never thought about before (largely because I had zero experience with guns). The woman who taught us - and who was licensed to carry a handgun - said that if you’re going to consider using a gun in self-defense, you have to be willing to kill someone. You might never need to use the gun, but if you do get into a situation where you need to use it in self-defense, you need to be willing to actually fire it, not just threaten with it. And if you do shoot someone, you may kill him. (If you try to make sure your shot is not fatal, you’re likely to miss altogether or not injure the person seriously enough to stop him.) And even if an investigation (and possibly trial) finds that the shooting was justified self-defense, you have to live with the knowledge of having killed another human being. If you’re not willing to do that, she recommended not using a gun in self-defense to begin with. I hadn’t been thinking about doing so, but after that lesson I knew I definitely would not. I’m sure that at the “moment of truth” I would be indecisive, not sure I was doing the right thing.