Comments on: School weighs gun courses

By: Pauline

Pauline — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 04:27:52 +0000

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.

By: Kwerna

Kwerna — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 04:10:26 +0000

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.

By: janie

janie — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 00:21:29 +0000

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.

By: metanoia

metanoia — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 19:20:20 +0000

Talk about lobbing a softball post! This one was way too easy.

By: TL

TL — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:44:25 +0000

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.

By: RonD

RonD — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:39:27 +0000

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.

By: TomBob

TomBob — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:30:31 +0000

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.”

By: Frank in Phoenix

Frank in Phoenix — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:15:03 +0000

Q: How will this class teach eye-hand co-ordination if they’re using disabled guns?

By: Frank in Phoenix

Frank in Phoenix — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:13:15 +0000

Q: Will the disabled students be allowed to use working guns?

By: Frank in Phoenix

Frank in Phoenix — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 18:11:10 +0000

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.