From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Mon Jun 07 1999 - 17:42:48 MDT
Date sent: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 13:30:18 -0700
To: extropians@extropy.com
From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Fear of Guns Vs. Fear of No Guns
Send reply to: extropians@extropy.com
>
> In turn, I agree with your point as well. A child should always be
> supervised around any dangerous equipment, whether it is a hot stove or a
> gun. I was not trying to imply that a five year old is capable of handling
> a gun responsibly on their own without supervision. Generally speaking, a
> five year old should never be allowed to handle a firearm except in
> strictly controlled environments. However, you can teach them enough that
> when unexpected situations occur (perhaps due to some other parents
> irresponsibility), there is a high probability that they will respond
> appropriately.
>
> A big part of the problem is that some parents are not fit to supervise.
>
Guns should get the hot stove, snake and middle of the busy street
treatment from parents until a child is at least approaching puberty
and preferably until they're competent to be trusted with a car
(there is an NRA couple in New England who are now taking their
THREE YEAR OLD to a target range to practice shoot).
.
> -James Rogers
> jamesr@best.com
>
>
> At 02:33 PM 6/7/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >I agree with your point, but I still would not want to be around a five year
> >old with a loaded gun. Even with good training, I don't want to risk my
> >life on a five year old acting responsibly.
> >
> >From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
> >
> >> This is hardly a useful characterization. A five year old child can most
> >> certainly be educated (so that they are not ignorant) and taught why it is
> >> important to be careful when dealing with firearms. We do it with
> >> everything else, why not firearms?
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:02 MST