Speaking Different Languages

Wow, my daughter's fourth birthday present must make Nurse K's head explode. (Crosman 1377 pistol — the ONLY thing she had asked for for the last several months.)

As must the fact that she started shooting (albeit not well) at age 3 1/2, with the neighbor kid's pellet rifle. (Of course, she was shooting at a very large target at very close range.)

In all cases with me within a half arm's reach and ready to grab the gun if it ever wavers from a safe direction.

But this is the kid who knows the 4 rules (her mom regularly gives her pop quizzes while driving to day care), knows HOW to clear a range, knows WHY to clear a range, knows she has 100% authority to declare a CEASE FIRE, just like anyone else at the range, and practices better safe handling than a LOT of cops I've observed on the range (frequently as a Range Officer).

That's right.

Because when they reach the age of 15, 16, 18, or whatever you've arbitrarily decided is an “appropriate” age to be home alone and possibly faced with an intruder, they will magically have developed the skills and confidence needed to safely and efficiently handle a firearm in a high-stress situation, without having had years of exposure and use.

Oh, usre — many people HAVE managed to pull off the “defend life without good training” schtick — that IS one of teh reasons why guns make good defensive tools. But frankly, having had teh “shooting” part down cold and nearly reflexive through years of practice means that the rest of her brain can concentrate on critical details like “hide”, “grab phone and call 911″, etc. — rather thna having to devote large chucks of a VERY stressed brain to “How do I handle this thing safely and make it do what I want?”

Wow, my daughter's fourth birthday present must make Nurse K's head explode. (Crosman 1377 pistol — the ONLY thing she had asked for for the last several months.)

As must the fact that she started shooting (albeit not well) at age 3 1/2, with the neighbor kid's pellet rifle. (Of course, she was shooting at a very large target at very close range.)

In all cases with me within a half arm's reach and ready to grab the gun if it ever wavers from a safe direction.

But this is the kid who knows the 4 rules (her mom regularly gives her pop quizzes while driving to day care), knows HOW to clear a range, knows WHY to clear a range, knows she has 100% authority to declare a CEASE FIRE, just like anyone else at the range, and practices better safe handling than a LOT of cops I've observed on the range (frequently as a Range Officer).

Sorry, CBEMT, I'm also well aware that my weapons terminology is lacking. I believe my issues (you may apply that term as you wish are based on automatic vs. non-automatic weaponry. That is to say, I'm making reference to function, not appearance (because I couldn't truly tell you what most guns look like according to their function). I'm less comfortable with private ownership of automatic weapons. I realize that we probably will disagree on the topic. Works for me. My point remains that civil discourse isn't all that difficult–and I appreciate you helping me make that point.

What he means, Nurse B, is that what the media (and those ignorant about guns, but then, I repeat myself) refers to as “assault weapons” are functionally no different than Grandpappy's duck hunting shotgun or deer rifle, and “sniper rifles” are no different than the many millions of bolt action rifles used for big game hunting every day.

Armor piercing bullets are far less lethal than standard big-game hunting ammo, as another example, yet much hue and cry is made about “cop killer” bullets, and no law enforcement issue body armor is capable of stopping any rifle round, anyway.

An “assault weapon” is a military weapon capable of fully automatic fire. What you see in the news (and in Katy's photo that started this ruckus) is simply a weapon that resembles an assault weapon in aesthetics only. It's scary looking.

Nor can they, despite common misconception, be easily modified to shoot full auto, and to do so is a Federal offense – against the law already, and it's kinda hard to make something illegaler, isn't it?

The Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 did absolutely nothing to ban assault weapons, which is why the let it sunset without renewing it. That ban only limited the sale and manufacture of scary looking weapons.

Ownership of fully automatic weapons in this country have been limited to police agencies and a small number of fully vetted, licensed individuals since 1968, at least.

And those weapons are so rarely used in crimes that the incidence of such events is literally infinitesimal. Getting struck by lightning on the same day you win the lottery is a more likely event.

The only documented case of a lawfully possessed machinegun used since teh 1934 law was passed was a COP, who shot a drug dealer why trying to rob him.

My family grew up with guns, no big deal. We were educated about safety, and very supervised. I do not have the paralyzing fear that many feel around guns. I have friends that are afraid of cops “because they have guns.” A sentiment I will never understand.

Have found a second case. Doctor murdered a neighbor with his lawfully registered machinegun. Both cases in Ohio.

“I took my 7-year-old daughter with cerebral palsy to go shoot her gun, but, don't worry, she followed all the safety rules and I was there…”, I'd at least have to report it to CPS.

Hey Nurse K. I'm a frequent reader of your blog and find you intelligent, capable of critical thinking and hilarious. I think this topic of gun safety is a very difficult one to tackle, and I often find myself on the side you're arguing. I think there are valid arguments on both sides, hence why I have had trouble defining my own attitude towards it.

My husband works for a shotgun/rifle company. My brother-in-law is in the army. Hunting is part of the culture where we live. We have 4 guns in the house under lock and key. Plenty of ammo, too. Grandpa bought my son a play pop gun from Cabela's when he was 3 years old. He has foam light sabers and swords, and all that play pretend kiddo stuff.

Reading this discussion has actually helped me crystallize my opinions on the matter, and a lot of it has to do with that quote I posted above.

In addition to the many other things we do in life, we're avid downhill skiers. In fact, both my husband and I consider skiing to be our religion. Before we had our son, we had both been ski instructors for a decade. I specialized in teaching very small children to ski. The youngest child I taught to ski was 18 months old. That may sound impossible, but it's a matter of what your goals are for children of that size. When they're 18 months old, the expectation is that after 5-6 times on snow, that they may be able to take steps with skis on their feet, and balance while gliding down a very gradual slope. Would you report that child's parents to CPS?

Ditto for expectations of children with guns. I always anticipated that I would teach my son gun safety and target practice. Each kid is different. My own son was not able to ski @ 18 months owing to just not having the patience for it. He's also not a candidate to play with his pretend pop-gun right now, and it's been put away in a closet with his light sabers, swords, and other pretend weapons. He hasn't been able to prove his maturity with those items and follow the directions given to him. Until he can show maturity with a water gun, his pop gun, and other “toys” around the house, there's no way we'd ever introduce the real thing to him.

However, there are many kids who do have the attention span and patience to listen and follow directions at young ages. I happen to have a very spirited little one, and these lessons aren't appropriate for him yet.

Skiing is also a very dangerous sport. I had a group of 5 year olds who skied every weekend together who would give most adults a run for their money on double black diamond bump runs. They were thrilled to leap and jump into the air and eager to learn tricks that the big kids do. There were rules. Look before you leap. inspect the take off and landing on your first run, make sure it's safe and you know what the surface was like. Then, if you followed the rules of the road (i.e. you weren't about to crash into someone and cause an accident) you could take the jump on your next run.

There were very few kids who had the patience to go through each and every step @ age 5. And some of them jumped anyway. That feeling of nausea that came over me when I watched them go for it was terrifying, even if they were careful enough to inspect and look and be safe about it. Those who didn't follow the rules got to go ski with kids who weren't as good as them on the bunny slopes for the afternoon, and they learned pretty quickly that you follow the rules or else. I also worked in a Trauma I ED in ski country, and saw the devastating results of kids who didn't follow the rules or were just unlucky enough to be a statistic. TBI, kids who will never walk again, dead kids. Ugh.

If the child has shown the maturity to respect safety rules required for shooting, I see no reason why there should be an issue in teaching the child how to shoot. Safety is pretty much the main focus of all early lessons – I just learned the other week, actually. The entire day was devoted to the parts of the rifle, the mechanics, how it works, etiquette of the range, and then I actually fired the weapon 8 times. That's as an adult. For a kid, I'd imagine there's probably less shooting than that to begin with.

So thanks for helping me sort my own thoughts out here. I think that in general, the social stigma attached to guns prohibits people from thinking logically about topics such as teaching kids to shoot. It's an emotional subject, and whenever we let our emotions prevail, it clouds our ability to come to rational conclusions. There's nothing inherently wrong with an emotional conclusion. If you can't ever convince yourself otherwise, there's no reason why as a parent you should let your child participate in something you aren't 100% comfortable with. But it is my opinion, that from a logical perspective, learning to shoot is no different from learning to play hockey or ski.

I'm not even going to address the issue of AD's child having CP. I think it's a non issue. Kids with disabilities have shown that they can perform at a top level in all disciplines, and certainly sports are not exempt from that generalization. It's a case by case thing, obvs, but certainly CP is not in and of itself disqualifying for the sport of shooting. I think that's been sufficiently addressed and covered already.

My $.02 FWIW.

“I took my 7-year-old daughter with cerebral palsy to go shoot her gun, but, don't worry, she followed all the safety rules and I was there…”, I'd at least have to report it to CPS.

Hey Nurse K. I'm a frequent reader of your blog and find you intelligent, capable of critical thinking and hilarious. I think this topic of gun safety is a very difficult one to tackle, and I often find myself on the side you're arguing. I think there are valid arguments on both sides, hence why I have had trouble defining my own attitude towards it.

My husband works for a shotgun/rifle company. My brother-in-law is in the army. Hunting is part of the culture where we live. We have 4 guns in the house under lock and key. Plenty of ammo, too. Grandpa bought my son a play pop gun from Cabela's when he was 3 years old. He has foam light sabers and swords, and all that play pretend kiddo stuff.

Reading this discussion has actually helped me crystallize my opinions on the matter, and a lot of it has to do with that quote I posted above.

In addition to the many other things we do in life, we're avid downhill skiers. In fact, both my husband and I consider skiing to be our religion. Before we had our son, we had both been ski instructors for a decade. I specialized in teaching very small children to ski. The youngest child I taught to ski was 18 months old. That may sound impossible, but it's a matter of what your goals are for children of that size. When they're 18 months old, the expectation is that after 5-6 times on snow, that they may be able to take steps with skis on their feet, and balance while gliding down a very gradual slope. Would you report that child's parents to CPS?

Ditto for expectations of children with guns. I always anticipated that I would teach my son gun safety and target practice. Each kid is different. My own son was not able to ski @ 18 months owing to just not having the patience for it. He's also not a candidate to play with his pretend pop-gun right now, and it's been put away in a closet with his light sabers, swords, and other pretend weapons. He hasn't been able to prove his maturity with those items and follow the directions given to him. Until he can show maturity with a water gun, his pop gun, and other “toys” around the house, there's no way we'd ever introduce the real thing to him.

However, there are many kids who do have the attention span and patience to listen and follow directions at young ages. I happen to have a very spirited little one, and these lessons aren't appropriate for him yet.

Skiing is also a very dangerous sport. I had a group of 5 year olds who skied every weekend together who would give most adults a run for their money on double black diamond bump runs. They were thrilled to leap and jump into the air and eager to learn tricks that the big kids do. There were rules. Look before you leap. inspect the take off and landing on your first run, make sure it's safe and you know what the surface was like. Then, if you followed the rules of the road (i.e. you weren't about to crash into someone and cause an accident) you could take the jump on your next run.

There were very few kids who had the patience to go through each and every step @ age 5. And some of them jumped anyway. That feeling of nausea that came over me when I watched them go for it was terrifying, even if they were careful enough to inspect and look and be safe about it. Those who didn't follow the rules got to go ski with kids who weren't as good as them on the bunny slopes for the afternoon, and they learned pretty quickly that you follow the rules or else. I also worked in a Trauma I ED in ski country, and saw the devastating results of kids who didn't follow the rules or were just unlucky enough to be a statistic. TBI, kids who will never walk again, dead kids. Ugh.

If the child has shown the maturity to respect safety rules required for shooting, I see no reason why there should be an issue in teaching the child how to shoot. Safety is pretty much the main focus of all early lessons – I just learned the other week, actually. The entire day was devoted to the parts of the rifle, the mechanics, how it works, etiquette of the range, and then I actually fired the weapon 8 times. That's as an adult. For a kid, I'd imagine there's probably less shooting than that to begin with.

So thanks for helping me sort my own thoughts out here. I think that in general, the social stigma attached to guns prohibits people from thinking logically about topics such as teaching kids to shoot. It's an emotional subject, and whenever we let our emotions prevail, it clouds our ability to come to rational conclusions. There's nothing inherently wrong with an emotional conclusion. If you can't ever convince yourself otherwise, there's no reason why as a parent you should let your child participate in something you aren't 100% comfortable with. But it is my opinion, that from a logical perspective, learning to shoot is no different from learning to play hockey or ski.

I'm not even going to address the issue of AD's child having CP. I think it's a non issue. Kids with disabilities have shown that they can perform at a top level in all disciplines, and certainly sports are not exempt from that generalization. It's a case by case thing, obvs, but certainly CP is not in and of itself disqualifying for the sport of shooting. I think that's been sufficiently addressed and covered already.

My $.02 FWIW.