Life Magazine photo essay on 1950s school firearm instruction

[Balrog]

OK Sam you win. I don't like to get argumentative with longwinded moderators...
Yea, every problem we have could be fixed if we just taught gun safety at the government schools.

 

[Sam1911]

Yes we should give up and hand our kids over to the government's re-educators.

The default opposite of "government re-education" (an incorrect term here) is not "magically something better."

It is nothing at all. No teaching, no experience, no understanding. Just "sure hope he figures it out before ... BANG! ... Whoops."

You, and millions of other parents like you (and me) can CHOOSE to do a far better job than what a public school teacher could do. But for those many millions more kids who's parents don't care or know anything about guns, not having a default level of understanding (as could be provided in school) is simply failing them.

 

[Sam1911]

OK Sam you win. I don't like to get argumentative with longwinded moderators...

Well, if you have an actual point to make here, I'd love to hear it. Feel free to counter any single thing I've said.

Yea, every problem we have could be fixed if we just taught gun safety at the government schools.

Wow. That's the best you can do?

Not "every single problem." Some important problems. And some really happy ancillary benefits to our longer-term goals.

 

[Balrog]

Sam, you win. I don't have the time or energy to argue incessantly.
Whatever you say, I support.

 

[pbearperry]

No,we should not hand our kids over to the school system,we should be better parents.

 

[Sam1911]

we should be better parents.

Yes, WE should. (Hey, I'm trying. My 8 and 11 year olds know how to safely operate submachine guns.)

What does that mean for the other 99.9% of the kids our fortunate children have to share this country with?

What we (us here) think "we" (the parents of American children throughout the nation) should do rarely becomes reality simply because we (us here) say so. Is that then the sad end of our efforts? "Golly gee, we told each other what parents should do, and they didn't go do it. Shucks. ... hmmm ... ah ... well, guess I'll go see what's on TV..."

If one of OUR kids ends up wounded or killed by a negligent firearm discharge, chances are the shot will be fired by one of those kids who didn't get any training from anyone. But, hey, his/her parents really SHOULD have, right?

 

[Sam1911]

Sam, you win. I don't have the time or energy to argue incessantly.
Whatever you say, I support.

Great. So you don't have a defensible reason to oppose teaching basic gun safety in schools, but rather than admit your initial objections were not well thought through, and extending the courtesy of even a simple "you make some good points" or words to that effect, you'll stomp off in a huff citing my position on Staff (and my "longwindedness") as somehow stifling your free expression, and making spurious claims about not having time to debate the ideas you so sharply ridiculed before.

Fine. So be it, but I'm disappointed. I expect more from our members.

 

[Balrog]

No, thats not it Sam. I find your points unreasonable and your tone argumentative and felt that as a gentleman it would be best to drop it. I am no more convinced of your argument than you are of mine, and I find your points no better reasoned than mine. That is all subjective and I guess we could type about it til the cows come home but frankly my friend I have other things that I need to do. I don't see the point of discussing the relative validity of our arguments. I mean you no ill will. We just have a difference of opinion that both need to respect. I don't need to be scolded, and hear words of your disappointment. I too am disappointed as I expect more of a moderator.

 

[Jlr2267]

Part of "Health Education" was hunter safety when I was in High School (80's). Part of the class was shooting clays on the football field (yes folks, guns on campus is not too far in our history)

 

[DeadMoneyDrew]

Part of "Health Education" was hunter safety when I was in High School (80's).

I had it as part of Physical Education. Every year we spent a week of P.E. in a classroom watching hunter safety videos and lessons on safe firearm handling. No actual guns, but a lot more positive exposure than kids get these days.

 

[Sam1911]

I find your points unreasonable and your tone argumentative and felt that as a gentleman it would be best to drop it.

As a gentleman? Oh, well in that case, I accept your accusations of my points being unreasonable without the honor of any supporting facts or reasoning to back those accusations up. Obviously you are far too busy to sit here and type about it.

 

[Pizzapinochle]

So what if Eddie the drug dealer will someday knock off his rival with that Glock? Not much society can do to stop him. And NOT having taught him gun safety isn't going to better those odds.

Maybe if we don't teach him gun safety he will accidentally shoot himself early in his attempted criminal career. That would change the odds.

I agree though... The gun knowledge you need to commit a crime is not exactly rocket science, if someone is an "amoral thug" they are going to figure it out pretty easily. No reason not to help keep everyone else a bit safer by teaching solid gun safety.

 

[Sam1911]

Yeah, that was the only argument I could think of against teaching the future thugs among us gun safety -- maybe there's a chance that they'll have an accident and will kill themselves.

That, though, is a pretty slim hope. And for it to be of benefit at all it would have to take place after that potential thug has actually turned to a life of crime. Otherwise it's just another (literally) poor innocent kid killed by a gun accidentally. And the truth will always be that if such an accident ever happens, the victim is far more likely to be someone else, not the potential/actual amoral thug holding the gun.

If we want to decry REAL downsides of gun training given to potential criminals, look to the military who've acknowledged that there are gang members who do join the service and receive training in the actual lethal use of weapons to kill people -- as well as tactics which is a much more troubling bit of instruction to give to a gang member. And yet, we don't eschew training our soldiers even though a few absolutely WILL turn that training to evil ends.

How much then can we shirk from teaching basic firearms safety to all kids?

 

[Armymutt]

Parent education works very well. My grandpa was a cop. He showed my dad his S&W 38, explained it to him, and told him to never touch it. My dad went on to become a cop and retired in '95. To this day, he has never done much more than move that 38 into and out of the closet, with the occasional wipe down. The first time he will shoot it is when he comes to visit me in May. Then it will move into my safe.

 

[torqem]

Winchester's exhibition shooter, Ernie Linde,1950'S, used to shoot at ice-disks in school gyms, thrown from a Mossberg min clay pigieon device, using regular 22 bulleted ammo. he had a 12'x12" square tri-folding back stop. Not only did he hit the disks, he never once missed the backstops. Use interlibary book loan to get his book, COMPLETE BOOK OF TRICK AND FANCY SHOOTING.

 

[inclinebench]

When I was in college, a great many of my friends had grown up without any introduction to firearms safety. They were the most dangerous dudes around. A few of us started taking them to the range and teaching them safety and proper handling. So many parents pretend that their kids will never come into contact with a gun. This is really scary. I agree firearms safety should start at home, but for some kids that will not happen, so having schools teach it seems logical to me.

 

[Balrog]

How much then can we shirk from teaching basic firearms safety to all kids?

Its not an issue of shirking, its an issue of who is proper to teach firearms safety and who is not. I don't see why it should be an issue of government teachers. They can't teach the average high school graduate how to work basic math problems, why do you think their gun education is going to be any good either.

Anyway, at this point we don't have much to worry about, as I can't imagine gun education is ever going to be put back into education.

 

[Sam1911]

I don't see why it should be an issue of government teachers. They can't teach the average high school graduate how to work basic math problems, why do you think their gun education is going to be any good either.

This makes the error of painting with far, FAR too broad and distorted a brush. It should be self-evident that the great majority of kids in public education do indeed learn "basic math" and a lot of other important things at the hands of "government teachers" ... (whatever that loaded name is supposed to imply).

(Though I certainly understand why certain groups use language like this to hammer on the teachers' union and other champions of the public schooling status quo.)

Now, I cannot believe I find myself, of all people, defending public school teachers -- I mean the thought would be hysterical to anyone who knows me personally. But, if we say that "they can't teach the average high school graduate how to work basic math problems" as part of the foundation of our argument against public school gun training, then that statement needs to be true, not a hugely out-of-proportion hyperbole. Truth is, most students come through public school learning how to read, learning how to do basic math, at least, learning a few things about science, a little history, and the rest. Certainly not at the levels we would wish, and absolutely there are tragic numbers of students who do fail to learn these basic skills, -- public education has a lot to answer for -- but nothing in the actual record of public instruction would indicate that basic firearms safety training would be unsuccessful, or (as is pretty baldly suggested) would make kids MORE dangerous around guns.

 

[Mike1234567]

Even the antis should support teaching firearms safety in schools. After all, they think all guns are unsafe. Shouldn't they want their young ones safe if they were to handle a firearm out of curiosity? If they're against it then they must be against sex ed too because those certain "things" should be played with unsafely either.

 

[utbrowningman]

"LIFE.com is aware that encountering images of guns and children in a classroom might be distressing to some readers — even if those images were made decades ago and depict an adult instructing schoolkids in a rural community in the proper and safe use of firearms. Our intention is not to incite, but to add context and nuance to the national dialog around guns, gun violence and gun safety in the United States."

Seriously?

 

[Sam1911]

Yeah...that was pretty funny. You know, Life has published pictures of war, atrocity, some pretty brutal stuff.

But kids standing near guns? Wow, better sit down for this one folks!

 

[Balrog]

Sam, I am curious... what is your level of involvement with public schools?
I think you vastly overestimate the quality of the education the average student gets.

Do you have any first hand experience?

Or maybe we are just using different definitions of basic math. I don't mean 2+2, I mean what the rest of the developed world calls basic high school math, which would include through Algebra II and Trigonometry. Those aren't the standards much in the US anymore. We are pretty well dumbed down.

 

[Jlr2267]

I'd be last to defend public school teachers, but much of the blame for our poorly educated youth lies at the feet of the kids themselves, and with school administrators and politicians who refuse to enforce discipline in the classrooms.

 

[Sam1911]

I am a graduate of public schools, as is my wife. I have relatives currently working in public schools, teaching high school math including Calculus. I have family and coworkers with kids currently both in public school, and home-schooled. As I said before, for ME to be accused of overestimating what good the public schools do is a highly novel concept.

We could wander off onto a side discussion of what level of math instruction a student needs to have mastered for his/her elementary education to be considered a success, but I don't think that's really cogent to the current discussion.

I'm sure you are not suggesting that if a teaching environment has not been able to impart a mastery of trigonometry to the average student, that they would be incapable of teaching basic gun safety fundamentals.

I'd wager a substantial sum that a) almost every one of us here could pass a test on Cooper's four rules, and probably a lot more about safe gun handling, and b) that not more than 1/4 of us here would pass a high school trigonometry exam were we handed one today. (... and that's being generous.)

We aren't saying that the students should be given government-mandated training in bullseye pistol shooting, the finer points of high-power service rifle competition, or even course analysis and strategy development for shooting grandmaster times in USPSA. Compare that to trig. or analytic geometry? Sure, ok. You're right.

We're talking about basic gun safety. Compare that with Home Ec. or Fire Prevention...heck, it isn't even Driver's Ed!

(And all that said, I do appreciate deeply you taking the time to explore this in more depth. I hope I've not been too strident in cajoling you into it.)

 

[Pizzapinochle]

The quality of public school teachers is probably irrelevant either way. IF public schools were to institute a gun safety program, they would most likely bring in someone from the outside to teach for a few hours and to bring demonstration firearms with them. Probably an NRA certified instructor.

And that is a big huge "IF." Lots of good things have been cut from school, none of them good (music, art, recess, etc.).