News Should Young Children Be Given Real Firearms?

[Greg Bernhardt]

The point was, the parents were the ones at fault. And the result of the law will teach them.

Gotcha! It's too bad, it's too late for education for that child.

 

[micromass]

If that is so, then when you go pick up your baby from the hospital, you should be handed a children's law book to review. It should read, "How to raise your child by knowing what is illegal in (city) (state) (country)."

Laws cover .00001% of what parents teach their children about being a good person.

I know it's a bit off topic. But if you want to adopt a child, then you have to go through a lot of background checks and a lot of trouble. They really see whether you are right for the child. But if you get a child through natural means, then they don't do anything.

I'm not saying we should change laws for this of course. I just want to say that any idiot and aggressive parent can get children without any problems. Of course, the child will be taken away if it gets abused, but then the harm is already done.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I know it's a bit off topic. But if you want to adopt a child, then you have to go through a lot of background checks and a lot of trouble. They really see whether you are right for the child. But if you get a child through natural means, then they don't do anything.

Trust me, I am radical when it comes to parenting. I see so many examples both in real life and in the news with people who never should have been allowed to procreate. I'm not convinced it's a basic right anymore. Not if it's likely the child or society in general will suffer.

 

[WannabeNewton]

While the parents are at fault, we should have some sympathy for them. They are probably already feeling extremely guilty and distraught considering their daughter just died. Once people start bombarding them with hate through various mediums it will only destroy them ever more.

 

[FlexGunship]

I never said guns are horrible things, but I see how I could have come across that way. I say that guns that are advertized as children toys are horrible things.

I don't believe they're being marketed as toys; they're being marketed as firearms that are small enough to be handled comfortably by children.

Minibikes (example: http://www.minipocketrockets.com/mini-bikes/) are responsible for the deaths of five children per year (source: http://www.kidsgrowth.com/resources/articledetail.cfm?id=234). They are purchased by adults and given to children. Certainly they're not marketed as toys! They're marketed as motorcycles small enough to be operated comfortably by children. Would you propose to make minibikes illegal? Would you suggest that advertising a minibike is horrible (or amoral)?

Do you think we should sell nuclear bombs to individuals? You don't, which means you are already convinced that we should limit what companies sell to the public. I'm just going further in that logic than you. It's not immoral though.

Okay. You're right that I wouldn't support the sale of nuclear bombs to individuals. To be completely and totally forthright, I'm not sure where I draw the line on what an individual can own. But that line is between firearms and nuclear bombs.

I'll drop the issue of amorality en exactus but leave open that the idea of restriction of productive freedom via legislative intervention is an amoral idea in premise and it what leads to legalized cartels.

So if a child is abused by their parents, you wouldn't intervene because it's none of your business how a person raises their children??

I understand the hyperbole here, but I consider teaching a child about literal hell-fire and brimstone to be child abuse and I'm not allowed to intervene.

If it's physical abuse, of course you have to intervene. In fact, I believe you have a moral responsibility to intervene. But I think you'd agree that intellectual abuse is a very gray area. The idea of educating a child about firearms is a far cry from abuse.

It's easy enough to argue that giving a young child alcohol is physical abuse, but many people don't have the same puritan knee-jerk revulsion to giving a 14 year-old a glass of wine that others do.

In the case of sexual education, I've heard it argued that giving the "birds and the bees" talk to a 12 year-old is abuse. Or that explaining the mechanical basics of reproduction to a child that is 10 years old is okay so long as you don't use images. Someone might argue that breast feeding in sight of children is abuse. Or maybe that NOT explaining what sex is to someone older than 14 is a form of abuse.

Certainly, sexual education in general is a murky area. When in doubt, let the parents decide what is appropriate. I cannot fathom a scenario in which giving an 8 year-old a pornographic magazine is any reasonable part of a responsible sexual education... HOWEVER, if another parent DOES, it's not my place to impose my ideas on them.

Okay, that being said, if their child shows my child that magazine, that's a very different story.

 

[dlgoff]

Trust me, I am radical when it comes to parenting. I see so many examples both in real life and in the news with people who never should have been allowed to procreate. I'm not convinced it's a basic right anymore. Not if it's likely the child or society in general will suffer.

I don't think you can forecast if a child will suffer, but yea ... Seeing children's suffering? ... yea.

 

[micromass]

I don't believe they're being marketed as toys; they're being marketed as firearms that are small enough to be handled comfortably by children.

I was arguing based of this post by astro:

Interesting webpage - PRODUCT CATEGORY - CRICKETT TOYS & BOOKS
http://www.crickett.com/index.php?cPath=12

The link doesn't work for me anymore. But it certainly did give me the impression like they were treating guns as toys. If I misunderstood the website, then I'll drop this point.

 

[cobalt124]

T...I'm not convinced it's a basic right anymore...

Theres another problem, making having children into a right. It never was.

 

[Borg]

It's easy enough to argue that giving a young child alcohol is physical abuse, but many people don't have the same puritan knee-jerk revulsion to giving a 14 year-old a glass of wine that others do.

I don't have a problem with that. But, when I learned that my own father put beer in my baby bottle at the age of 18 months so that I would go to sleep while him and his buddies stayed up all night... I thought that was pretty wrong. Young and dumb.

 

[russ_watters]

I think the law should work the same for guns as for alcohol and cigarettes: too young to buy should mean too young to have and too young to market to. That would make both the parents actions and company's product/marketing illegal.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I think the law should work the same for guns as for alcohol and cigarettes: too young to buy should mean too young to have and too young to market too. That would make both the parents actions and company's product/marketing illegal.

That sounds fair to me.

 

[Borg]

The link doesn't work for me anymore. But it certainly did give me the impression like they were treating guns as toys. If I misunderstood the website, then I'll drop this point.

The home page is showing a Linux server test page. Looks like they're having some web issues. I'm sure that it couldn't be due to the sudden publicity from this story.

 

[micromass]

I think the law should work the same for guns as for alcohol and cigarettes: too young to buy should mean too young to have and too young to market to. That would make both the parents actions and company's product/marketing illegal.

I never thought I would agree with you on something involving politics. But this post proves me wrong

 

[cobalt124]

I think the law should work the same for guns as for alcohol and cigarettes: too young to buy should mean too young to have and too young to market to. That would make both the parents actions and company's product/marketing illegal.

That makes perfect sense.

 

[russ_watters]

Flexgunship RE minibikes. Minibikes don't have performance anywhere close to that of full sized motorcycles, so they aren't a fair comparison. They really are toys.

 

[dlgoff]

The home page is showing a Linux server test page. Looks like they're having some web issues. I'm sure that it couldn't be due to the sudden publicity from this story.

And I was wanting to see the "cricket with gun" image.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

The home page is showing a Linux server test page. Looks like they're having some web issues. I'm sure that it couldn't be due to the sudden publicity from this story.

Sad thing is when they get the server running, they will get a load of new orders from the free publicity.

 

[Borg]

And I was wanting to see the "cricket with gun" image.

Let me Google that for you - Crickett rifle. Note how small they made this lethal weapon. Also, the colors could fool a cop into thinking it wasn't real.

Sad thing is when they get the server running, they will get a load of new orders from the free publicity.

No doubt.

 

[FlexGunship]

As an open note, I'm trying to keep this light-hearted also, but there are two insanely serious issues here: (1) the death of a child by parental negligence, and (2) the casual discussion of further abridging individual rights.

1. This is as bad as parenting gets apart from physically hurting your own child. These parents should/probably will lose custody of their four year old as a result of this. The amount of time they spend in jail is debatable, but I don't think it'll end up being zero days and zero hours.
2. There is a disturbing trend in the U.S. to make everything either compulsory or forbidden. Whether something becomes compulsory or forbidden depends mostly on which end of the the tragedy-spectrum becomes prominent in the media first.

I don't have a problem with that. But, when I learned that my own father put beer in my baby bottle at the age of 18 months so that I would go to sleep while him and his buddies stayed up all night... I thought that was pretty wrong. Young and dumb.

I wish I knew what to say to this. I have to assume this happened in a time before it was known how dangerous it is to give young children alcohol.

My father once confessed to giving me a taste of beer when I was only a few years old (maybe six or seven?) just to discourage me from bothering him about trying it. Obviously I hated the small taste I got, and it was a LONG time before I was ever curious about beer again. His confession included a guilty apology and an explanation that he had no idea how dangerous it was (which I felt was unnecessary given the scenario).

I think the law should work the same for guns as for alcohol and cigarettes: too young to buy should mean too young to have and too young to market to. That would make both the parents actions and company's product/marketing illegal.

Eh, I could get behind this if the alternative were worse. But in one fell swoop, you've basically made father/son hunting trips, a classic American pastime, illegal.

 

[FlexGunship]

Flexgunship RE minibikes. Minibikes don't have performance anywhere close to that of full sized motorcycles, so they aren't a fair comparison. They really are toys.

Okay, fine. My point was more about that fact that they cause more child deaths per year than firearms made for children but there's no equivalent uproar.

 

[WannabeNewton]

Eh, I could get behind this if the alternative were worse. But in one fell swoop, you've basically made father/son hunting trips, a classic American pastime, illegal.

If it means innocent animals won't get killed, then I'm all for it.

 

[ModusPwnd]

I see alcohol brought up as a comparison. In Oregon, and I believe other states, underage kids are allowed to drink alcohol under adult supervision. They can't buy it, but they can drink (at home, with adults). This seems similar to guns, they can't buy them but they can use them under adult supervision.

edit - I say adult, but I meant guardian or parent. I don't think it can be any adult.

 

[Borg]

I wish I knew what to say to this. I have to assume this happened in a time before it was known how dangerous it is to give young children alcohol.

My father once confessed to giving me a taste of beer when I was only a few years old (maybe six or seven?) just to discourage me from bothering him about trying it. Obviously I hated the small taste I got, and it was a LONG time before I was ever curious about beer again. His confession included a guilty apology and an explanation that he had no idea how dangerous it was (which I felt was unnecessary given the scenario).

Yes, it was a very long time ago and people didn't know what they know now. He is a much different person now that he's grown up. BTW, during that time, many mothers, including my own, smoked when they were pregnant.

 

[FlexGunship]

If it means innocent animals won't get killed, then I'm all for it.

I'm NOT a hunter (like you, the execution of wild animals does not interest or appeal to me), but I respect the right of others to hunt. It's a part of our heritage as a species. Besides, my childhood neighbor is a deep sea fisherman, and I LOVE fresh tuna steaks.

I see alcohol brought up as a comparison. In Oregon, and I believe other states, underage kids are allowed to drink alcohol under adult supervision. They can't buy it, but they can drink (at home, with adults). This seems similar to guns, they can't buy them but they can use them under adult supervision.

edit - I say adult, but I meant guardian or parent. I don't think it can be any adult.

I like that better.

 

[russ_watters]

I see alcohol brought up as a comparison. In Oregon, and I believe other states, underage kids are allowed to drink alcohol under adult supervision. They can't buy it, but they can drink (at home, with adults). This seems similar to guns, they can't buy them but they can use them under adult supervision.

edit - I say adult, but I meant guardian or parent. I don't think it can be any adult.

I'd be fine with that modification to my position. It doesn't actually change the disposition of this incident though, since the kids were not under supervision.

 

[russ_watters]

Okay, fine. My point was more about that fact that they cause more child deaths per year than firearms made for children but there's no equivalent uproar.

Well I agree that in terms of outrage, guns are the squeaky wheel, but in terms of my opinion, some of those bikes do have enough performance to strain the definition of "children's toy".

 

[WannabeNewton]

and I LOVE fresh tuna steaks.

Can't argue with tuna

 

[russ_watters]

Can't argue with tuna

Not unless you can breathe underwater!

 

[WannabeNewton]

Not unless you can breathe underwater!

Is this a Pixar movie idea I see hatching? Yey!

 

[russ_watters]

I never thought I would agree with you on something involving politics. But this post proves me wrong

Speaking of squeeky wheels, discussions here tend to focus on economics and foreign policy, two issues on which I am solidly conservative. But even though they never affect my voting, gun control and abortion are still considered benchmark issues and help get me labeled as "moderate" on rating tests.

 

[dlgoff]

Let me Google that for you ...

Thanks. I was wanting to see if this logo was what a news commentator called "targeting kids".

 

[edward]

According to cabela's sporting Goods.

Crickett Single-Shot Rimfire Rifles

If you’re looking for a fun firearm to get your young shooter started with, consider these single-shot rimfire options. Each bolt-action model sports a blued barrel and the added safety feature of being able to shoot only one round at a time. This also teaches beginning shooters to make every shot count. All are lightweight and easy for youngsters to carry at the range and in the woods. Available: Davey Crickett – Durable synthetic stocks available in pink or black. Target-style peep sights. Weighs just 2.5 lbs. Chambered in .22 LR.

http://answers.cabelas.com/answers/8815/product/217335/crickett-crickett-single-shot-rimfire-rifles-questions-answers/questions.htm?sort=recentq

Added safety feature?? it only takes one shot to kill someone.

I had one of the little rifles when I was about 11. They only came chambered for the .22 cal short ammunition. There is a tremendous difference in the muzzle velocity between the short and the long rifle.

No child should ever be alone with a weapon that fires the .22 cal long rifle ammunition loaded or not.

 

[Andre]

It's a tragedy for everybody involved. Let there be no doubt about it.

It reminds me of the debriefing we got from our oldest daughter when she pronounced herself adult. We were okay raising kids but there were a few things in which we failed. She never got Ken of Barbi, design pumps, and a toy gun. The latter was my fault. In my military profession I got to fire off many guns with the objective to kill other humans. But no matter how legitimate that might have been or not, I develloped a strong resentment against it and I opposed to getting the kids (innocent) toy guns. Kids can easily play: "pow pow you're dead" but they have no beginning of an idea what that implies. I mean you can't be educational enough to point out the immorality of using guns on humans.

Micromass, you're totally right.

 

[BobG]

According to cabela's sporting Goods.

Crickett Single-Shot Rimfire Rifles

If you’re looking for a fun firearm to get your young shooter started with, consider these single-shot rimfire options. Each bolt-action model sports a blued barrel and the added safety feature of being able to shoot only one round at a time. This also teaches beginning shooters to make every shot count. All are lightweight and easy for youngsters to carry at the range and in the woods. Available: Davey Crickett – Durable synthetic stocks available in pink or black. Target-style peep sights. Weighs just 2.5 lbs. Chambered in .22 LR.

http://answers.cabelas.com/answers/8815/product/217335/crickett-crickett-single-shot-rimfire-rifles-questions-answers/questions.htm?sort=recentq

Added safety feature?? it only takes one shot to kill someone.

I had one of the little rifles when I was about 11. They only came chambered for the .22 cal short ammunition. There is a tremendous difference in the muzzle velocity between the short and the long rifle.

No child should ever be alone with a weapon that fires the .22 cal long rifle ammunition loaded or not.

If you're marketing a product for kids, the product should have some safety precautions that make it safe for the age group you're targeting. I have to agree that only being able to shoot one round at a time is pretty weak when it comes to safety precautions. And this case is different than marketing tobacco and alcohol to adults even though you know the products could wind up in the hands in of children. This is a product designed to be used specifically by children. I'm not sure what modification they could make that would make it safe, though.

 

[MarneMath]

This is probably one of the saddest stories I've read this week. During the last time gun safety was brought up in this forum, I was in the chat discussing with Evo on how I had approximately 20 some odd guns and my 6 year old daughter is completely obvious to them all. After that conversation, I took out one of my pistols and laid it out on the kitchen table and brought my daughter in. She was pretty terrified of it because in her mind, "guns hurt people." So I took it apart and taught her about it and gave her some rules on what to do if she ever sees a gun.

My goal as a parent is to never have my child afraid of something because she doesn't understand. I want her to fear something out of respect for the danger it can pose. That's why we walk through the woods and I teach her about the poison berries vs good berries, dangerous spiders to take outside vs the ones you should call daddy to kill, etc. So I wanted the same things with guns. I know some people think it's insane to introduce a gun to a kid so young, but where we live, I'm sure she'll see them at some point at friends house in a corner or on a wall, so I figured I rather have her respect them then afraid of them or even worse, curious of them.

 

[jim hardy]

Marnemath your post is the healthiest approach .

Around junior high school kids go through a stage of being fascinated with power and forbidden fruit. Your daughter's familiarity with firearms will insulate her from that enchantment. She just may be an example for some other kids.

My Grandpa showed me how to shoot with a.22 single shot when I was about 6. His caution with the gun instilled respect. I never messed with guns much more until my late twenties. I just wasn't interested and, frankly, some of the kids I grew up around worried me as to their judgment.

 

[encorp]

It's a shame he didn't just shoot and kill his damn mother instead.

 

[SteamKing]

Why does everybody want to up-gun when the kids are barely house-broken? Today it's a .22, tomorrow it'll be a kiddie-Barrett .50 cal. Don't they make BB guns anymore?