1
   

HANDS-ON MANDATORY FIREARMS TRAINING IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS ?

 
 
Reply Wed 8 Aug, 2007 07:29 am
Some public schools require their students to learn to swim
( presumably for safety reasons ).

As a deterrent to crime,
and in an effort to having a better armed populace,
shud public schools require proficiency training with firearms
and safety training ?

No one can graduate without being able to hit the bullseye at 50 feet
with a pistol, a revolver, and a submachinegun ( preferably a 9mm H & K MP 5 KA4; nice and compact )

( This does not imply that anyone shud do the William Tell thing with the submachinegun. )
David
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,231 • Replies: 38
No top replies

 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 8 Aug, 2007 07:32 am
In service to CIVILITY, please don 't suggest
that the really NASTY teachers shud hold the targets.
That wud be rong.
David
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 08:13 am
Absolutely not.

Half of this country doesn't even wants their kids to learn about safer sex in school which is by far a larger problem.
0 Replies
 
Gargamel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 09:06 am
I think training children to use firearms is a great idea.

Except for children with green eyes. They should be made to wear patches on their clothing, to distinguish them as "dirty green-eyeds" in the event they try to disguise their true identity with contact lenses.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 09:35 am
I resemble that remark.

I have long thought there should be some sort of firearms training in school. Since that is highly unlikely to happen due to the anti-gunners desire to control our children's minds, I have opted to push for the ASP.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 10:53 am
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Absolutely not.

Half of this country doesn't even wants their kids to learn about safer sex in school which is by far a larger problem.

With all respect,
I believe that surviving the violence of criminals or of animals
is more important than safer sex; ( yeah, yeah, I 've heard about AIDS' lethality ).
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:02 am
cjhsa wrote:
I resemble that remark.

Quote:
I have long thought there should be some sort of firearms training in school.

If I had a child,
I 'd consider it my moral duty
to invite him, or her, to learn hands-on,
firearms proficiency and safety,
as I did, when I was 8.





Quote:
Since that is highly unlikely to happen
due to the anti-gunners desire to control our children's minds,

This is a matter of the fashion of the times.
Around the First World War, Congress created the office of the
Director of Civilian Marksmanship.
Many schools had rifle teams, or pistol teams.
I attended some of them.
Subsequently, the Director of Civilian Marksmanship sold us
some very affordable war surplus small arms.






Quote:
I have opted to push for the ASP.

What 's that ?
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:12 am
Archery in Schools Program

http://www.nasparchery.com/

My son has a Genisys bow.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 11:32 am
OmSigDAVID wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Absolutely not.

Half of this country doesn't even wants their kids to learn about safer sex in school which is by far a larger problem.

With all respect,
I believe that surviving the violence of criminals or of animals
is more important than safer sex; ( yeah, yeah, I 've heard about AIDS' lethality ).



So hold on for a moment... you want to teach kids about guns even though they can't legally own them? how is this knowledge (and lack of a tool) going to protect them from these wild animals and vilians?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 9 Aug, 2007 09:59 pm
USAFHokie80 wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
USAFHokie80 wrote:
Absolutely not.

Half of this country doesn't even wants their kids to learn about safer sex in school which is by far a larger problem.

With all respect,
I believe that surviving the violence of criminals or of animals
is more important than safer sex; ( yeah, yeah, I 've heard about AIDS' lethality ).



Quote:
So hold on for a moment...
you want to teach kids about guns even though they can't legally own them?

I do not necessarily accept your premise.

I imagine that statutory legality depends on the jurisdiction.
I have not researched the legal issue,
tho I have no doubt that kids have the same rights
under the Bill of Rights as anyone else.
Such age discrimination is unconstitutional.
The 2nd Amendment has no age limit on it.
Everyone has an equal right to defend his life.
Too many children have fallen victim to robbery, burglary and murder.
( Remember Joel Steinberg, Andrea Yates and how many others ?
It is sad, and unjust, that the victims were defenseless. )

Any laws against people of any age
having immediate access to emergency survival equipment shud be voided,
either by repeal, or by judicial enforcement of the Bill of Rights.

In any case, too many children have accidentally shot themselves
or others because of inadquate gun handling knowledge.

If I were a father,
I imagine that ( if I liked the kid ) I 'd have a greater loyalty
to his survival than to government. If I 'd had to choose between
loyalty to government or to defense of my mother,
there is no chance that I 'd have preferred government,
nor any of its laws above my mother 's survival.
The same applies to a kid, or anyone.

Whoever chooses to arm himself,
WILL be armed with the weapon of his choice,
regardless of any law. Prohibitions have never worked.






Quote:

how is this knowledge (and lack of a tool)
to protect them from these wild animals and vilians?

Firstly, it will reduce accidental discharges
( particularly from an automatic pistol, with a round in the chamber ).
Too many children have lost their lives to ignorance in this area.
We know from the newspapers that kids find guns around all the time.
Hands-on, competent knowledge will avoid or reduce accidental discharges.

Secondly, each child must decide whether to obey any
victim disarmament law against his survival,
or
to take his chances.

David
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 05:51 am
It would also provide a great opportunity for left wing liberals to shoot themselves in the head and put themselves out of their misery at a young age.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 06:29 am
I'm pretty sure that a child cannot legally own a firearm. Especially a handgun.

Children are immature and unstable. And as such, they shouldn't be allowed to own guns. I think it's dangerous.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 06:30 am
So, my 11-year old's shotgun technically belongs to me. It's still his though.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 07:07 am
USAFHokie80 wrote:


Quote:
I'm pretty sure that a child cannot legally own a firearm.
Especially a handgun.

I 'm pretty sure there is no law
against owning guns,
but I am not equally sure qua their possessing guns in every jurisdiction.

If there were a law against owning guns,
then a citizen ( of any age ) wud become a criminal
the minute that he inherits a gun collection; ( which happens a lot ).

I remember Colorado enacting a statute in the 1990s
( or was it maybe a municipal ordinance of one of its cities ? )
against people under 18 possessing handguns,
except while hunting or fishing, because of brawls among young alien Mexican gangs.

Until then, it was legal.
In any case, there is no age limit on the 2nd Amendment.


Quote:
Children are immature and unstable.
And as such, they shouldn't be allowed to own guns.

U think its OK to just blythely blow off
their constitutional rights to self defense ?

There survives a letter from Thomas Jefferson
to his 12 year old nephew, wherein he advises the boy
always to take his gun with him when he goes for a walk.
He also advised the boy to practice for proficiency with it.
He finds it to be good for the character.

I armed myself with a 2 inch .38 revolver, when I was 8,
until I upgraded to a 2 inch .44 special loaded with hollowpointed slugs.
The kids in my neighborhood in Arizona
were well armed. We never had any complaints.
The police never arrived in our neighborhood with any lights nor sirens.


Quote:
I think it's dangerous.

It has been fatally dangerous for the children
who have been murdered, while thay were unarmed, and helpless.
Everyone has an equal constitutional right
to self defense.
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 07:13 am
cjhsa wrote:
It would also provide a great opportunity for left wing liberals
to shoot themselves in the head and put themselves out of their misery at a young age.

Maybe thay cud be convinced to hold the targets ?
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 08:11 am
Omsig, read up.

It's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to own any gun, by federal law. In only 5 states there is no legal age limits to possess a gun. I don't know that possess and own are considered the same thing.
0 Replies
 
USAFHokie80
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 08:12 am
Their constitutional right to protect themselves? That is the job of their parents. No, I do NOT thin kids should be able to own handguns or use them outside the presence of a licensed adult. It is just asking for trouble.

It's far more likely allowing this would lead to more school shootings. A kid's brain is not developmentally able to form cohesive abstract thought until about 15 or 16 years of age. They can't be expected to know the consequences of shooting someone.

And suppose the police had come to your house when you and your little friend were packing... If a person (child included) lays hand on a gun under duress in the presence of an officer, he'll most likely be shot. Is that a chance you're willing to take?

I can believe you want to teach them how to shoot a gun, and provide them one, but you would refuse to teach them to speak and spell correctly.

I think it's a good idea that you don't have children.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 09:04 am
littlek wrote:
Omsig, read up.

Quote:
It's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to own any gun, by federal law.

Because I have nothing to do with any children,
and it has been a very long time since I was one,
I have found no reason to read up on it.

It is OBVIOUS that the federal government
has no authority to enact such a statute.
I don 't know what the jurisdictional predicate is
( probably another abuse of the interstate commerce clause ).
I expect the Roberts USSC to enforce the 2nd Amendment
( based upon statements that the Justices have altready made ),
voiding anti-gun laws ( which are fundamentally unAmerican and unconstitutional )
and returning America to the freedom that we had until around the mid 1900s, in most places.

I am aghast that people believe that if u r too young,
then u have to let anyone murder u if he feels like it.
Enforced defenselessness is deeply unAmerican.


Quote:

In only 5 states there is no legal age limits to possess a gun.

That represents a perverted philosophy of legally enforced helplessness
that is very offensive to basic American liberty and to the philosophy thereof.
It is as if to imply
that children do not get murdered.

Historically, we know that thay are not even safe from their own parents.
( Jeff Rothenberg, who tried to burn his little boy, David, to death,
Andrea Yates, Joel Steinberg, etc, etc. )

( It is the silent, unspoken mind set of collectivist liberals
that THE MORE LOCKS and
HEAVY CHAINS THE CITIZEN IS FORCED TO WEAR,
THE BETTER OFF HE AND EVERYONE ELSE WILL BE,
as long as government does not stop adding more and more chains. )






Quote:

I don't know that possess and own are considered the same thing.

If u borrow your friend 's car,
u possess it until u give it back to him
but u do not OWN it.

Got the idea now ?

David
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 09:25 am
littlek wrote:
Omsig, read up.

It's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to own any gun, by federal law. In only 5 states there is no legal age limits to possess a gun. I don't know that possess and own are considered the same thing.


If true, that's a bad law. What happens if you parents die when you are little? Does the government get to take away all their guns? Bad, bad law.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 10 Aug, 2007 09:41 am
USAFHokie80 wrote:



Quote:
Their constitutional right to protect themselves?

Yes; a very fundamental right,
supported in the Bill of Rights by the 2nd Amendment, the 5th Amendment
the 9th Amendment, the 10th Amendment,
and by the 14th Amendment.






Quote:
That is the job of their parents.

Can u cite us to any authority
in support of your point of vu ?
or is that only your personal opinion of what is NICE ?

Can u remember being a child ?

Tho its been many decades,
I can remember back to my 3rd birthday,
and some of the time leading up to it.
I remember, very distinctly, that I was alone
for long periods of time on many days.
When going to school,
I ALWAYS travelled alone.

I saw my parents many hours later.
I had peace of mind, with my .38 revolver
for defensive purposes; I never neeeded it,
in that no emergency ever arose.
We lived in a very peaceful neighborhood.



Quote:
No, I do NOT thin kids should be able to own handguns or use them
outside the presence of a licensed adult. It is just asking for trouble.

What thay are ABLE to do
is a very differenct issue than what the law requires.
We were ABLE to make our own guns
( the area was full of juvenile amateur gunsmiths, of varying degrees of quality ),
tho we had plenty of commerically manufactered guns
( Colt, Smith & Wesson, et al ).
We did it to pass the time, because it was FUN.

Is there any person, of any age,
who is not ABLE to get marijuana or heroin,
if he puts his mind to getting it and persevers ??




Quote:
It's far more likely allowing this would lead to more school shootings.
A kid's brain is not developmentally able to form cohesive abstract
thought until about 15 or 16 years of age.
They can't be expected to know the consequences of shooting someone.

What NONSENSE !!!
Don 't u remember being a kid ?
Were u really ignorant of that ?

I can 't believe that u were.

We were all well armed,
and nothing ever went rong,
the same as if we were doing carpentry together,
we did not smack each other with hammers,
because we were not malicious.
( Other people ARE malicious; murderers come in all ages. )



Quote:
And suppose the police had come to your house when you and your little friend were packing...
If a person (child included) lays hand on a gun under duress in the presence of an officer, he'll most likely be shot.
Is that a chance you're willing to take?

OF COURSE.
Just don 't aim guns at the police,
nor anyone else, unless your well being requires defense.

I have had the police arrive at my house in NY.
I never felt a need to point any gun at them.





Quote:
I can believe you want to teach them how to shoot a gun,
and provide them one, but you would refuse to teach them to speak
and spell correctly.

I don 't have the energy at the moment
to argue the benefits of fonetic spelling,
but is there something rong with how I SPEAK ?





Quote:

I think it's a good idea that you don't have children.

So your thinking is that if thay existed
then thay might get killed, and thereby get hurled into non-existence
( where thay are now )
so it is better that thay do not exist ??

Did I get that right ?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » HANDS-ON MANDATORY FIREARMS TRAINING IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS ?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 12/04/2021 at 05:42:25