It is good to see that they are advising at least some of the many points that the NRA offers. Some great information on storage can also be found here.
There is simply no excuse for an unsecured gun around children.
By Miguel.GFZ
Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.
7 thoughts on “Finally Moms Demand is following the NRA’s lead on Gun Safety.”
Comments are closed.
“There is simply no excuse for an unsecured gun around children.”
I think this statement needs more nuance. If we define “children” as those who have not yet reached 16 years of age, I think it is overly restrictive. If we use the “Moms'” definition of 18, or 21, or 25, or whatever fits their narrative, I know it is overly restrictive. Recently we have seen instances where children under 16 had access to firearms and successfully used them to protect their lives and the lives of their parents and siblings. I don’t feel smart enough to tell others when their children are old enough to have access to guns, and I sure don’t feel the government or the “Moms” are smart enough. I would be interested in your personal feelings on when children are old enough for access (without direct parental supervision and control), since my own experience is far too distant to have meaning in today’s world. Thanks for your blog.
Actually the range of age for children is defined as those 12 and under.
Miguel, I don’t disagree with your definition, but I wish you had stated it earlier. There is much confusion on the definition of a “child”. A simple Google search finds that “The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child defines a child as everyone under 18”. It also finds the Farley Dictionary stating “a person 14 years and under. A “child” should be distinguished from a “minor” who is anyone under 18 in almost all states.” while Wikipedia says “Biologically, a child is generally anyone between birth and puberty.” We won’t even start on the definitions of a child used in those “scientific studies on Gun Violence”. Words are important and we don’t want to let the “Moms” control the dialog. Again, thanks for your thought-provoking (and other-provoking) blog. It is on my daily reading list.
By the time my son was nine years old, he was shooting rifle and revolver (22). He had been to the range with me many times. He knew the 4 rules by heart. He knew the I would take him shooting any time he wanted. He could be trusted not to mess with the household firearms. The first lesson I taught him was “guns are not like the movies. Put on these ear protectors. Look at that milk jug full of water over there, down range. Now look what this 44 magnum does to it.” The enormous bang and the complete disintegration of the milk jug was a powerful lesson. I told him, “this is what a gun can do. They are not toys, and must always be handled with the utmost care.” Safes are great, and so are gun locks– but there is no substitute for proper safety training at an early age.
PS: this is why the demanding moms’ hatred of gun safety classes is so galling. Ignorance of basic firearm safety is a crime.
The fight we’re having in Tennessee right now is people who say “There is simply no excuse for an unsecured gun around children” are following that up with “and anyone who leaves a firearm unsecured to our liking around children should go to prison regardless of whether anything bad happens or not.”
I did mention that it is our responsibility. You know I am the last person that wants government mandates, but at the same time the way to avoid busy bodies from stepping in is to make sure there is an almost fanatical culture of safety on our side.