ATLANTIC BEACH, Fla. – An 8-year-old girl found a loaded gun on the side of the road this week in Atlantic Beach, her mother told News4Jax. The mom said she, her fiancee and her 8-year-old daughter were walking their dog, Teddy, along 11th Street and East Coast Drive when the girl told them she found a gun in the grass. They called police, who looked at the gun and found that it was loaded. The mom said her daughter was very proud of her discovery, especially after police told her that she might have saved a life.“Thank God she didn’t touch it and told us immediately,” the woman wrote on Facebook. “Please be careful and keep our children safe.”
Source: 8-year-old girl finds loaded gun on side of road, mom says
Damn! If there was a way to “bottle” what this little girl did into a teaching solution for other kids to repeat, I am sure we could implement it in every school. But according to what we hear from Moms Demand (They do it for the kids), Brady, VPC, CSGV, etc, no such program exists.
AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FOR PARENTS The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program was created in 1988 by reading and curriculum specialists, teachers, law enforcement, psychologists and other professionals. The program continues to evolve through the years, but its mission remains the same: teach children what to do if they ever come across a gun.
If your child sees a gun, he/she should:
We encourage you to reinforce these ideas by repeating this message and discussing it with your child.
It is the parent’s responsibility to ensure that guns are stored safely. NRA’s longstanding rule of gun storage is: Store your guns so that they are inaccessible to any unauthorized users, especially children. NRA’s Eddie Eagle Program brochure, “A Parents’ Guide to Gun Safety,” has more information on how parents can keep their children safe.
For more information about the program and additional resources, including a parents’ guide to gun safety, visit eddieeagle.nra.org. For specific questions and inquiries, contact the Eddie Eagle Department at eddieeagle@nrahq.org or 1-800-231 0752
The Eddie Eagle Program: Hated by Gun Control since 1998.
They rather see Dead and Injured Kids than allow an NRA program be successful.
PS: Gun identified as Magnum Research’s Micro Desert Eagle (MSRP: $479).
I’m sure that for $479, the owner of that micro deagle didn’t just drop it an keep walking. Just because it wasn’t reported stolen doesn’t mean it wasn’t a hot gun. Leave it to MDA to imply a law abiding gun owner did this.
FDLE has a searchable database where you can check for lost/stolen fiearms. But only for the state of Florida. I did check and was not there so it was either never reported or it is froom out of state.
And you need to get your ass in Facebook. I’ve been harassing the Brain Collective about the type of gun. Somebody did come with the right answer but you could have helped! (Doing the Guilt Trip thing.)
Not a cheap gun, and glad she DID do the right thing! I’m betting stolen, used in a robbery, then dumped by the perps…
There is another factor in play here when it concerns MDA actually acknowledging the NRA does something right. Consider this scenario:
You are a doctor searching for a cure of some horrible debilitating disease, and you also happen to be a Jew that had family executed in the Holocaust.
Do you allow yourself to use the research performed by Dr. Mengele and the Nazis? Or do you reject it, regardless of any potential benefit, because of its source?
MDA is right there.
No matter how beneficial Eddie Eagle might be, the organization that created the program is (in their mind) the equivalent of Josef Mengele.
Granted, mine is a more extreme example, but is it really that far off the mark?
Wait, so you would advocate not using the research? Because I thought the answer was obvious: use the research, it will help you save lives. As a matter of fact a lot of that research was used to advance medical science to good effect. The Government thought the research was important enough to offer amnesty for the findings to some of the researchers. Not a decision I would have made (I would have performed terminal ballistic testing on them, “let the punishment fit the crime” and all) but there is no doubt that they made progress in the realm of medical science and biological warfare (well, the bits that were valid anyway, there was a lot of their stuff that was pure garbage, like some of the anti-gun “research” today. It was produced not to find truth, but to prop up an ideology). It also provided good foundations for continued ethical research, as an example of what not to do.
Knowledge is knowledge; it is not evil in and of itself, even if it was gained by evil means. If the research was valid, then the conclusions are also valid. Now of course validating the findings will be difficult, since you cannot ethically repeat the experiments, but you can attempt to validate the findings though ethical means. Not using the research means taking longer to figure out what the evil guys already knew, and could cost lives that would otherwise be saved.
Please note that this is an entirely separate argument to the legal concept of “fruit of the poisoned tree”. That is a concept that protects the accused from having their rights violated by the government. It does not apply to scientific inquiry, where truth is truth, no matter how it was found out.
Point is, even if MDA is right about the NRA, Eddie Eagle is correct on how children should handle guns, and has an effective way to deliver that message. Even if they don’t want to use NRA branded material (the equivalent of showing NAZI produced research material to students) the least they could do is repackage the message into a more appropriate brand and distribute that. But we know they will never do that, because they are not actually a safety organization, they are a political organization advocating for government control.
“Wait, so you would advocate not using the research?”
No, Shannon Watts would advocate not using the research.
The messenger is much more important than the message, at least in her simple mind.
Ok yeah, that is definitely the case for the anti-gun crowd. You just wrote your comment in such a way to sound like you agreed with it.