Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Friday August 29 2014, @08:33PM   Printer-friendly
from the but-not-with-an-uzi dept.

The accidental death of an instructor at an Arizona shooting range, killed while teaching a 9-year-old girl to fire a fully automatic Uzi, has touched off a debate among those who enjoy and teach the use of firearms: What’s the proper way to teach children about guns? The key, is training says gun instructor Butch Jensen. A gun is a tool, and like any tool — be it a circular saw or a kitchen knife — requires proper instruction. “It was clear that she was a beginner, and you don’t start a beginner in that type of firearm,” says Jensen, who watched a widely circulated video of the fatal lesson. “If you want to learn how to run Indy cars, you don’t start at Indy.” Blake Carrington, who serves in the Air Force, has taught his 10-year-old daughter to shoot a .22 rifle. “I personally would never give my child a fully automatic weapon,” says Carrington. “I feel terrible for that little girl having to live with that.”

Shooting instructors said in interviews that in some cases, a 9-year-old may be able to handle an Uzi, even though it has a tricky recoil and can fire hundreds of rounds per minute. The child would have to weigh enough to handle the recoil and have some experience with guns. The parent and instructor would have to jointly determine that the child is mature and skilled enough to operate the firearm safely. Tom, who practiced with an M1 Garand Rifle, says he shoots for sport and to exercise his 2nd Amendment rights. “I don’t think you should keep kids away from firearms. This shouldn’t keep people from taking their kids to the range.” Still, Tom says he could not fathom why adults allowed the 9-year-old girl to shoot an Uzi. “I don’t know what they were thinking. My personal opinion is someone under 15 years of age playing with a submachine weapon is not a good idea.”

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @05:26AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30 2014, @05:26AM (#87478)

    If you annoy people with them, then you tip public opinion against them and empower authoritarian govts to remove those them.

    Am I reading you correctly? You are arguing that people shouldn't use their rights because it might piss off someone?
    Have you considered that attitude is what has enabled british politicians to massacre your rights in the first place?
    Just look at those ridiculous ASBOs you guys freakin love. ASBOs are the very embodiment of it being OK to strip someone of their rights if they are annoying.
    Your problem in the UK isn't with people exercising their right to be obnoxious, it is with the public not having the balls to fight the authoritarians in the first place.
    There will always be authoritarians, don't make give them any more power by making excuses for them too.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 0) by UpnAtom on Saturday August 30 2014, @10:39PM

    by UpnAtom (4626) on Saturday August 30 2014, @10:39PM (#87670)

    Ever considered that maybe you don't know so much about what is going on here?

    ASBOs have been abolished.

    You are arguing that people shouldn't use their rights because it might piss off someone?

    Correction, I am arguing that pissing people off whilst "exercising" rights ie when they're not under attack is self-defeating. It achieves nothing and sets public opinion against such rights.

    Not many things are as simple as that, but this is.