427
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rooskie91@discuss.online 37 points 10 months ago

I know you're not referring to hunting rifles, but it is very common to give those as gifts to teenagers when they are old enough to get a hunting license. In some places that's 12 years old.

My parents also made me take a course on gun safety tho....

And they wouldn't let me use it unless it was with them....

So this lady definitely still deserves her sentence. Also, no kid needs and AR or a pistol.

[-] 520@kbin.social 32 points 10 months ago

Some of that stuff you mentioned needs to be mandatory IMO. I'm talking about gun safety lessons for all firearm owners.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

It's the pro-gun community that insists they shouldn't be. They'll literally send you death threats for trying.

[-] 520@kbin.social 2 points 10 months ago

Ok?

It's absolutely moronic that we need licenses to drive but not to own and operate firearms.

[-] PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

I just thought it was important to note why this kind of thing doesn't already exist.

[-] 520@kbin.social 0 points 10 months ago

Just say that the lessons will be given by the NRA at a price and they'd probably lose most of their institutional backing pretty quickly. Money talks to republicans.

[-] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 10 months ago
[-] 520@kbin.social 1 points 10 months ago

Exactly. Only difference would be essentially making basic safety courses mandatory.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

The NRA is already the largest gun safety education organization in the USA. Their hunter's safety education programs are basically ubiquitous across the USA wherever people go to get their first hunting license.

[-] Narauko@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Gun safety should be a mandatory class in education. Probably a multi-stage class starting with an age appropriate class in Elementary school, a more advanced class in Middle school to demystify and take some of the taboo cool factor out, and again in High school. Range time should be incorporated in High school, and maybe Middle school. We all know abstinence only education doesn't work.

[-] spiffy_spaceman@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago

My dad is a gun collector, so I was around them my entire life, but gun safety was also part of my entire life. We understood what they were and what they could do. So if my friends ever said "can we see your dad's guns?" It was always "no."

[-] GONADS125@feddit.de 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That's good, and I can relate to your experience growing up respecting firearms, but children should simply not be trusted to have access.

There have been many experiments in which children find a weapon and the parents who claimed their children knew better were horrified to see them handle the staged weapon.

Children simply don't have the logical portion of the brain developed. Even in teenagers, their amygdala (emotionality, anger, fear response) is nearly fully developed, yet their prefrontal cortext (executive control, rational thinking, emotional regulation, thinking of future consequences) is still severely underdeveloped. [1]

In fact, the prefrontal cortext isn't fully developed until our mid 20s, and possibly a few years longer for those of us with ADHD. [2] This is why teenagers display heightened risk-taking, are bad at controlling their emotions, restraining themselves, and thinking about the consequences of their actions.

Under supervision is one thing, but unsupervised access to a firearm is a patently bad idea. With that said, I did have access to a firearm (.22) and I acted responsibly as a minor (only used it for target practice). But I absolutely should not have had access to it.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 4 points 10 months ago

In some places that’s 12 years old.

Whyyy? Hunting is a dangerous sport that is 100% not required that utilizes lethal weaponry. If a parent wants to take their kids hunting, they should be 100% responsible for them including having the license and owning the firearms. 16 seems like the bare minimum to allow children to engage with weaponry, but probably older to own.

[-] krellor@kbin.social 24 points 10 months ago

There's a huge difference between giving a child unrestricted access to a firearm, and taking them sport shooting in a controlled environment. I've helped with beginner shooting courses for kids in scouts. There is an adult with each kid, one round loaded at a time, etc. You can similarly control the environment hunting by using blinds, etc, where you oversee the use of the firearm, loading of round etc.

I'm not big into shooting, but from a safety perspective there are ways to hunt and sport shoot with kids in a very controlled way.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Keep in mind, a person earlier in this convo said some kids get one gifted when they get a hunting license, which can be as early as 12, so you're basically attempting to change the entire claim being made... Clearly, in many situations, kids ARE ending up with a firearm under their sole ownership.

[-] theyoyomaster@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

Having a .22 under the Christmas tree and having unsupervised access to it are two very different things. I know plenty of people who got rifles for their younger children but keep them in a safe with their own guns until the kids are older.

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago

Being gifted a gun is not being given unrestricted access to that weapon. I was gifted a shotgun at 15 and I never saw it unless my dad was present. It stayed in his safe until we went shooting together. When I moved out and showed him my own safe was ready, I got it from him and that was that.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

What I'm saying is you're complaining about something no one is asking for. No one has even mentioned doing anything negative towards people who responsibly teach their kids about guns.

[-] krellor@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I gave my kid a BB gun, but it stays in a safe. I also gave my son a pocket knife for camping that stays in my night stand unless we are camping.

You can give something to a kid without letting them have unsupervised access. I gave my kids steam decks, but limit their screen time.

I agree the original comment lacked specificity. You could gift a gun in a responsible or irresponsible way, and I've seen both.

Edit: and the comment about gifting a rifle also mentioned that in their personal situation they had to have a parent to use it.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Indeed, and that's exactly what they'd be evaluated on. Responsible gun ownership should be the only kind of ownership protected under the 2a. Responsible gun ownership should not include sole ownership by those that cannot even join the military.

Maaaybe under odd edge cases where a kid gets to be their own guardian, but eh.

this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2024
427 points (98.0% liked)

News

23684 readers
4402 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS