Weapons, Cowboy at School in US from early age?

I don't wish to belabor the point or in any way derail this thread but I think I should make it clear that the farmers I knew did not feed nor allow to graze for the purpose of later harvesting easy dinners. Feed was made available only during particularly harsh winters (almost always deer, since elk rarely come to lower, human populated areas) when deer became visibly close to starvation. Grazing was never a serious problem, at least where I lived in Western Colorado, as it was quite rare to see much more than a dozen at a time in any one field during milder weather in which deer could graze. Numbers only grew when larger numbers grew desperate from harsh weather. Lower down many deer resorted to even attempting to survive eating sagebrush.

Life is hard more often than not and Nature, while not cruel, simply doesn't care.

Now I may not have been raised by parents whom owned firearms however, I'll be the first one to admit that I did infarct play quite a few violent computer and console vid us along with aforementioned PS2 was counterspy games. The ones that I played to death where the Unreal Tournament series. Later on my parents gave my sister and myself a PS2 and one of the game that they gave

I'll also state clearly that my parents especially my father but also my mother taught my younger sister and I the importance a skill known as polite disagreement. I myself have several mental and physical health conditions of which the most predominate is a visceral field disability known as nistamus. Although I had an uncle who lived in Maryland and owned a rifle which he trolleybus for shutting seethe tried to train me however I refused on the grounds that I didn'el safe.

Over the past few decades I've decided that I never want to own and or handle a firearm of any kind however, I did go to an all boys sleep away summer camp outside of Hawley ,Pa called camp Watonka where they did have rifler y as n activity I never went to the range though. On the literally flip side of the coin I was at the archery range literally every spare minute, I got so good with memberizeing the commands that the councilors would issue too us that pretty much every camp consult er would let me manage the archery range

Over the past few decades I've decided that I never want to own and or handle a firearm of any kind...

I have no problem with that. Your choice. Your privilege as a free citizen... But now if you thought "Since I do not want to own a firearm, therefore everyone else shouldn't either, and start advocating that, or voting for gun control laws" ... Now we have a problem! I say, let the law (plenty on the books) take care of those that 'misuse' firearms, knifes, bow and arrow, blowgun, shovels, baseball bats, karate, etc. There are laws against murder for example... Let freedom ring otherwise and leave the rest of us alone. It 'seems' so simple, yet here we are with 'Bertha knows better than you by golly' syndome.

taught my younger sister and I the importance a skill known as polite disagreement

Rose colored glasses? As most all of us know... Not going to work with a gang-banger, high on drugs, or many other criminals. A rapist, or burglar isn't going to care about your 'polite' disagreements.... Unless he/she/whatever is stopped by a deterrence (looking down the barrel of 12 gauge) or in the extreme, lethal force, that so called person is going to try to do whatever is planned. Simple as that -- no matter how you (or I) was brought up. There are bad people in the world. Deal with it. Or put it another way, putting up to a sign that says 'gun free zone' or 'no burglar allowed in this area' by a school or on a house isn't going to stop 'em. Probably encourage them in fact.

I'd like to say that while I may disagree with several of the other optimisms stated in this threa. I'll stand by the assertion that we all have the right to have our own opinions. In my previous post I sated that I myself have mental health issues that make me not want to own a weapon that carries the potential to kill another human being because I'd feel liked Had contributed to the further spread of gun violence that plagues our nation.

I'd rather sacrifice my own life for those I love than shoot another man or women because I think that would show my family and community that I'm a honorable gentle man.

So friendlysalmon8827....no knives in your house but plastic or butter knives? No hammers?

@enorbet: "Down here in the South," where winters are historically much more mild, some people do use feeding stations to attract game for hunting. Now, to me, that's not "honorable hunting." But, game wardens have also set up camera-equipped stations with fake deer which were filled with bullet-holes by people driving by with guns and then they keep right on driving. So it goes. Some people are just jerks.

Many game animals become so plentiful around here that organized hunting periods are specifically set up to reduce their numbers. But you must account for, and take, everything that you take. The fall quotas are set based on animal census taken during the summer and vary from year to year. I myself am not a hunter and have no interest in participating, but I know many responsible hunters who are.

Unfortunately, sundialsvcs, I suppose that's not only true but common in milder, and more populated areas and yes, some people are just jerks. However I think you have multiple times expressed the antidote and that is proper training. I am against any government controlling the possession of firearms but insisting on proper behaviour, care and treatment is reasonable and in line with ownership of other deadly devices. We accept that one must demonstrate capability and knowledge of laws to gain a license to drive and even differentiate between types of vehicles, so I don't have a fundamental problem with requirements for demonstrating such for firearm ownership.

I doubt that would ever be 100% effective, but I'm confident it would at the very least be grounds for accountability and reduce such "jerkiness".

Originally Posted by Xeratul Hi, It is new in US. More weapons during education. teacher allowed to have weapons. Weapons, Cowboy at School in US from early age? This scene that they see handguns from early age is earliest introduction to american criminality. Russia vs US, none is better. They forgot human values.

Every country has issues. The USA has guns, Russia jails journalists, suppresses the population and protesters, and invades nearby countries, and foments wars around the world. No nation is perfect.

Originally Posted by enorbet We accept that one must demonstrate capability and knowledge of laws to gain a license to drive and even differentiate between types of vehicles, so I don't have a fundamental problem with requirements for demonstrating such for firearm ownership. I doubt that would ever be 100% effective, but I'm confident it would at the very least be grounds for accountability and reduce such "jerkiness".

Fundamentally, @enorbet, I agree with you on this issue. However, I think that it is important to observe from, say, the WikiPedia article on 'the Bill of Rights' – and also this one, that "even 'twenty-six (more or less) words' can be profoundly contentious." Even back when they were originally written. (And of course: "every single day since.")

Thinking back to the "political process" which actually lead to this particular piece of vellum, I often think of this phrase: "Damned if you do, and damned if you don't."

More than two centuries later, it seems that we are still here. But you know, "Article V" is still included. Ready to "Amend the Constitution." Ready to take up once again those same controversies and 'try to do better than they did.' Any volunteers?

The original authors were writing of course in their century, not ours. They had recently fought and won what was essentially a guerilla war against what was then "the World's Mightiest Military Empire.™" When those British soldiers were sent marching into what were then-colonial towns as the Revolution was just breaking out, their first military objectives were utterly clear . . . but they focused their military-trained efforts on nice, military community arsenals.

But I still find it very remarkable that, in all this time, the Constitution has only been "Amended" twenty-seven times.

And(!!!) that the latest Amendment to be ratified is actually paragraph #2 of the original "Bill of Rights" document! The first State ratified this Amendment in 1789. It entered legal effect(??) in 1992, amid controversy. The latest in 2016. (Four States to go.)

Your task – should you choose to accept it (and actually, many have ...) is to: "Amend the Second Amendment." Perhaps it needs to be done. Good luck.

Hmmm... well we already have exceptions as in convicted felons, so there is some precedent that didn't require amending amendments. I wouldn't like to see it extended to blind, deaf, dumb nor crazy (well maybe dumb <jk> ) but basic capability and understanding seems reasonable. You know like understanding it's unlawful to shoot a jerk in the face for calling your Mama a rapscallion carpetbagger 'n such

I don't know how to interpret your last comment, @enorbet. It's babble to me.

I was basically saying that I generally agree that "if we have driver's licenses for cars, shouldn't we have shooter's licenses for guns?" The problem is that this would require a Constitutional amendment. (The folks who wrote the first one lived, well, "more than 200 years ago," and had a very different set of concerns.) However, maybe that is exactly what should be done. (Even though the actual chances of doing it are exactly zero.)

How about if we try something else? "In the state of X, if you take and complete a gun training course offered by the state, the state will offer you a 15% discount on your gun purchase." Yes, the state of X is paying public money. But what it is getting in return is the idea that more of the gun-bearers in the state have some idea of what they are doing. And, accidents involving firearms will perhaps occur less often. I'd vote for that ...

And, say: "Gun shop, we'll give you a discount on your taxes and fees if you offer gun safety courses meeting a certain standard to your customers." And, even more if you offer a discount to your customers who successfully complete your course.

Yeah, we are incentivizing certain desirable behaviors. Maybe, "money talks."

if you take and complete a gun training course offered by the state, the state will offer you a 15% discount on your gun purchase."

Slippery slope. Now you have the state having control of who can and can't have tools around and of course they will continue to add conditions until only them or a select few can 'legally' have these useful tools around. Of course they'll get around to adding fees/stamps/tax etc. anyway. No, simpler to just let things be, or even reverse a lot of the gun control laws. Not guilty until proven guilty. Ie. Until you misuse your firearm, axe, shovel, knife, whatever, does the 'law' come into play. Only way to keep our personal freedoms. Life is a risk regardless and I'd rather err on side of freedom than be held hostage by the criminals (who don't care about training/laws/etc.) and the government. Really quite simple.

I dunno guys... most gun shops I've known have seemed quite responsible. It seems to me that Gun Shows are more of the "hit 'n run" kinda sale with little or no checking and rarely any concern for offering a training course or even a range with guides around.

@ sundialsvcs - Discount might be good but it might be better to offer trigger locks free with purchase, sort of like seat belts.

I, too, am wary of getting know nothing government officials involved much since it doesn't seem many actually care much about public health and safety. Maybe I'm mistaken but I always figured motorcycle helmet laws were a great example of the government looking out for enterprise (insurance companies), not actual riders, and certainly having no benefit to anyone else.

...rarely any concern for offering a training course or even a range with guides around.

That SHOULD be up to the individual buying the revolver. HIS/HER/Whatever responsibly. Not the seller. And from where I sit there are courses offered. All you have to do is take advantage of them -- IF you want. Again personal responsibility at play here. Don't 'push' more regulation and such... Gun shows have to follow the rules and call it in on a new gun purchase and fill out the paperwork -- just like other seller. Also a valid instate drivers license has to be shown. Otherwise, the gun will need to be sent to the FFL in your state. It's really no difference that going down to the store and buying a new or used gun. No worries there other than the media hype and the paranoid.

What's a trigger lock? Toss them and of course don't use 'em. Useless. When seconds count.... "Man, the wolf in the sheep again, where's the key ma. And find me some bullets for this gun" ... Not how it works. Need to grab the loaded gun standing in the corner or over the door, or ... and go out and get the job done so to speak... Without the hassle.

WTF? rclark? Pushing regulation? Do you not understand the definition of "offer"?

I even made to comparison with seat belts. You can choose not to buckle up and in some circumstances that's certainly convenient as well as safe but under others you're just being contrary to not use them. Same with trigger locks. I don't know how often you're faced with wolves and home invasions but unless you're a hermit, you likely regularly have kids and unschooled individuals near your guns, possibly even when you're not around. You could choose to hang a rifle up high enough that it's less likely a child could get to it and those need not have trigger locks. Those under your pillow or on a nightstand or in a kid level drawer or shoe box prolly should. What's the big deal?