• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Children and Guns

Banned? Another example of a pro gun perons first line of defense when faced with a serious issue about guns is to whinge that "they" want to ban guns. The issue here would be gun safety not banning guns.
The OP talked about banning people from his house not guns. He said that anybody visiting his house who touches his guns who isn't supposed to isn't allowed back. I pointed out that if somebody visiting his house plays with his guns when he isn't looking and gets somebody killed, that not allowing them back will not bring back the person that got killed.

Yet the pro gun group always make the claim that it their right to defend themselves in cases of home invasion by criminals. Which is an argument in direct opposition to your emphasise.
It is possible to have guns securely locked up and at the same time quickly and easily accessible to authorized personnel should the need to use them arise.
 
If you have both guns and kids, you need to teach your kids about guns from a young age. Such has been the custom in my family for generations.

Typical first-intro... when my son was 3, I had him watch while I blew a 2L jug of water apart with a 12 gauge. I then explained that the gun had no brain and didn't care, it would destroy anything in front of it when the trigger was pulled, so the operator had better be using HIS brain. Showed the jug and graphically explained what his head would look like from such a blast and told him he was to touch no guns in the house without my permission and under my supervision.

Even so, at that age I kept all guns not under my direct control locked in the gun cabinet. I always had a loaded firearm on hand for emergencies but it stayed on my person or in my sight. The gun cabinet had a speed dial and could be opened in less than 2 seconds, if I felt the need for something heavier than a pistol.

To remove the "allure of the taboo" he was told at age 4 he could handle and fire any gun I had that he could handle under my supervision any time, all he had to do was ask. First I made him memorize the Four Rules of Safe Gunhandling... this is like a mantra in my family, we look askance at any child that can't recite all 4 on command by age 10.

I treated power tools much the same.

Another important aspect is moral teaching. Children must be taught the value of human life and the enormity of taking it. They have to be made to understand that there is no save game, no restart, no take-back once you pull that trigger. As we are religious folk, I emphasized that sending a human soul into eternity is one of the most serious things that can be done, and should never be done except by terrible necessity.

Hunting is a good way to teach this, and once a child has seen a rabbit or deer field-dressed and skinned that dividing line between "alive" and 'dead' becomes crystal clear.

By the time my son was 12 he'd shot every gun I owned at some point, under careful supervision. He could recite the Four Rules in his sleep and adhered to them in practice, and well understood the life-and-death nature of the thing.

By age 13 I required and expected a high degree of maturity from him in all things: school and homework, chores and responsibilities, personal accountability and self-motivation. I allowed him to operate my truck on the farm (private property) so he'd learn young how to handle it, along with some heavier equipment like front-end loaders and backhoes. At 14 I trusted him enough to give him the combo to the gun safe. At 15 he was my armed backup when we had a trespasser problem, not an uncommon event, and I let him keep a loaded shotgun in his room.

I was also a very involved parent, day-to-day involved, and kept a close watch on his mental condition thru the teenage years for any signs of problems. We talked about any and all issues he was dealing with, even if they seemed trivial to me if it mattered to him, we talked about it.


Now he has a concealed carry permit and several guns of his own.

We've had zero injuries or deaths from accidental or negligent discharge, and zero murders, in our family line as far back as I know about, which is about 100 years and five generations.
 
The OP talked about banning people from his house not guns. He said that anybody visiting his house who touches his guns who isn't supposed to isn't allowed back. I pointed out that if somebody visiting his house plays with his guns when he isn't looking and gets somebody killed, that not allowing them back will not bring back the person that got killed.
.
Ok, apology then, I took it another way.

It is possible to have guns securely locked up and at the same time quickly and easily accessible to authorized personnel should the need to use them arise
No it's not. Do you assume a house breaking criminal who enters with a gun with the obvious intention of killing any who try to stop them will politely wait while the owner unlocks one cupboard for his gun and then another for his bullets and the load the gun?

You do know that safety is never leave a loaded gun in a locker?
 
One of the issues brought up all too often by the side that doesn't like guns is the issue of children and guns. If you keep guns in the house and you've got children you don't want your children to have access to your guns. You also don't want any of your children's friends to have access to your guns when they're over. Even if you don't have children you might have friends and/or relatives that have children that might come over and bring their children to your house. In short, you don't want any children in your house to have access to any guns you keep in your house. The way I see it, this shouldn't be much of an issue provided certain common sensical safety procedures are followed. Keep all guns in your house locked up or otherwise inaccessible. After all, do you keep medicine in your house? How do you know children won't get into your medicine and eat and drink it? Hopefully you keep your medicine locked up or otherwise inaccessible. Keeping guns in the house is no different than keeping medicine in the house in regards to children.

This changes everything.
 
So you keep your guns locked up in a safe. That's good but not everybody does that.

Because if you keep guns in your home for protection it can be counterproductive to have them locked up. My workaround has been if I am not home the gun is on me or locked up. If I am at home the gun is on me or in a quick open safe. It is a safe with a combination lock that can be opened quickly by touch even in the dark. That combined with educating my kids seems to work for my family.
 
No it's not. Do you assume a house breaking criminal who enters with a gun with the obvious intention of killing any who try to stop them will politely wait while the owner unlocks one cupboard for his gun and then another for his bullets and the load the gun?

You do know that safety is never leave a loaded gun in a locker?
They make safes designed for storing defensive firearms that can be easily and quickly opened in less than a second using a button combo. People keep loaded handguns in such safes all the time.
 
And again you need to back your idea up and not just rely upon circumstantial evidence or what your neighbors think.
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/19/health/child-gun-violence-study/index.html


or is it a case of you think that many childrens lives are irrelevant?

That stat is misleading because it is lumping together all gun related child deaths, if we are discussing the benefits of locking guns up then that would only account for a portion of those deaths.

You complain about my argument as being anecdotal, yet use an appeal to emotion. Statistically there are far worse problems that cause more deaths that could be addressed. The fact that many want to focus on such issues as this shows that it is less about saving lives and more about pushing an agenda. We could instantly save 1,000s of lives by merely lowering the speed limit to 35 and yet you want to pass laws merely to save a few hundred.
 
They make safes designed for storing defensive firearms that can be easily and quickly opened in less than a second using a button combo. People keep loaded handguns in such safes all the time.

Again, you do know that safety is never leave a loaded gun any where, including safes?

And would you car to share the statistics on the likeliness of a thief breaking into a house with the intent of murdering the occupants compared to the number of child related gun deaths? Which do you think is the most likely to happen?
 
That stat is misleading because it is lumping together all gun related child deaths, if we are discussing the benefits of locking guns up then that would only account for a portion of those deaths.

You complain about my argument as being anecdotal, yet use an appeal to emotion. Statistically there are far worse problems that cause more deaths that could be addressed. The fact that many want to focus on such issues as this shows that it is less about saving lives and more about pushing an agenda. We could instantly save 1,000s of lives by merely lowering the speed limit to 35 and yet you want to pass laws merely to save a few hundred.

I would suggest that that stat relates directly to people not being safe with guns and allowing unsupervised access to one.

That there are other areas where death occurs is irrelevant. Should we ignore a childs death because car accidents happens more often? Each has there own importance. Is not your concern over speed nothing more than an agenda as well?
 
Again, you do know that safety is never leave a loaded gun any where, including safes?

And would you car to share the statistics on the likeliness of a thief breaking into a house with the intent of murdering the occupants compared to the number of child related gun deaths? Which do you think is the most likely to happen?

Sure. According to the BJS, over 1 million home invasions happen each year with over 25% of those resulting in death or injury to a resident.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf

According to CDC, unintentional firearm deaths of children age 17 and under has averaged less than 100 per year for the last ten years. Since we don't know how many of those deaths were from guns that were illegally possessed, we don't know what kind of reduction a law about storing guns would be seen.

https://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe
 
One of the issues brought up all too often by the side that doesn't like guns is the issue of children and guns. If you keep guns in the house and you've got children you don't want your children to have access to your guns. You also don't want any of your children's friends to have access to your guns when they're over. Even if you don't have children you might have friends and/or relatives that have children that might come over and bring their children to your house. In short, you don't want any children in your house to have access to any guns you keep in your house. The way I see it, this shouldn't be much of an issue provided certain common sensical safety procedures are followed. Keep all guns in your house locked up or otherwise inaccessible. After all, do you keep medicine in your house? How do you know children won't get into your medicine and eat and drink it? Hopefully you keep your medicine locked up or otherwise inaccessible. Keeping guns in the house is no different than keeping medicine in the house in regards to children.

What makes you think that in most homes, they arent locked up or stored safely?
 
I would suggest that that stat relates directly to people not being safe with guns and allowing unsupervised access to one.

That there are other areas where death occurs is irrelevant. Should we ignore a childs death because car accidents happens more often? Each has there own importance. Is not your concern over speed nothing more than an agenda as well?

That stat doesn't directly translate to anything regarding unsupervised access.

If your concern is a child's death, shouldn't the leading cause be the main focus in protecting children? Focusing on an issue that accounts for a small of minority deaths while no attention is paid to the vast majority of issues to lead to the deaths of children is the point. It shows that you care less about the welfare of the children and more about your personal agenda against gun owners. Do I care about the deaths of those children? Of course, but I don't pretend that government can magically make a utopia where everyone lives a happy life. If you are going to argue about limiting peoples freedom and more governmental control in a person's life, you are going to need more than an appeal to emotion to convince me a law is necessary. The communities that I have lived in, it is completely a non issue. If it is such a problem where you live push for local and state laws.
 
They make safes designed for storing defensive firearms that can be easily and quickly opened in less than a second using a button combo. People keep loaded handguns in such safes all the time.

If you think that 'getting to a safe' and opening it (less than a second?...reaching, getting combo right when terrified or rushing, unlocking, grabbing gun, bringing it on target, pulling trigger) is better than having one right on hand is safer, you are out of your mind. And why should we, if we have no kids, have one second less advantage when that's all it takes in a life or death situation?

Those that truly plan and prepare for safety in the home dont depend on marginal or minimal percentages....nothing ever works out as planned and no scenario ever goes down exactly as imagined. You dont leave things to chance...you maximize your chances and you have alternatives.
 
It shows that you care less about the welfare of the children and more about your personal agenda against gun owners. Do I care about the deaths of those children? Of course, but I don't pretend that government can magically make a utopia where everyone lives a happy life. If you are going to argue about limiting peoples freedom and more governmental control in a person's life, you are going to need more than an appeal to emotion to convince me a law is necessary. The communities that I have lived in, it is completely a non issue. If it is such a problem where you live push for local and state laws.

Are you writing that it's wrong to place your own and your family's safety ahead of the 'general welfare of children'?
 
Again, you do know that safety is never leave a loaded gun any where, including safes?
Where did you hear that from?

And would you car to share the statistics on the likeliness of a thief breaking into a house with the intent of murdering the occupants compared to the number of child related gun deaths? Which do you think is the most likely to happen?
In houses where guns are properly stored and made inaccessible child related gun deaths are zero.
 
What makes you think that in most homes, they arent locked up or stored safely?
I don't know how many homes with guns have the guns locked up and safely stored but I do know that in some homes with children guns aren't locked up and safely stored.
 
I don't know how many homes with guns have the guns locked up and safely stored but I do know that in some homes with children guns aren't locked up and safely stored.

And so then why would you suggest forcing something on people that might not be necessary?

Responsible people lock up their guns around kids. Making a law for the same thing has no effect on irresponsible people...nobody is going house to house checking on storage.

OTOH, if we have to register firearms, that enables local municipalities to do exactly that more easily...
 
Are you writing that it's wrong to place your own and your family's safety ahead of the 'general welfare of children'?

Where are you getting that? Are you Cathy Newman?
 
If you think that 'getting to a safe' and opening it (less than a second?...reaching, getting combo right when terrified or rushing, unlocking, grabbing gun, bringing it on target, pulling trigger) is better than having one right on hand is safer, you are out of your mind. And why should we, if we have no kids, have one second less advantage when that's all it takes in a life or death situation?
Im not sure but I think they do make fingerprint safes which open by fingerprint so all you have to do is press your finger against the surface and if your finger print matches it will open so you don't have to fumble with a dial or a combo. If they don't have such safes they should come out with them. People talk about smart guns, they should make smart safes.

And if you have no kids than the only reason I see to sometimes keep guns locked up is to safeguard against theft when you're away from home or if you ever do have kids visit your house (children of friends, relatives, ect.)

While I would be against having any law that would require guns to be locked up, its nonetheless something I would strongly emphasize if children are present.
 
And so then why would you suggest forcing something on people that might not be necessary?

Responsible people lock up their guns around kids. Making a law for the same thing has no effect on irresponsible people...nobody is going house to house checking on storage.

OTOH, if we have to register firearms, that enables local municipalities to do exactly that more easily...

As I said in post #45 I wouldn't want any laws that would require guns to be locked up but I would strongly encourage that when children are around.
 
Im not sure but I think they do make fingerprint safes which open by fingerprint so all you have to do is press your finger against the surface and if your finger print matches it will open so you don't have to fumble with a dial or a combo. If they don't have such safes they should come out with them. People talk about smart guns, they should make smart safes.

And if you have no kids than the only reason I see to sometimes keep guns locked up is to safeguard against theft when you're away from home or if you ever do have kids visit your house (children of friends, relatives, ect.)

While I would be against having any law that would require guns to be locked up, its nonetheless something I would strongly emphasize if children are present.

Yes and when you are shaking and may not even have a light on...that's just great. Most safes are also usually not out in the open...they are in closets, cupboards, etc. So you have to get into that.

You cannot forget...or maybe dont know, the realities that come with a life or death situation. The physical and mental realities.

Safes are a good idea for people with kids because they have to weigh the risks. Those risks should not be forced by law on the rest of us. I am glad that you feel the same.

The guns I do lock up are locked up to protect my property (those guns) from theft but not all mine are locked up, they dont serve their purpose that way.
 
As I said in post #45 I wouldn't want any laws that would require guns to be locked up but I would strongly encourage that when children are around.

That's great.

However I have never heard of any 2A supporters that disagree with that.
 
You cannot forget...or maybe dont know, the realities that come with a life or death situation. The physical and mental realities.
I've been in life or death situations. Not with guns but on the road.
 
I've been in life or death situations. Not with guns but on the road.

And? How were your fine motor skills during and after? Your perceptions of events as they occurred and after?
 
Back
Top Bottom