Kids and guns at the NRA

Click here for more information.

I like it that the kids are being taught to "index" so early. It really wasn't something I had drilled in to me until the military, though I admittedly didn't learn to shoot with weapons with pistol grips, mainly rifles and shotguns. I have no problem with either the NRA, Colt, S&W, or any other qualified organization, business, or individual teaching children safety with firearms, but if a parent chooses to own firearms that parent is primarily responsible for teaching safety to their children.
I don't care that the NRA is funded by gun manufacturers, it makes business sense. I am, however, taking not of which manufacturers are choosing to continue to manufacture in states that have assaulted the 2nd Amendment of late, and will not reward them with my continued business.

I personally allowed my 7 year old to shoot a rifle for the first time not to long ago. We talked safety first, dry fired, and finally live fired. Had she not listened while talking safety, or not obeyed the rules while dry firing I would have sent her in an not allowed her to shoot. My wife was a similar age when her father taught her. We've thought about buying her a .22 (and keep it secured in my cabinet in my room not in a corner), but I'll probably wait a few years till her little sister is better able to be taught and more importantly follow THE RULES.

I'm not a big fan of pink weapons or for that matter anything other than wood finish,chrome, blue, or camo firearms as I think they are too easy to mistake for toys. But, while I was growing up incredibly real looking toy guns were very common and I had plenty.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

I never said anything of the sort, and thats hardly what this is about. This is about creating another generation of brand-loyal gun consumers. Look again. Its all sponsored by crimson trace and other manufacturers.

So guns are good but capitalism is bad now???

I’m not following you so far, brother. I must have missed the mark.

If you want something to be mad at the NRA about I can share THIS THREAD. As far as your outrage here, I don't see it. I think they are smart to pursue this new market at this time. What’s the problem?

reply to post by seabag

So guns are good but capitalism is bad now???

I dont recall saying that, though, I find it funny how people pick and choose what they consider to be 'good' conditioning.

I’m not following you so far, brother. I must have missed the mark.

Thats ok, it seems a lot are missing my point. Perhaps I didnt illustrate it very well. These were publicity shots that were released by the NRA. Do you really think, in the public eye, this makes the NRA, or gun owning parents, look good?

If you want something to be mad at the NRA about I can share THIS THREAD. As far as your outrage here, I don't see it. I think they are smart to pursue this new market at this time. What’s the problem?

I saw that, and I find it highly disgusting.

I am not outraged, just to be clear. I find it to be highly irresponsible, and I think it makes guns owning parents look bad. In short, I think the NRA is discrediting themselves, from the inside.

A couple of points so you guys can stop arguing over nothing.

1 The 'Guns' the kids are holding aren't guns they're trainers.

2 The NRA provides men, women, and children with gun safety and shooting technique courses.

3 The fact that the NRA attracts individuals as well as weapons manufacturers should come as no surprise to anyone. You're not going to scare pro gun people by pointing out that both manufacturers and individual members benefit from the existence of the NRA.

4 I learned to handle, shoot, and maintain firearms when I was roughly 8 years old. Stigmatizing guns is not going to do anything but create both unhealthy fear, and dangerously ignorant curiosity. When my kids reach the age I deem proper they too will learn as I did.

Originally posted by projectvxn
A couple of points so you guys can stop arguing over nothing.

1 The 'Guns' the kids are holding aren't guns they're trainers.

2 The NRA provides men, women, and children with gun safety and shooting technique courses.

3 The fact that the NRA attracts individuals as well ad weapons manufacturers should come as no surprise to anyone. You're not going to scare pro gun people by pointing out that both manufacturers and individual members benefit from the existence of the NRA.

4 I learned to handle, shoot, and maintain firearms when I was roughly 8 years old. Stigmatizing guns is not going to do anything but create both unhealthy fear, and dangerously ignorant curiosity. When my kids reach the age I deem proper they too will learn as I did.

1)Correct. But that wasnt the point.

2)Yes, they do. They are also a lobbying group with a vested interest in creating gun enthusiasts at the youngest age possible.

3)I wasnt try to 'scare' anyone. As I have already said, I am a pro-second amendment gun owner.

4)Did you learn it from the NRA? Its not about stigmatizing guns. Its about the culture that surrounds them.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
The amount of money that the NRA receives from gun manufacturers disagrees. A great article on the subject:
www.businessinsider.com...

They are nothing more than the political arm of gun manufacturers.

Maybe you would be better represented by a gunowners association of some sort that didn't accept money or membership from the corporates?

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
The amount of money that the NRA receives from gun manufacturers disagrees. A great article on the subject:
www.businessinsider.com...

They are nothing more than the political arm of gun manufacturers.

Maybe you would be better represented by a gunowners association of some sort that didn't accept money or membership from the corporates?

edit on 6-5-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

Id feel a heck of a lot better about that, yes.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


The NRA does have a vested interest in keeping Americans young and old interested in their rights.

While I am not a member I support what they do.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

The NRA does have a vested interest in keeping Americans young and old interested in their rights.

While I am not a member I support what they do.

I dont necessarily agree, but, then again, we dont have to agree. I have seen the NRA, in my lifetime, go from a true pro-rights group to a corporate interest group concerned, first and foremost, with money.

Its fine for people to not agree with it. Im just not sure why, for some, to disagree means all civility goes out the window.

Firearm safety and training is actually a very valuable educational tool for children to learn. Some may find it unsuitable for children to handle firearms. But respect for guns early gives people a strong foundation to not turn into the blathering buffoons I argue with about gun control on a nearly daily basis.

In 6th grade in my school we had a hunters safety course in our school. (I had already been using firearms for several years prior and often went hunting with my father) It was a very valuable class and I wish they would offer that sort of teaching to our students today.

The NRA while being no more than a lobby group for unlimited firearm access to all (including the deranged, insane, criminal, and substance dependent) has the right idea about safety lessons for youth.

Education is the best way to prevent future problems.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

I dont recall saying that, though, I find it funny how people pick and choose what they consider to be 'good' conditioning.

I quoted the part I took acceptation to. You went from defending what sounded like an aversion to teaching kids the proper way to keep and use a gun to sounding like you were bent out of shape about companies like crimson trace taking advantage of the situation (invited by NRA no doubt).

Don’t get your knickers in a pinch. We’re usually on the same page. I’m just wondering where you’re coming from tonight!

Crimson was taking advantage of the capitalist system. What better time and audience??? They're trying to make money and make payroll, dude!

reply to post by captaintyinknots


I hope I haven't come across as uncivilized in this debate. I found much of what was being said in the preceding couple of pages to be irrelevant to an otherwise worthy discussion.

I am attempting to have that discussion now.

To address your point on the NRA:

Money is grease. Without it, the support of manufacturers, and an aggressive PR campaign we can kiss our gun rights goodbye to the pro disarmament crowd.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

I dont necessarily agree, but, then again, we dont have to agree. I have seen the NRA, in my lifetime, go from a true pro-rights group to a corporate interest group concerned, first and foremost, with money.

That’s true but who is fighting harder for our rights??

Name the group and I’ll pay dues!

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

Maybe you would be better represented by a gunowners association of some sort that didn't accept money or membership from the corporates?

Who are the corporates you speak of?

GE? If so I could share the displeasure.

It sucks that people are upset about companies like Crimson, Browning, Colt etc making money at pro-gun events and employing people.

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
they are not some corporate company pushing a product

They kind of are though. That's what the OP is pointing out.

They have a board of directors who have direct links to gun manufacturers. They're pushing an ideology on children who are too young to be ideological.

It's like big tobacco did years ago, 'get 'em while they're young.'

reply to post by seabag

I quoted the part I took acceptation to. You went from defending what sounded like an aversion to teaching kids the proper way to keep and use a gun to sounding like you were bent out of shape about companies like crimson trace taking advantage of the situation (invited by NRA no doubt).

While this is the second time I have been accused of it, I have not said one word about it being a bad kid to teach kids gun safety.

The comment on sponsorship was an attempt to point out that this is not some 'club', but rather a group with corporate interests. Seems to me, like I said, that people pick and choose. Everyone is all up in arms about corporate interests when it comes to certain groups having influence in washington, but not others.

Don’t get your knickers in a pinch. We’re usually on the same page. I’m just wondering where you’re coming from tonight!

I honestly just laughed out loud when I read that. You always have a way of breaking it down, seabag, that makes me smile. Like I said in my other post, I just dont think I am doing a great job of illustrating the point I am trying to make.

Crimson was taking advantage of the capitalist system. What better time and audience??? They're trying to make money and make payroll, dude!

I get that, I just dont think that corporations are the ones who should be teaching our children.

reply to post by projectvxn

I hope I haven't come across as uncivilized in this debate. I found much of what was being said in the preceding couple of pages to be irrelevant to an otherwise worthy discussion.

Not at all, and I apologize for being standoffish (and thanks to seabag for making me check myself a bit). The truth is, there is a small group of posters following me around on these boards of late, and its put me a bit on the defensive (and I cant seem to get any help with it from those that can). So again, I apologize. I have a TON of respect for you as a poster. And I agree, most of what was dragged in was not relevant, whatsoever.

I am attempting to have that discussion now. To address your point on the NRA: Money is grease. Without it, the support of manufacturers, and an aggressive PR campaign we can kiss our gun rights goodbye to the pro disarmament crowd.

Let me ask you this, though: Since we know that manufacturers have a grip on the NRA, doesnt it serve to reason that at least SOME of the worry about gun confiscations and the such could be manufactured, by the NRA and gun companies, to up sales?