Date sent: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 13:30:18 -0700 To: email@example.com From: James Rogers <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Re: Re: Fear of Guns Vs. Fear of No Guns Send reply to: email@example.com
> In turn, I agree with your point as well. A child should always be
> supervised around any dangerous equipment, whether it is a hot stove or a
> gun. I was not trying to imply that a five year old is capable of handling
> a gun responsibly on their own without supervision. Generally speaking, a
> five year old should never be allowed to handle a firearm except in
> strictly controlled environments. However, you can teach them enough that
> when unexpected situations occur (perhaps due to some other parents
> irresponsibility), there is a high probability that they will respond
> A big part of the problem is that some parents are not fit to supervise.
Guns should get the hot stove, snake and middle of the busy street treatment from parents until a child is at least approaching puberty and preferably until they're competent to be trusted with a car (there is an NRA couple in New England who are now taking their THREE YEAR OLD to a target range to practice shoot). .
> -James Rogers
> At 02:33 PM 6/7/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >I agree with your point, but I still would not want to be around a five year
> >old with a loaded gun. Even with good training, I don't want to risk my
> >life on a five year old acting responsibly.
> >From: James Rogers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >> This is hardly a useful characterization. A five year old child can most
> >> certainly be educated (so that they are not ignorant) and taught why it is
> >> important to be careful when dealing with firearms. We do it with
> >> everything else, why not firearms?