I belong to an organization in Arizona called the Arizona Citizens Defense League. It’s a good organization; pure volunteer that fights for gun and associated rights in Arizona.
Recently I’ve gotten a couple notices from them about a bill stuck in the Arizona legislature: AZ HB 2448.
It basically requires age-appropriate firearm instruction starting in grade 6 and going through high school. There are some exceptions and provisos and such but the concept is that almost every kind will have at least some exposure to firearms.
Table of Contents
Is that a good idea?
Overall, I tend to think so. More information would tend to reduce the chances of accidents. If a kid picks up a gun he found, at least it won’t be the first time he’s ever seen one. He may have some inkling of how it works, which means an idea of how to make it not work. In other words, not shooting it accidentally.
Potential downsides.
The devil is, as they say, in the details. The bill does not require a certified firearms instructor, for example. If a sixth grader is being handed a blue gun that doesn’t even hold bullets, well, that’s probably OK.
On the other hand, while I know there are teachers who are just as pro Second Amendment as I am, there are also some who equate a firearm with a rattlesnake and want just as much to do with one as the other. I don’t really care about their personal views as much as that attitude comes from those who know absolutely nothing about guns except that they hate them. Not really who I want teaching kids about firearm safety.
The upside.
Hopefully a reduction in accidental shootings. Getting tired of articles like this one. Maybe lesson one would be: “There’s no such thing as a prop gun.”
Sadly, Alec Baldwin is too old for this but maybe someone else will learn something useful.
The opposition.
I”ve seen a couple different sets of people against this, for wildly different reasons.
First, there are the usual suspects that would prefer that all guns vanish into thin air. Except those guns in the hands of police and military, of course. Then the same people will protest the police; I digress.
It’s funny, because the people that don’t want kids to learn about kids tend to be all for sex education. To help prevent disease transmission and accidental pregnancy. It’s almost like they can see that education prevents accidents but they’re so blinded by their hatred and fear of guns they can’t see the clear parallel.
The other objection I’ve heard is that the schools will turn this into an anti-gun indoctrination opportunity. I can see that possibility, or at least that dream of some teachers and administrators. I would think giving the responsibility to administering this program and finding instructors to AZ Fish & Game or some other entity would fix that.
What about curriculum?
I’m about to speculate wildly about what I think the kids should be taught. There’s a comments section below where you’re more than welcome to disagree with me.
Middle school. I think blue guns are perfectly adequate here. This is not a time for stance, sight picture, sight alignment, and trigger control. We’ere still at the Four Rules of Gun Safety stage, here. Primarily the one about not pointing a gun at people.
High school. At this point, I’d like to see some real guns. Time to start teaching people how to check the guns to make sure they’re unloaded. And still don’t point them at people. I think both long guns and handguns should be involved here. Including AR platforms, which I’m sure will drive some people bat crap crazy. Nevertheless, it’s the most popular rifle in America, which means it’s one of the more likely to get found.
At some point I would like to see some live fire. I can see the logistics of that being difficult. I think it’s important, though, that the consequences of a gun shot are shown. Saying, “don’t point this at someone,” is great. Showing what happens when a bullet striking a can, watermelon, pumpkin, soda bottle, or what have you will have more impact.
This does not technically require the student to fire a round; the instructor could do so. Under no circumstances should a kid be required to fire a gun if they don’t want to. Or their parents don’t want them to. We’re trying to reduce accidents, here, not usurp parental rights.
Once we get into live fire type things I would require a certified firearms instructor. No excuse for having someone who hasn’t demonstrated their skills and abilities involved here.
Conclusion
Re-reading some of that I see a lot of “perfect world” going on. And I’m pretty sure that there are parents, teachers, and administrators whose heads would explode at some of those ideas. Especially that live fire part.
Still, I like to think of myself as a sensible person. The whole point is to prevent accidents. That’s a clear, beneficial goal that no one can disagree with. It’s up to us to calmly, logically, and rationally point out the benefits of this to those blinded by hatred and fear.
If you live in AZ, contact your Senator about this bill. And take a look at AZCDL. Good organization that does good work. They don’t sell your information or spam you, either.
