NRA Parodies Itself

Here is the deal,

If you are a big time gun advocate, a lot of the ideas that he talks about may seem within reason. If you are anti-gun or have no/limited exposure to guns, many of his ideas seem insane. The funny thing is that variants of his ideas have been implemented (on a more voluntary basis) for decades now.

For example, requiring that schools teach students to shoot. That may seem nuts, but I learned how to shoot at a state university during my freshman year. It was a club sport, but it was attached to a class, and the shooting range was on campus underneath the basketball court. I am pretty sure that there are other state universities that offer shooting courses as a PE credit.

Also, I hear anti-gunners always talking about accidental shootings. A gun safety curriculum in the schools might not be a bad idea. Like they say "if it saves just one life..."

Regarding the government subsidizing gun and ammunition purchases, they already did that. There is a government sponsored program called the Civilian Marksmanship Program which allows civilians that meet certain qualifications to purchase surplus rifles (and IIRC, ammunition) from the government. These were WW1-Korean War era weapons (e.g. M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, etc).

Regarding gun required zones, some cities have implemented something similar (but constitutionally unenforceable). Kennesaw(sp?), GA had (has?) a law on the books requiring every household own a firearm. IIRC, Switzerland had a long standing policy mandating that every able bodied man have his government issued assault rifle at home, in case they needed to rapidly mobilize the militia for national defense.

Requiring that one MUST carry a firearm in certain areas (gun required zones) will probably never happen, because it would be an admission by the government of their complete inability to protect its citizens in certain places. Then again, there is a decent argument to be made that supposed "gun free zones" have been completely ineffectual.

Personally, I don't like the idea of the government REQUIRING me to do anything, even stuff I would do anyway.

 

I'm not sure how I would feel about "Gun Required Zones." It's like when I was in college looking for an apartment. I visited one that had free home alarms. That made me wonder why they needed alarms. Clearly there must've been high levels of criminal activity, and thus I chose another apartment. Similarly, if there were "Gun Required Zones" what would that mean? Would it be so dangerous a place that it would be assumed you'd need protection to enter? That's just a little scary to think about.

A shooting class wouldn't be bad. They still do those at summer camps. Heck, if schools can teach kids to swim during P.E. as a way to protect them from drowning, it makes sense to teach them about gun safety as well.

-Matt

 

Well, I promise not to shoot you - will that do for now? :smile:

Hmmm - Do any offer a major in that field? :smile:

Johann

 

It sounds like a clever advertising gimmick. Once word gets out that all units are alarmed, would-be burglars may opt for easier targets.

My house was burglarized about a year ago. My home video surveillance system is a big reason the burglars were caught, along with some old fashioned police work of course. One detective asked me if I had signs indicating video in use. I said I didn't as the cameras are not concealed. He suggested I get signs. He said no one looks up to see the cameras and a sign will deter 90% of would-be burglars. I now have signs posted on my property indicating video in use.