Shooting Range Birthday Party?

[Gumbo4x4]

Yes. REALLY. But then, taking kids to a gun range birthday party is illegal here.

Objections aside, are you really sure it would actually be illegal? I mean, I would assume that anywhere that has guns & gun ranges (and that includes Canada) would have the potential to have this setup.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

But how do you know that any kid your child may be friends with doesn't have a parent with a gun? You know not everyone that owns a gun is looking to be a gansta right? Some people actually use them for sport.

I'm not the poster you're quoting, but yes, we ask the parents of any child before our children go over to their home to play whether there are guns in the house. If the answer is yes (and it has only been "yes" twice), we ask for the child to come to our home or to meet somewhere else to get together. It has never been an issue, and we assume the parents are not lying to us when we ask. We explain that it has nothing to do with our trust of the parents, but that it's a personal value, and both gun owners were completely understanding and our daughter is friends with both girls. They merely play at our home or at a third-party location.

Ok, so, do you ask people if they own guns before you hang out with them? How exactly do you know if they own guns or not? Are your kids allowed to hang out with kids whose parents are police officers?

Yes, my wife and I ask. We don't think people who own guns are bad people, but guns are not compatible with our value system, just as some parents eschew having their children visit homes where there is alcohol (using that as an example of something else that is legal and usually enjoyed responsibly but to which some people have an objection on principle). We don't know any police officers or members of the military and our children have not made friends with any children of police officers or of people in the military as of yet, so that is an interesting question that we will likely address if and when the time comes. My candid reaction, however, is that no, we would still not allow our children to be in their home at least initially but if we felt comfortable with the parents, we might reassess in the future.

Do you let your kids go to pool parties? Just like a gun party, a pool party could go tragically wrong if the adults involved aren't extraordinarily careful. My 3 year old is invited to a pool party in a few weeks, and I told DH that he has to come with me - 20 preschoolers in a pool is a dangerous situation unless there are enough adults. I want to be able to socialize at least a little bit with the other moms, so all 3 of us will go so that at least one adult is watching DS at all times. That's the type of surveillance I would expect at a gun party, too.

For my wife and me, it is a values-based choice. We simply do not like guns and they do not fit within our life or our family's values. A pool, while certainly dangerous, is not inherently designed to kill. Also, to be fair, we do ask whether the parents take appropriate precautions if they are going to swim at a friend's pool, but we will generally suggest going to our country club to swim, instead, as we know the lifeguards well and are more comfortable with them. Since nearly all of DD's friends belong as well, that usually works for all involved.

Pools can be very dangerous. There are far fewer pool owners than gun owners in the U.S., yet our children are far more likely to die in a pool than from a gunshot. So, with that in mind I don't find it unusual that anyone would object to taking their kid to either a shooting range party or a pool party.

But, I also equate refusing to allow their children to associate with someone who'd host a gun party to be pretty much equal to refusing to allow their children to associate with anyone who owns a pool. And that just sounds weird

Again, it's just a values thing for me and my family. I don't think gun-owners are bad people and I know that most use their guns responsibly. Honestly, yes I do wish there were fewer guns and more restrictions on them, but that is not the law of the land and I accept that. As a pacifist, however, I find them incompatible with my values so rather than insist they be removed from the world, I choose to remove them from my life.

And yes, we speak to our kids about guns, that they are not bad but that they are very dangerous, and to never play with one if they find it. When they are older, perhaps even as teenagers if they show responsibility and competency, they will make their own value decisions about guns and may choose to use them. But for the time being, I do not want my children playing in a home with a gun.

 

[tiffjoy]

I'm not the poster you're quoting, but yes, we ask the parents of any child before our children go over to their home to play whether there are guns in the house. If the answer is yes (and it has only been "yes" twice), we ask for the child to come to our home or to meet somewhere else to get together. It has never been an issue, and we assume the parents are not lying to us when we ask. We explain that it has nothing to do with our trust of the parents, but that it's a personal value, and both gun owners were completely understanding and our daughter is friends with both girls. They merely play at our home or at a third-party location.

Yes, my wife and I ask. We don't think people who own guns are bad people, but guns are not compatible with our value system, just as some parents eschew having their children visit homes where there is alcohol (using that as an example of something else that is legal and usually enjoyed responsibly but to which some people have an objection on principle). We don't know any police officers or members of the military and our children have not made friends with any children of police officers or of people in the military as of yet, so that is an interesting question that we will likely address if and when the time comes. My candid reaction, however, is that no, we would still not allow our children to be in their home at least initially but if we felt comfortable with the parents, we might reassess in the future.

For my wife and me, it is a values-based choice. We simply do not like guns and they do not fit within our life or our family's values. A pool, while certainly dangerous, is not inherently designed to kill. Also, to be fair, we do ask whether the parents take appropriate precautions if they are going to swim at a friend's pool, but we will generally suggest going to our country club to swim, instead, as we know the lifeguards well and are more comfortable with them. Since nearly all of DD's friends belong as well, that usually works for all involved.

Again, it's just a values thing for me and my family. I don't think gun-owners are bad people and I know that most use their guns responsibly. Honestly, yes I do wish there were fewer guns and more restrictions on them, but that is not the law of the land and I accept that. As a pacifist, however, I find them incompatible with my values so rather than insist they be removed from the world, I choose to remove them from my life.

And yes, we speak to our kids about guns, that they are not bad but that they are very dangerous, and to never play with one if they find it. When they are older, perhaps even as teenagers if they show responsibility and competency, they will make their own value decisions about guns and may choose to use them. But for the time being, I do not want my children playing in a home with a gun.

I completely understand a viewpoint like yours, and I think you explained it well.

 

[joviroxx]

Yes, my wife and I ask. We don't think people who own guns are bad people, but guns are not compatible with our value system, just as some parents eschew having their children visit homes where there is alcohol (using that as an example of something else that is legal and usually enjoyed responsibly but to which some people have an objection on principle). We don't know any police officers or members of the military and our children have not made friends with any children of police officers or of people in the military as of yet, so that is an interesting question that we will likely address if and when the time comes. My candid reaction, however, is that no, we would still not allow our children to be in their home at least initially but if we felt comfortable with the parents, we might reassess in the future.

.

I can completely understand asking people who will host your children in their homes if they have guns. I can even understand not wanting your children to go to this kind of party. I can even understand your right to not agree with guns.

I just found the comment by the poster that they don't hang out with people who have guns interesting. Not that she doesn't go to their house, but that she doesn't hang out with them. So I wondered if she asked each person she meets if they have guns even if its just to go to a movie.

 

[aprilgail2]

I think my kids wouldn't be attending, nor would they be socializing with any kid whose family vaguely thought this was appropriate.

I totally agree!

But how do you know that any kid your child may be friends with doesn't have a parent with a gun? You know not everyone that owns a gun is looking to be a gansta right? Some people actually use them for sport.

I ASK them-if they have guns then my child did not hang out at their home.

 

[luvmy3]

I'm not the poster you're quoting, but yes, we ask the parents of any child before our children go over to their home to play whether there are guns in the house. If the answer is yes (and it has only been "yes" twice), we ask for the child to come to our home or to meet somewhere else to get together. It has never been an issue, and we assume the parents are not lying to us when we ask. We explain that it has nothing to do with our trust of the parents, but that it's a personal value, and both gun owners were completely understanding and our daughter is friends with both girls. They merely play at our home or at a third-party location.

I got the impression that that poster wouldn't even be giving that child a choice to come to her house, afterall they don't hang out with people who have guns Its pretty clear you have nothing against people who own firearms, that poster clearly does.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

To me the gun vs. pool comparison is apt in some ways, not apt in others.

Guns, pools, and for that matter big dogs, are things that I'd ask about before my young child went to your house. If the answer was yes it wasn't an automatic no, but it meant I'd ask follow up questions, and that I'd probably wait to know you better before I made up my mind about my kid visiting alone.

When my son was younger he had a friend whose parents were very nice but who clearly had different ideas than I did about pool safety. Once she said to me "I'm so glad your son is such a good swimmer, my son is too so I can let them swim while I go inside to make dinner". The boys were 3 at the time. My son was never allowed back at their house unsupervised. Now if she'd said, instead, "We have a high fence with a lock that separates the pool from the rest of the yard, and I can 100% promise you that the boys will never be inside that fence without me, even my 8 year old doesn't go there alone". Then I'd have considered it.

Similarly, if I asked you "do you have guns" and you said "yes but they're in the bedroom, the kids never go there, and besides they took a safety class", then no, never. If you say "my husband is a federal marshall and needs to bring his gun home from work. It is either on his person, or in a locked gun safe, with a trigger lock, in a different room from the ammunition at all times", then I might say yes. Two different situations.

So, in that respect guns and pools are similar.

But as far as birthday parties, I think that guns and pools are very different. If you have a pool party and invite my young child, and I go, I can control the variable I'm most worried about. I can't guarantee that every child at the party will be supervised closely enough, but I can guarantee that my child will be watched every minute.

On the other hand, with guns I'm not so worried about MY kid being unsupervised, I'm worried about someone else's kid being unsupervised. I'm worried about the dad whose "watching his kid" and turns to see what someone behind him is laughing about, taking his eyes off his kid who turns around too with the gun still in his hands. I'm worried about the adult whose so busy watching the shooter next to him, because God forbid they outperform the kid, that he doesn't notice that the kid has passed the gun off hand to hand, rather than putting it down, and there's a mishap and a stray bullet. That's way harder for me to control.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

It's not rhetoric, it's fact. There's a reason your insurance company requires a hefty premium for owning a pool, but not for owning a gun. Statistically speaking, the pool is more dangerous. I'd also be willing to bet that if your extreme attitude is prevalent in your circle of friends that were one of your friends to own a gun, they'd be very unlikely to mention it - even if the topic comes up. There are 80 million gun owners in the U.S. It's extremely unlikely you'll be able to keep your children away from the children of gun owners for their entire adolescence.

Probably one of the best things your kids could do would be to attend such a party - they could even leave before the actual gun handling & shooting begins. But, the safety portion is as important as knowing how to swim, if not more so. I forget the news program (wanna say 20/20) that aired the segment on kids & guns several years back. But, the basic study had children from gun-owning households & children from non gun-owning households. They put these kids in a room with a real (but disabled) gun and no adults. Without exception, none of the children from gun-owning households touched the gun. NONE. Most of them ran from the room calling for an adult. The only kids to pick up the gun (and some pointed it at each other) were from homes of families that did not own guns. Needless to say, it was a REAL eye opener for the parents. They all took the safety course with their children immediately.

Do you have a link? Because the 20/20 show I can find access to refers to a study where 1/2 the kids received Eddie the Eagle type training and 1/2 didn't. Kids were then left alone with a peer in a room with nonfunctional guns. In both groups 65% of the children picked up the gun and pointed at each other. The training had no impact.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobau...protects-kids-from-guns-not-an-eagle-costume/

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video?id=7282623

 

[Gumbo4x4]

I totally agree!



I ASK them-if they have guns then my child did not hang out at their home.

But again, you (and others) choose to host rather than have your children where you know there are guns. That's different than saying those children can't be friends with your kids - which is what was being said back on page 1 or 2 by pp. That was the part that puzzled so many of us.

 

[ZachnElli]

It's not rhetoric, it's fact. There's a reason your insurance company requires a hefty premium for owning a pool, but not for owning a gun. Statistically speaking, the pool is more dangerous. I'd also be willing to bet that if your extreme attitude is prevalent in your circle of friends that were one of your friends to own a gun, they'd be very unlikely to mention it - even if the topic comes up. There are 80 million gun owners in the U.S. It's extremely unlikely you'll be able to keep your children away from the children of gun owners for their entire adolescence.

Probably one of the best things your kids could do would be to attend such a party - they could even leave before the actual gun handling & shooting begins. But, the safety portion is as important as knowing how to swim, if not more so. I forget the news program (wanna say 20/20) that aired the segment on kids & guns several years back. But, the basic study had children from gun-owning households & children from non gun-owning households. They put these kids in a room with a real (but disabled) gun and no adults. Without exception, none of the children from gun-owning households touched the gun. NONE. Most of them ran from the room calling for an adult. The only kids to pick up the gun (and some pointed it at each other) were from homes of families that did not own guns. Needless to say, it was a REAL eye opener for the parents. They all took the safety course with their children immediately.

I have an inground pool and I'm an insurance agent. There is absolutely no extra premium, let alone "extra hefty premium" for having a pool.

 

[joviroxx]

My DH has guns. He is a hunter. We have rifles, shot guns and handguns in my home. My soon to be DS has been taught to shoot and about guns from a very young age. To this day, he and his dad go to the range to shoot. We have never had an issue with him getting into the guns or otherwise. The only small issue we had once was with a friend of his who was tried to get my DS to show them to him. My DS firmly told him, no way.

That said. Im not sure about these parties for 8 year olds. Not because they can't handle them but because of the word PARTY. A party has the connotation of the word fun and play. I don't think , at that age, teaching them that guns are for play and fun is a good idea. But I could be very wrong about how this is presented.

Now, I would be for taking an 8 yr old to the range for the safety lessons they give and to learn to shoot safely. You can have both fun and gun safety and respect, but , IMO, at that age, it needs to be presented in that way. I would love to see how these parties are set up. When guns are mysterious, kids seem to less "interested" in them as a play toy.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Do you have a link? Because the 20/20 show I can find access to refers to a study where 1/2 the kids received Eddie the Eagle type training and 1/2 didn't. Kids were then left alone with a peer in a room with nonfunctional guns. In both groups 65% of the children picked up the gun and pointed at each other. The training had no impact.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobau...protects-kids-from-guns-not-an-eagle-costume/

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/video?id=7282623

That wasn't it, but it had a very similar feel so I feel pretty good it was 20/20. The kids in the one I saw were school age, not toddlers. I would expect toddlers reaction to Eddie The Eagle (or anything similar) to be pretty much non existent. They're too young for it to sink in.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

I have an inground pool and I'm an insurance agent. There is absolutely no extra premium, let alone "extra hefty premium" for having a pool.

There is in my policy.

 

[Mickey'snewestfan]

That wasn't it, but it had a very similar feel so I feel pretty good it was 20/20. The kids in the one I saw were school age, not toddlers. I would expect toddlers reaction to Eddie The Eagle (or anything similar) to be pretty much non existent. They're too young for it to sink in.

It says here: http://articles.mcall.com/1999-05-21/news/3250337_1_gun-safety-eddie-eagle-gun-touch-guns

that the children in that episode were 4 to 8, so not toddlers and including the age of the children in the OP's birthday party scenario.

Here's a related article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/29/AR2006052900755_pf.html

It says that 22% of children living in houses with guns report playing with the guns, and that there isn't a statistical difference between the likelihood of a 5 year old, and a 14 year old accessing a gun that's kept in the house.

 

[ZachnElli]

There is in my policy.

What company? I work in an independent office and we are licensed in all but 2 states. There is a good chance I could look it up. None of the 34 companies we use charge extra for a pool. None. This includes Nationwide, Progressive, Safeco, Travelers, Columbia out of Missouri (but they are in the process dropping all homeowners policies), etc.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

It says here: http://articles.mcall.com/1999-05-21/news/3250337_1_gun-safety-eddie-eagle-gun-touch-guns

that the children in that episode were 4 to 8, so not toddlers and including the age of the children in the OP's birthday party scenario.

Like I said before, the episode we saw came out VERY much in favor of the safety program (almost to the point of being an infomercial). I also seem to recall a much smaller percentage of the kids from all groups touching the guns. Seems like it was less than 1 in 5 overall (IIRC). So, probably not the same episode.

 

[cornflake]

That wasn't it, but it had a very similar feel so I feel pretty good it was 20/20. The kids in the one I saw were school age, not toddlers. I would expect toddlers reaction to Eddie The Eagle (or anything similar) to be pretty much non existent. They're too young for it to sink in.

I saw the same thing, they were like 8? But as I recall, they picked up the guns, relentlessly. The parents predicted they wouldn't, they did.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

What company? I work in an independent office and we are licensed in all but 2 states. There is a good chance I could look it up. None of the 34 companies we use charge extra for a pool. None. This includes Nationwide, Progressive, Safeco, Travelers, Columbia out of Missouri (but they are in the process dropping all homeowners policies), etc.

American National - we actually have Travelers now & DW handled that policy. But, when we signed up for AN, the pool (which we didn't have at that time - we have one now) was a red flag as was certain breeds of dogs (also not an issue for us). Both impacted the liability portion. With the pool, I particularly remember our guy making a big stink about a fence. There were probably some other things, but the pool & dog are the ones I remember.

 

[donaldlovesdaisy]

I have an inground pool and I'm an insurance agent. There is absolutely no extra premium, let alone "extra hefty premium" for having a pool.[/QUOTE

Is there for having guns?

 

[joviroxx]

I have an inground pool and I'm an insurance agent. There is absolutely no extra premium, let alone "extra hefty premium" for having a pool.[/QUOTE

Is there for having guns?

I've never been asked if I had guns by any insurance agent.