Do you think gun safety should be taught in schools?

[LisaR]

It looks like Missouri schools are going to be teaching gun safety to 1st graders. This is such an important topic and it is obvious that many children are not learning about gun safety at home. Are schools responsible for teaching every topic that isn't being addressed at home? There aren't enough hours in the day to cover the core topics so do they really have time to fit in gun safety? Is this something you would want your child learning about in school? Will teaching this to 1st graders really make any impact?


http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...ety/-/1719386/20989962/-/cahjfuz/-/index.html

 

[kamik86]

Didn't look at the article yet but if we are talking that they are going to teach "Guns are dangerous and you should never play with them. Always assume they are loaded and tell an adult if you see a gun that isn't locked up." Then I think that is fine.

If they are going to teach anything that involves touching a gun then no... these are first graders.

As for the time thing. This has been something that has been happening for years. schools now have to teach about gun safety and about sex ed and about not bullying others and not doing drugs and balancing a checkbook and all kinds of other life skills. If they belong in schools or not is a big debate. It would be great if all parents taught these things but if you know they don't do you want to risk letting many students not know them?

Its not even just the things for teaching schools have become the place for anything where you need to reach most children. Breakfast programs to ensure they eat. Excercise programs to ensure they move. Health checks to ensure they are being cared for, counceling for mental health etc. Schools are being burdened with alot because its the only place we know we will hit all but a small handful of students.

 

[FireDancer]

I think it depends on the part of the country. I know of at least one school district in central Ohio that has hunting and shooting clubs. The schools all close on the first day of both riffle and bow season and they have sanctioned outings.

In a district like that it might make more sense to have a more in depth class even in first grade because guns are very present in homes. In the Cleveland suburb I live in teaching them about the dangers and that if you find one tell and adult and don't touch it would suffice.

 

[luvsJack]

I think it depends on the part of the country. I know of at least one school district in central Ohio that has hunting and shooting clubs. The schools all close on the first day of both riffle and bow season and they have sanctioned outings.

In a district like that it might make more sense to have a more in depth class even in first grade because guns are very present in homes. In the Cleveland suburb I live in teaching them about the dangers and that if you find one tell and adult and don't touch it would suffice.

I agree.

Here hunting is something at least one person in almost every household does, so almost every home has a gun. And many kids that age go hunting with a parent so an in depth class could be very valuable.

 

[Acklander]

I have no problem with it, as long as its optional, but I think it should be like drivers Ed - where those who take it, finance it (or maybe get a sponsorship from a gun store or something) I dont think funds should be diverted from core classes to pay for it.

 

[HM]

No.

 

[ZephyrHawk]

I would not have a problem with kids being taught gun safety. I would not have a problem with kids being taught how to safely use guns, either. However, much like sex ed, there's only so much a school can do. It is important for parents to stress these issues at home, even if their kids are getting nominally educated at school.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Absolutely. And yes, IIRC this is planned to be one of those "guns are dangerous, don't touch" kind of classes.

 

[luvsJack]

I have no problem with it, as long as its optional, but I think it should be like drivers Ed - where those who take it, finance it (or maybe get a sponsorship from a gun store or something) I dont think funds should be diverted from core classes to pay for it.

You have to pay for driver's ed in school?

Our high school offers it just like any other elective. You don't have to take it but you don't have to pay for it if you do.

 

[NHdisneylover]

I can see gun safety being a legitimate "healthy and safety" topic that is well within the norm of what schools teach, right along with nutrition, anti smoking/alcohol and drug programs, stop drop and roll fire safety, etc.

I agree with Firedancer that it makes sense to access the area and how likely children in any particular district are to encounter fire arms and use that sort of information to decide how much time to give to such a program.

I am concerned that the program being taught is put out by the NRA--given their known lobbying and how much of a political force they are--however what they say in the article makes is seem like reasonable program, and not meant to push anyone's opinions in any way.

I disagree with the Kansas City blogger mentioned. BECAUSE we do not own guns and my children are not normally around them, that made them (IMO) less likely to know what to do IF they did see one (or even less likely to realize it was a real thing and not a toy), so they probably really needed it. It reminded me of parents who say that they do not believe in sex before marriage so their child should not be taught a sex e class. In real life, real kids encounter issues and things their parents do not agree with--and they need knowledge and tools to be able to handle it when they do.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

You have to pay for driver's ed in school?

Our high school offers it just like any other elective. You don't have to take it but you don't have to pay for it if you do.

Our school does not even HAVE drivers Ed

Oh, and this program would be minimal expense - think 30 minutes with be whole class.

 

[Planogirl]

Our school does not even HAVE drivers Ed

Oh, and this program would be minimal expense - think 30 minutes with be whole class.

Ours doesn't have it either. You have to pay an outside firm a lot of money or the parent has to follow a certain program and teach the kid.

I wouldn't have a problem with this. Like stranger danger lessons and such things, this could be valuable.

 

[wiigirl]

I have no problem with it, as long as its optional, but I think it should be like drivers Ed - where those who take it, finance it (or maybe get a sponsorship from a gun store or something) I dont think funds should be diverted from core classes to pay for it.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

I can see gun safety being a legitimate "healthy and safety" topic that is well within the norm of what schools teach, right along with nutrition, anti smoking/alcohol and drug programs, stop drop and roll fire safety, etc.

I agree with Firedancer that it makes sense to access the area and how likely children in any particular district are to encounter fire arms and use that sort of information to decide how much time to give to such a program.

I am concerned that the program being taught is put out by the NRA--given their known lobbying and how much of a political force they are--however what they say in the article makes is seem like reasonable program, and not meant to push anyone's opinions in any way.

I disagree with the Kansas City blogger mentioned. BECAUSE we do not own guns and my children are not normally around them, that made them (IMO) less likely to know what to do IF they did see one (or even less likely to realize it was a real thing and not a to), so they probably really needed it. It reminded me of parents who say that they do not believe in sex before marriage so their child should not be taught a sex e class. In real life, real kids encounter issues and things their parents do not agree with--and they need knowledge and tools to be able to handle it when they do.

Oddly enough, politics is really a very small part of what NRA does. It consumes a lot of headlines and $$$$. But, the number of people they have involved in "other things" dwarfs the political effort.

BTW, I agree with your assessment regarding non gunowners' children. Most will have no idea what to do should they encounter one.

 

[DopeyDame]

I think it's a great idea. And I don't think it should be limited to areas where hunting and guns are commonplace. In fact, the generic suburban 6 year old who hasn't encountered a gun before is probably FAR more in need of a "don't touch, find an adult" lesson than a kid who grows up in a hunting household.

 

[mamacatnv]

I think the overall message of the program,
"Our 'Eddie Eagle' children's safety program has taught over 25 million young children that if they see a gun, they should do four things: "Stop. Don't touch. Leave the area. Tell an adult," he said.

I have no issue with the message but I would be concerned about the adults ie teachers, admin and volunteer parents interjecting their own personal opinions regarding guns.

 

[Southernmiss]

I do think this could be a worthwhile 30 minute activity in school once a year, maybe done by police officers with the dare program.

We are not a gun owning family. However, dhs brother was showing dhs mom how to shoot safely in her field while we were visiting. I encouraged our 4 kids to go learn gun safety from their uncle. It's a life lesson we would not have been able to share with them otherwise.

 

[The Mystery Machine]

It looks like Missouri schools are going to be teaching gun safety to 1st graders. This is such an important topic and it is obvious that many children are not learning about gun safety at home. Are schools responsible for teaching every topic that isn't being addressed at home? There aren't enough hours in the day to cover the core topics so do they really have time to fit in gun safety? Is this something you would want your child learning about in school? Will teaching this to 1st graders really make any impact?


http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/...ety/-/1719386/20989962/-/cahjfuz/-/index.html

NO!

Heck our district dropped the DARE program 2 yrs ago because it was deemed ineffective.

 

[erin1715]

Teachers do NOT get paid enough for this crap. Being a teacher is like missions work anymore...

 

[okeydokey]

I think it easily fits into a health and safety curriculum and I see value in it, but it seems every time you turn around teachers are expected to add more things to their curriculum. I don't know how they accomplish what they already have to.