Third-graders are selling AR-15 raffle tickets in Missouri - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Toybasher;53142538]Former EMT student chiming in. The AR-15 is no more deadlier than other 5.56 rifles. Through and through injuries are far less deadly than a tumbling/shattering round. Assault Weapon Bans are bullshit in of themselves. [IMG]http://mini14stocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Mini-14s.jpg[/IMG] All the same gun, fire the same round, but some of them are illegal in certain states due to feel good laws passed by people who don't know what they're legislating.[/QUOTE] To those wondering: The laminate rifle is illegal in CA because it has a "thumbhole stock" The mini-14 with ati stock is illegal in CA because of the pistol grip, the telescoping stock, and the extended magazine. The mini-14 tactical is illegal in CA because of the extended magazine. And all of them are illegal in CA if they have a detachable magazine. They're considered "assault weapons" for having these features.

I remember a school down here in Texas had a raffle to win a wheelbarrow full of alcohol for a girls softball team or something. As long as they do the transfer through an FFL dealer whats the problem? Just my opinion.

[QUOTE=catbarf;53142662]How does that follow? I've seen cars raffled off but those aren't 'playthings', and you absolutely have to teach your kids to respect just how dangerous cars can be if mishandled. I don't see how it's undermining teaching children respect for firearms by selling it in a fundraising raffle. They're not selling guns to children so what's the issue?[/QUOTE] Guns are weapons: they're [I]inherently[/I] made to harm, unlike a car or any other everyday object you can think of. My response would've been similar if they had been raffling a dagger or a pole arm instead. It's just seems a bit weird to me.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53142488]What you need is first hand experience. If you happen to be in central Texas, I'd be happy to take you to a gun range and show you what it's about using guns from my collection.[/QUOTE] Ditto to anyone here. Although, you and I could do that too. :v:

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53142639]Implying that children don't have the capacity to be taught respect for it. As someone who sells guns for a living it's pretty easy to tell when someone is not familiar with firearms and someone who is, and that reflection can be seen in their children. Folks who teach their kids to respect firearms at a young age handle them safely, and at least have a rudimentary understanding of how deadly they can be. They're the ones, even with toy guns, who are careful not to point the muzzle at anyone else and keep their fingers off the trigger. I'd argue that video games do a better job of reducing guns to play things, and I'm no Jack Thompson. The kids that come in with their not gun experienced adults can name half the guns in the shop from playing COD, but they're also the ones who pick up the mock pistols I have to display sights and point them at one another making pew noises. The kind of lessons taught to children when it comes to how they perceive firearms is shaped as much by the parents, if not more so, than by any sort of media. The idea that a raffle aimed at adults devalues the seriousness of a firearm is probably one of the least of my concerns when it comes to children learning about the proper handling and respect of firearms.[/QUOTE] They certainly can be taught, but using them as prizes in a raffle comes off as treating them somewhat flippantly. I'm not super bothered by it but I'd rather they use something else as a prize.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;53142698]They certainly can be taught, but using them as prizes in a raffle comes off as treating them somewhat flippantly. I'm not super bothered by it but I'd rather they use something else as a prize.[/QUOTE] How is using it as a prize in a raffle wherein an adult would win it treating them flippantly?

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;53142698]They certainly can be taught, but using them as prizes in a raffle comes off as treating them somewhat flippantly. I'm not super bothered by it but I'd rather they use something else as a prize.[/QUOTE] while i disagree with you, i respect your position.

[QUOTE=Boaraes;53142718]How is using it as a prize in a raffle wherein an adult would win it treating them flippantly?[/QUOTE] A raffle is typically a fun, lighthearted event. Moreover, raffles are pretty much a form of gambling. Having a weapon as the main prize in a gambling event just doesn't quite sit well with me.

I don't see why sport shooting can't be fun and lighthearted.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53142740]I don't see why sport shooting can't be fun and lighthearted.[/QUOTE] Neither do I. Which is why I wasn't talking about shooting at all. I was talking about using a gun as the main prize in a gambling contest.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;53142746]Neither do I. Which is why I wasn't talking about shooting at all. I was talking about using a gun as the main prize in a gambling contest.[/QUOTE] I don't see why a rifle is any less of a fun and lighthearted prize than anything else. Sure, it's not exactly a barrel of monkeys but the damn things aren't evil.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;53142746]Neither do I. Which is why I wasn't talking about shooting at all. I was talking about using a gun as the main prize in a gambling contest.[/QUOTE] I mean when you put it in that light it can seem bad, but imo it's just an incentive for parents/adults in that area to put forth money towards the sports teams being represented, it being a gun is probably just a desirable prize where they're from. Technically yes they're gambling for a shot at it, but it's a lot more lighthearted than what you may be implying On the other end of the spectrum, as someone raised at an early age around guns it's weird to me how much animosity/discomfort people have towards guns, all they require is a degree of respect

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53142753]I don't see why a rifle is any less of a fun and lighthearted gift than anything else. Sure, it's not exactly a barrel of monkeys but the damn things aren't evil.[/QUOTE] Because a gun is a weapon and should be treated as such, not bandied about as fun prizes to be won. Heck, consider catbarf's counterexample of cars as raffle prizes; I'd wager that cars aren't treated seriously enough either considering how many people die in road accidents each year. Maybe you view them as fun and lighthearted gifts: I personally don't think they should be.

[QUOTE=catbarf;53142662] How does that follow? I've seen cars raffled off but those aren't 'playthings', and you absolutely have to teach your kids to respect just how dangerous cars can be if mishandled. I don't see how it's undermining teaching children respect for firearms by selling it in a fundraising raffle. They're not selling guns to children so what's the issue?[/QUOTE] This is a great example because America (and the world) [I]does[/I] have a problem with respecting how dangerous cars can be when mishandled. Teens and young adults (and regular adults, for that matter) drive recklessly, speed, and drunken drive all the time. I remember when I was in highschool none of my wide group of peers respected how dangerous driving could be. And, here's the rub, [B]that was with a mandatory license that was for the express purpose of curbing reckless and unsafe driving.[/B] This is the problem with maintaining guns as a constitutional right. We can't create effective programs for mandatory safety courses, exams, and licenses, which should be a necessity for something as dangerous as a gun.

[QUOTE=Duck M.;53142764]This is a great example because America (and the world) [I]does[/I] have a problem with respecting how dangerous cars can be when mishandled. Teens and young adults (and regular adults, for that matter) drive recklessly, speed, and drunken drive all the time. I remember when I was in highschool none of my wide group of peers respected how dangerous driving could be. And, here's the rub, [B]that was with a mandatory license that was for the express purpose of curbing reckless and unsafe driving.[/B] This is the problem with maintaining guns as a constitutional right. We can't create effective programs for mandatory safety courses, exams, and licenses, which should be a necessity for something as dangerous as a gun.[/QUOTE] You can reintroduce those types of programs back into schools and extra curricular activities, something that was done all the way up until the end of the 80's and is only now being done again at a very limited level in high school trap teams. There was a time, which for most of us was when our parents were in grade school/highschool, kids would bring their .22's to school and shoot them in the schools range. Hell the middle school up the hill from my parents house still has it's .22 range under the gym, which is now used for storage. While I'm not saying we need to go back to that, there should be classes and education for children in schools about firearms considering how prevalent they are in this country.

Is this the same old baby-killer AR-15 crap? I thought handguns were much more dangerous? Not saying the US doesnt have something of a gun problem but isnt it counter productive to focus on one pattern of gun, and a rifle at that? I know the problem is that its really bad timing for something like this, but I just know someone is going to think that because its an ar-15 that its extra bad.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53142776]You can reintroduce those types of programs back into schools and extra curricular activities, something that was done all the way up until the end of the 80's and is only now being done again at a very limited level in high school trap teams. There was a time, which for most of us was when our parents were in grade school/highschool, kids would bring their .22's to school and shoot them in the schools range. Hell the middle school up the hill from my parents house still has it's .22 range under the gym, which is now used for storage. While I'm not saying we need to go back to that, there should be classes and education for children in schools about firearms considering how prevalent they are in this country.[/QUOTE] I'm not even sure the Department of Education would consider to do that, since all they do is slash as much funding to schools as possible. I heard recently in another article they don't even pay a living wage to the teachers in Oklahoma, so much so they need to get another job to pay the bills. But I do agree that children need to be taught more responsibility in the handling of firearms, since they're going to remain part of the landscape for the foreseeable future.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53142776]You can reintroduce those types of programs back into schools and extra curricular activities, something that was done all the way up until the end of the 80's and is only now being done again at a very limited level in high school trap teams. There was a time, which for most of us was when our parents were in grade school/highschool, kids would bring their .22's to school and shoot them in the schools range. Hell the middle school up the hill from my parents house still has it's .22 range under the gym, which is now used for storage. While I'm not saying we need to go back to that, there should be classes and education for children in schools about firearms considering how prevalent they are in this country.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't mind that, in fact my high school did have a range for ROTC, but it still wouldn't solve the problem of the large amounts of Americans out of school already. Besides, going back to cars, I'm sure we can agree anything hypothetically offered in schools for driver education would never be sufficient as a substitute for all driver safety courses and licensing programs. Furthermore, the bigger evident problem is funding. Firearm safety programs and ranges sound hella expensive, and the US is already having tons of problems with funding education. Schools cant afford school supplies, and you expect them to have a .22 range? Low income areas are arguably who needs firearm safety courses most, and there's really no way schools in those areas would ever be able to afford them.

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;53142785]I'm not even sure the Department of Education would consider to do that, since all they do is slash as much funding to schools as possible. I heard recently in another article they don't even pay a living wage to the teachers in Oklahoma, so much so they need to get another job to pay the bills. But I do agree that children need to be taught more responsibility in the handling of firearms, since they're going to remain part of the landscape for the foreseeable future.[/QUOTE] The Department of Education doesn't actually supply most of the money to fund public schools. What they provide is a pretty small fraction, things like subsidized meals costs and federally mandated support programs. The budget for public schools is actually paid for mostly by local governments, which is why you can see large disparities between public schools even within the same city. The DoE does help enforce federally mandated curriculums, but how the schools carries out the education is once again handled at the local level. Firearms education can literally be offered right now by any school so long as the local school boards can afford it and approve it, some of which already have as I said with the highschool trap teams. [QUOTE=Duck M.;53142789]I wouldn't mind that, in fact my high school did have a range for ROTC, but it still wouldn't solve the problem of the large amounts of Americans out of school already. Besides, going back to cars, I'm sure we can agree anything hypothetically offered in schools for driver education would never be sufficient as a substitute for all driver safety courses and licensing programs. Furthermore, the bigger evident problem is funding. Firearm safety programs and ranges sound hella expensive, and the US is already having tons of problems with funding education. Schools cant afford school supplies, and you expect them to have a .22 range? Low income areas are arguably who needs firearm safety courses most, and there's really no way schools in those areas would ever be able to afford them.[/QUOTE] Don't take my quote out of context. Gun safety and teaching kids how two shoot are two completely different things. Instructing kids how to safely react to and handle firearms is something that doesn't require an expensive range and hundreds of .22's. Having a member of staff trained in gun safety and handling is not something that is terribly hard to do, and to teach that is no different than teaching anything else. Offering after school activities approved by the school where children can choose to shoot guns in a safe adult supervised environment is also something that is very doable, with many local ranges willing to offer their time and experience for little to no cost. And as with most after school activities, they are in part funded by the parent who choose to allow their children to do so. The latter half of that paragraph is exactly how highschool trap leagues started in Minnesota, and it is now one of the largest club programs in the state with almost every highschool in the twin cities having a team.

I was absolutely disgusted to read about this, but also a lot of the responses here as well. Guns are extremely deadly, indeed designed for the purpose of being deadly, and so are things that ought to be treated with great respect. They are not afforded that respect when one is raffled away at $5 per ticket, to fund a sports team for 10 year olds. Here in Australia, no one in their right mind would raffle away a machete, slab of beer or carton of cigarettes in order to fund a junior sport team. And raffling away a rifle makes so much less sense. If Americans want an end to mass shootings every other day and for America to be like everywhere else in the developed world in that regard, the first step towards that is to stop treating guns just like any other commodity or any other tool, and to start giving them the respect for what they are.

[QUOTE=BF;53142796]I was absolutely disgusted to read about this, but also a lot of the responses here as well. Guns are extremely deadly, indeed designed for the purpose of being deadly, and so are things that ought to be treated with great respect. They are not afforded that respect when one is raffled away at $5 per ticket, to fund a sports team for 10 year olds. Here in Australia, no one in their right mind would raffle away a machete, slab of beer or carton of cigarettes in order to fund a junior sport team. And raffling away a rifle makes so much less sense. If Americans want an end to mass shootings every other day and for America to be like everywhere else in the developed world in that regard, the first step towards that is to stop treating guns just like any other commodity or any other tool, and to start giving them the respect for what they are.[/QUOTE] Do you people really believe this empty alarmist rhetoric is going to make any headway with people who know what they're talking about?

[QUOTE=BF;53142796]I was absolutely disgusted to read about this, but also a lot of the responses here as well. Guns are extremely deadly, indeed designed for the purpose of being deadly, and so are things that ought to be treated with great respect. They are not afforded that respect when one is raffled away at $5 per ticket, to fund a sports team for 10 year olds. Here in Australia, no one in their right mind would raffle away a machete, slab of beer or carton of cigarettes in order to fund a junior sport team. And raffling away a rifle makes so much less sense. If Americans want an end to mass shootings every other day and for America to be like everywhere else in the developed world in that regard, the first step towards that is to stop treating guns just like any other commodity or any other tool, and to start giving them the respect for what they are.[/QUOTE] Instead of viewing the American model of gun culture and violence through the lens of other models which did what works for them, why not actually view it by itself for a change? No other country besides America has guns enshrined in their constitution as a right. I'm sure you're aware of this. If you're going to do something about the gun violence problem by going after those guns, especially when you have no sustainable alternative to offer those law abiding gun owners anything in return for said concessions, you're not going to get anywhere, and that's the sad truth. Do I agree there's a disproportionately huge amount of guns in America compared to anywhere else in the world? yes. Do I agree that America tops off at the list of gun violence in the world? yes. But constantly harping on about the guns themselves, which most people won't budge on, tragedy or no, focus is better served tightening up the existing laws, ensuring perps like this don't fall through the cracks, and actually enforcing said laws properly instead of saying "oh this guy's no threat." But, all these other root causes are just as complex to solve and there's little to no political will from either side to fix those problems.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53142802]Do you people really believe this empty alarmist rhetoric is going to make any headway with people who know what they're talking about?[/QUOTE] The guy's posting from a ipad, what do you think? People who gets easily spooked by SBGs, and would most likely blindly vote for [I]anything[/I] that involves the words "Restriction" and "AR-15" are the ones who keep posting these near-non issue articles.

Honestly - I'm secure in my position because I know the facts. This is my life; I grew up around guns, now I teach other people to handle them responsibly. You aren't going to get anywhere by trying different combinations of scary emotional words and "THE CHILDREN" because I know it's bullshit. Between my personal experience, the combined experiences of the people I've grown up with, and the research I've done, I have a pretty good grasp on the actual problems the US is facing. Gun saturation isn't ideal but it's not actually THE PROBLEM and there's no practical way to do anything about it regardless, so I'm a lot more concerned with the actual problems this country is awash in. You're secure in your position because you think you know the facts. You have no real exposure to these things - if you do, it certainly pales in comparison to what Americans who live with them have had. You know what you see on the news and what your government tells you about The Evil Guns and you've taken it upon yourself to tell everyone else, too. But it's tripe. You aren't "disgusted," you aren't baying for the children, you've just completely given up making rational arguments because you don't know enough to form one. So the way I see it there's two ways we can move forward here. Way one is you figure out quick you aren't going to manipulate me with bullshit emotional arguments and move on to find someone else to lie to. Way two is you admit you don't know what you're talking about and educate yourself, with or without talking to us maturely, so you can actually carry a rational discussion. Whichever it's gonna be, I'm not hearing "b-b-but the children!" anymore tonight.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53142793] Don't take my quote out of context. Gun safety and teaching kids how two shoot are two completely different things. Instructing kids how to safely react to and handle firearms is something that doesn't require an expensive range and hundreds of .22's. Having a member of staff trained in gun safety and handling is not something that is terribly hard to do, and to teach that is no different than teaching anything else. Offering after school activities approved by the school where children can choose to shoot guns in a safe adult supervised environment is also something that is very doable, with many local ranges willing to offer their time and experience for little to no cost. And as with most after school activities, they are in part funded by the parent who choose to allow their children to do so. The latter half of that paragraph is exactly how highschool trap leagues started in Minnesota, and it is now one of the largest club programs in the state with almost every highschool in the twin cities having a team.[/QUOTE] Apologies, I wasn't trying to take anything out of context or anything. Like I said, I think these programs are great ideas, but at the end of the day I don't think they're an effective substitute for the extensive and comprehensive safety courses/license requirements we see for things like automobile handling and such. They're definitely worth pursuing, especially for those schools that can afford them, but I think they're a very small part of a bigger picture. You also have to get parents, teachers, and school boards on board, so good luck with that.

[QUOTE=The golden;53142335]This isn't related to the recent shooting at all and is entirely separate. But still... what the fuck? 9 (and under) year olds raffling off an assault rifle? What the absolute fuck? Why was this item even accepted as a donation? I'm guessing this is an American gun culture thing because I don't get it.[/QUOTE] Its a very expensive thing and people would love to get a chance to own one. Its not like the kids are walking around holding rifles and saying "Come on down and get one like this bad boy here!".

[QUOTE=Duck M.;53142828]You also have to get parents, teachers, and school boards on board, so good luck with that.[/QUOTE] Well seeing as we in Minnesota, a true blue state voting Democrat since 76' and the only state not to go for Regan, have been able to do it in the highschools something tells me grass roots efforts can work just fine.

[QUOTE=Grenadiac;53142825]Honestly - I'm secure in my position because I know the facts. This is my life; I grew up around guns, now I teach other people to handle them responsibly. You aren't going to get anywhere by trying different combinations of scary emotional words and "THE CHILDREN" because I know it's bullshit. Between my personal experience, the combined experiences of the people I've grown up with, and the research I've done, I have a pretty good grasp on the actual problems the US is facing. Gun saturation isn't ideal but it's not actually THE PROBLEM and there's no practical way to do anything about it regardless, so I'm a lot more concerned with the actual problems this country is awash in. You're secure in your position because you think you know the facts. You have no real exposure to these things - if you do, it certainly pales in comparison to what Americans who live with them have had. You know what you see on the news and what your government tells you about The Evil Guns and you've taken it upon yourself to tell everyone else, too. But it's tripe. You aren't "disgusted," you aren't baying for the children, you've just completely given up making rational arguments because you don't know enough to form one. So the way I see it there's two ways we can move forward here. Way one is you figure out quick you aren't going to manipulate me with bullshit emotional arguments and move on to find someone else to lie to. Way two is you admit you don't know what you're talking about and educate yourself, with or without talking to us maturely, so you can actually carry a rational discussion. Whichever it's gonna be, I'm not hearing "b-b-but the children!" anymore tonight.[/QUOTE] What "the problem" is is a matter of perspective and defining the question. If someone was addicted to ice cream and had significant health problems because of it, the "root" problem would be their addiction, but we could easily minimize the impact of the addiction by replacing the ice cream in their diet with an alternative that was healthier. It's the same with our approach to guns. While they're not the [I]root[/I] of the proble per se, they make the problem significantly worse and exacerbates the impact it has on the population. Things like incompetent enforcement on already lax gun control, our extent of saturation (having 101 guns per 100 people in the US), and cultural attitudes towards firearms/firearm ownership are definitely a significant part of why the problem is much larger relatively in the US. Also I'm from central Texas too, so I grew up around this stuff and have had a lot of experience immersed in the native gun culture. While I've never been as into them as my peers, I'm trying to keep an open mind going forward in both learning about them and cultivating my attitude towards them. I'd like to think that I've developed a more mature understanding over the past few years, at least. Hopefully, though, the context of my upbringing does rule out the whole "cultural inexperience" part of the equation (although its dawned on me that you might be referring to that Australian guy specifically lol). [editline]19th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=UncleJimmema;53142834]Well seeing as we in Minnesota, a true blue state voting Democrat since 76' and the only state not to go for Regan, have been able to do it in the highschools something tells me grass roots efforts can work just fine.[/QUOTE] I think it's really too hypothetical to know for sure how people would react to it. The culture of Minnesota likely does differ from that of places like California and New York, though. Cultural attitudes differ so widely between states (and even within states) that it's difficult to apply standards holistically.

[QUOTE=BF;53142796]Here in Australia, no one in their right mind would raffle away a machete, slab of beer or carton of cigarettes in order to fund a junior sport team.[/QUOTE] I think we raffled a knife a few years back at my gun club, and I've certainly seen beer (among other alcohol) raffled in fetes and such. Haven't seen smokes raffled though. So yeah, we will actually do raffle those things.

[QUOTE=download;53142848]I think we raffled a knife a few years back at my gun club, and I've certainly seen beer (among other alcohol) raffled in fetes and such. Haven't seen smokes raffled though. So yeah, we will actually do raffle those things.[/QUOTE] You're disregarding the other half of his rhetorical. Was that stuff raffled off to fund a junior sports team?