This is 100 percent on point
He is so terrific and on point. We are lucky to have him on our side.
Children’s Firearms and Safety Fundamentals by the USCCA is a great course to bring to the elementary schools. In July my grandsons ages 17,13 and 10 all got certificates in Young Adults and Childrens Gun Safety Training and Familiarization. They enjoyed the class and their parents were happy I took them to the class. If anything I feel confident that this training will definitely prevent tragedies from happening in their household and in the future make them responsibly armed citizens.
I follow him on YouTube every day. He is a font of wisdom. I do take issue with the use of “stupid” to describe the anti 2A folks.
There’s a difference between being ignorant and being stupid… For me, an ignorant person is someone who makes the wrong decision or a bad choice because he or she does not have the proper facts. If you give that person the facts and the proper information you have alleviated that ignorance, and they make the right decision. (Daryl Davis)
This circles back to teaching the young so they are no longer ignorant!
Yep makes perfect sense. But because of the fact it makes perfect sense the government will reject it as activism, indoctrination.
If you keep people ignorant, they are easier to scare and influence.
I have no idea how. Without watching the video, I know that if I went to the local gun store/range, the majority of the people there would have their finger on the trigger most of the time the gun was in their hand…regardless of where it’s pointed. I’d also fully expect to be flagged by at least one muzzle if it was a public range without an RSO or if it was a public outdoor DNR range with an RSO.
Perhaps we need the 4 rules to be required to graduate high school
And when the anti-rights people do have the facts and still make the “wrong” decision, are they then stupid or deceitful or both?
Actually they would be all for it but first they need to make it their idea and have a heavy investment in it.
Appreciate the post. Good topic.
I imagine the fear or resistance are those who think it will create more danger.
But I think it will increase safety, it makes sense to me. Resonated with me for the behavior we see at ranges sometimes, the accidents we hear about, but mostly - personally, the learning curve we experience and accidents which have come close to or have happened within our own circles, that hits home.
Realistically, might take a Bill, state. Then federal – though I know that’s asking a lot.
I’ll sign that petition.
Willful ignorance is built on the deliberate avoidance of evidence that doesn’t match one’s existing beliefs. This can be a defense mechanism as it allows us to create a world we feel safe in, akin to confirmation bias.
This is one of those times I think the answer is in the question.
Why wouldn’t they want everyone to understand the basics of firearms operation and safety?
perhaps if we re-write the question as the answer.
They wouldn’t want everyone to understand the basics of firearms, operation… and safety.
From their point of view, everyone understanding firearms isn’t safe, it’s dangerous.
What Colion says is true, but I worried he was on the path of hyperventilation.
So, how can individuals fix this lack of basic firearms education? One solution is to run for a position on your local school board and change the curriculum. Or, recall the board members who oppose firearms education. Running for office is a painful endeavor as is spearheading a recall effort, but merely complaining about the lack of firearms education won’t change anything.
@Mark697 :The work you suggest on the school board, as well as other public offices is, I think, key. I think that is why the opposition to rogue school boards has suffered quashing efforts supported by higher government. They know, because they are using it, that formative educational years are very important and go a long way to shaping the future. The parents who have braved the reprisals to affect change are important people who should be honored for that work.
Unpleasant as they have wrongly made it, that is a line were the stand necessarily needs to be made.
When I was young it was hunters safety and the boy scouts.
I respectfully disagree with the valueless nature of complaining, or, viewed another way, voicing a different viewpoint and highlighting why that viewpoint has merit.
If voicing opposition to how things are were of no value, they wouldn’t bother to try and stifle that speech. But your point is well taken, Republicans who talk only, but take no actions that would affect change with the power they may have in their hands, are worse than useless. Still, when the complainers are large enough in number and voicing the desire for something better, it can inspire others with more opportunity and resources to take action. Hence, I believe, the reason free speech remains so important, and, contested.
I totally agree.
Neither does running for office and failing. My father ran for a local public office a few times. Us kids were “employed” to do a lot of the menial tasks, stuffing envelopes, checking petitions for accuracy, checking voter rolls, etc. He was a well-respected member of the local Conservative party, where the majority were either Rebulican or Democratic, so his chances of winning were very low. Typically, the Conservative party would endorse Republicans or Democrats, as the Conservative party had enough votes to swing an election. But if neither the Republicans nor Democrats would make any consessions, they would occasionally run a candidate of their own, which is why my father ran.
My father was a bayman and fought hard for regulations to protect the waterways, bays and rivers. He was successful in that endeavor, even though he could not get on the Board of Trustees. What you call complaining, in a more controlled way is called lobbying. You get enough people to rally or support a position, politicians listen.
The VCDL is a great example of that. The lobbying and rallies, emails, telephone calls, meeting with reps, etc., has enabled good firearm laws to be enacted and prevented numerous bad laws from passing, many times, not even being brought to the floor for a vote, or even voted on in committee. So “complaining” does work.
I disagree. It sounds like your father’s runs at office actually produced a result he wanted, probably more effectively than if he had won.
The one thing elected officials want more than anything else is to remain in office where they continue to enjoy a government job and perks. People who run against them are their biggest threat, so they will work to defuse the complaints that opponents bring to a campaign. You father’s advocacy for waterway regulations is an example, Elected officials would probably have ignored him but for the election threat he presented.
Complaints and grousing about the latest outrageous government rule/regulation can only produce results if those who enact those rules and regulations think that there’s a risk they could lose their jobs. Challenging an incumbent in a primary or initiating a recall petition makes the risk of losing office real, even if you lose or the petition fails. Complaining, by itself, does not motivate elected officials.
No, they did not. It was not the running for office, but the lobbying that was effective. Same is true with the VCDL. He was not a “threat” to their remaining in office, as he could not get enough votes as the two major parties had far more votes in their pockets. It was just a moral issue. The Conservatives did not get consessions from the parties, so ran a candidate.
I’ve seen (and hired) my share of lobbyists and been involved in lobbying efforts. At some point in a visit to any politician comes the question: “Who’s for what you’re proposing and who’s against it?” Politicians are always counting votes, 'cause they want to know whether there is any chance they could get kicked out of office and their cush government jobs.
The reality of the world we live in is that unaffiliated or 3rd party people have no influence because politicians know that they are elected (or unelected) by Ds and Rs. I’ve had lots of clients running for office who will tell me “People are disgusted with Rs, so I’m running as an independent. That’s how I will win.” The always got crushed in the general election, because the people who do vote usually vote party line.
Politicians also gravitate to money. The old saying among lobbyists is “Money talks and BS walks.” If you come to a politician with any prospect of a contribution to his re-election campaign, he will listen to you and earnestly consider what you are asking him to do (“Money talks”). On the other hand, if you come with just a story or complaint, the politician may listen politely and quickly show you the door (“BS walks”).
44,000 gun deaths a year with 54% of them suicide to me is not a problem especially with our population. The real problem is illegal guns and politicians don’t make punishments stricter. Matter of fact they go easy on these losers while punishing us legal gun owners.