Strollerderby

Huh.  Interesting.

And rather classist, your reaction (the last few lines, in particular.)  You know, rich people can kill things, too.  (My dad does, and he's loaded.)

You are so ill informed about the reasons behind the school shootings that it is ludicrous. The children involved in the school shootings were all taking anti-depressants which the pharmeceutical companies neglected to test on adolescents until after the fact. There is nothing wrong with taking a child hunting and allowing them to use a firearm as this family has done. In fact, the time spent together forms a bond that will last a lifetime because the children are actually spending quality time with their parents. My son, who is ten years old, goes bowhunting for white tail deer with me every year and loves it. We also love each other. He is respectful of people and their lives. We don't live in a trailer, as if that has anything to do with a quality upbringing. In general people are not able to spend quality time with their children, or they don't want to, and that leads to children trying to raise themselves and make adult decisions which they are ill equipped to make. It is, without a doubt, positive parental involvement which will help children to be able to make appropriate decisions and keep them out of trouble. This family is doing the right thing by teaching this boy how to hunt and being there through the whole process. He shot the animal and knows it is dead therefore know the consequences of using a gun on a living being because his parents cared enough to teach him.

Alfred I appreciate and welcome your passion about this topic. As you believe I am ill informed about school shootings, I feel it’s important for you not to make blanket statements claiming the reason behind every school shooting resulted from anti-depressant drugs and therefore is the fault of pharmaceutical companies. I still contend there is something wrong with taking a 5-year old child hunting and allowing them to use a firearm, although your point about spending time with parents is a good one. There are, however, countless other ways for parents and children to spend time together that don’t involve deadly weapons and killing. Like I wrote in the post, teaching responsibility around handling a gun and allowing a child to use a gun are different. I think that the time you spend bow hunting with your 10-year old is time you both will treasure as he grows up, but bow hunting and using a rifle isn’t the same thing. You’re right…the trailer line was an unnecessary cheap shot and has nothing to do with family and raising a child. I still contend the family is not doing the right thing, but that is just my opinion and one I am entitled to as you are entitled to yours. Finally, just because the boy knows he killed an animal doesn’t mean he has the maturity to understand it on more than a basic level. Death is more than just the end of a physical life, it’s the ramifications on those left behind and the effect it has on them. You may say it’s just an animal but killing is not something that we should take lightly, especially when it comes to our children. You’re comments were intuitive and sincere and I appreciate the time you took to continue this conversation with me.

You are pretty much completely out of touch with the role hunting has played in human history and that it continues to play in American culture outside of you white, overly-privileged, most likely east or west coast based, condescending, effeminate, nanny-state advocating upbringing.

The Omaha shooter came from a broken home, step parents on both sides, typical situation in America that leads to a generation of messed up kids. Actually, the kid in this article is statistically less likely to be dangerously maladjusted than one growing up in a broken or single parent home without guns. 95% of male prison inmates grew up without a father(bio or adopted, only, NOT step) in their homes for a portion of their childhood.

Actually I’m quite aware of the role hunting has played and continues to play in the culture of this great country of ours where everyone is entitled to an opinion, even east coast based, condescending, effeminate, nanny-state advocating upbringing people like myself. It’s also good to see that making assumptions about people is not limited to haughty limp-wristed liberal tree-huggers. Even if your fact about prisoners without fathers were correct, which it is not as the number is closer to 70%, it still does not address the point of the post which had to do with the age of the child firing a weapon. All that being said I respect your comments, assuming and antagonizing as they may be, and thank you for taking the time to contribute to the conversation.

For what it's worth, I totally agree with you, especially about the misinterpretation of the Second Amendment. I have a huge issue with this, because people always seem to forget the first half of it, you know, the part about the well-regulated militia?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The amendment was written so that the people could protect themselves from their own government, should the government get out of hand. (Hmmmmm) In any case, A ten-year old with a bow is EXTREMELY different from a five year-old with a rifle. How does anyone think it's ok for a child that young to be handling a gun? How?