OUTRAGED AT PISTOL PHOTO'S

Thomasofmel

I think it is important to show your kids what a weapon (rifle, pistol, etc) is and educate your kids about them. I clean my rifles at home, my kids (4yr & 7yr) are interested, ask a lot of questions, which I do answer to best of my knowledge.

I do not let them use them, not in the field or on the range, nor I show where in the house they are kept. All ammo is locked away in the house as well. I will get a junior air rifle or pistol in few years time for the kids as it is the way I started shooting. It is a sport as any other, and it is safe when you act safe. :cool:

I would not post pics of my rifles in FB though... :rolleyes:

meathstevie

jill_valentine wrote: »

This is very much my problem with the idea that introducing kids to guns at an early age will teach them a healthy respect for firearm safety.

A gun is not like a golf club or a tennis racket. It's not like those things at all, and it should not be treated as such - a gun is a very potentially and instantly lethal piece of kit, and that should carry a healthy taboo with it because that's something that should be taken very seriously indeed.

I've worked with a lot of guns and a lot of people using them, and it's been my experience that the longer people are around them, the more complacent they tend to get about it. It doesn't matter how much they're drilled and trained and lectured, it's just a natural human response. The more you handle them, the more you start to view them as a tool just like any other, and that's something that should be consciously resisted.

You shouldn't ever be comfortable carrying a gun. It only takes the once for something to go badly wrong.

I think you're making one major mistake in your post, if you are handling carrying and using a firearm be it recreationally or professionally you should be as comfortable as possible with it. You should be familiar with it workings, you should know how to safely load and more importantly unload. There's nothing worse than a jittery git holding something they're not comfortable carrying or are unfamiliar with; that's when accidents happen.

tac foley

Manic Moran wrote: »

The NRA in the US has a program called "Eddie the Eagle",...etc NTM

Great post, Mr Moran, and one for which I offer my unconditional support.

I took my first step toward shooting as a hobby and pastime when I was six years old - with my dad's Colt .45 M1911. True, he had his hands wrapped firmly round mine, and the backstop was the ocean, but the KA-BOOM was something I'll never forget as long as I live - as were the size of the holes in the garbage can lid that we were shooting at. I was impressed.

Later that same year we moved on to his Walther .22 rifle - I have it still - always closely supervised until, at age nine, I was allowed to stand and shoot it by myself. I moved on from there...that was 55 years ago.

I get to shoot over in Switzerland every couple of years with my old Swiss stuff, BTW, and the sight of all the youngsters shooting the socks off their elders is a real treat.

Same as Camp Perry and the CMP this year, watching a small-framed girl shooting her own M1 Garand in the standing match and beating the military in score.

Take care, eh?

tac
Member - Clark rifles, Brush Prairie, Ft Vancouver WA

demonloop

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

If you are afraid of a firearm it is because you do not understand it fully.

sikastag wrote: »

I do not view my firearms as a weapon or something to harm people.

Sums it up for me.

Or, as Sigmund Freud said, 'A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity'

I'd tend to fear a madman holding a butter knife more than the parish priest with a Barrett .50

deeksofdoom

Manic Moran wrote: »

The NRA in the US has a program called "Eddie the Eagle", which basically is aimed at kids aged about 8 and below. Basically the curriculum consists of teaching the youngsters "If you see a gun, stop, don't touch, leave the room, tell an adult"

Excellent post and thats exactly what I'll be teaching my little girl when she's old enough to understand.

DeVore

I grew up near the sea. The first thing my father did was teach me to swim. I learned about the awesome power of the sea and rip tides and currents and was a strong swimmer before I ever went near the sea.

If you have guns in your house, teach your kids about them and then keep them out of their reach when you are not teaching them. Dont just tell them not to go near daddys special bangstick, make sure they physically cannot get near it once you have drilled it into them that they are dangerous. Dont let them see how it is accessed either (or they might pinch your keys!)


A house with a swimming pool is more likely to kill a kid then a house with a gun.

I'm not a big fan of guns, but I am a big fan of intelligence.

DeV.

Grizzly 45

Long ,long time ago before anyone had heard of child protection laws ,insurance,and common sense ruled the day[most of the time]
And Grizzly was a very young cub[around the mid 1960s].His old man being a firm beliver in keeping his firearms loaded and on a gun rack over the mantle piece,and hadnt botherd reading the Doctor Spocks manual on child rearing...[Go Google it if this has lost you]
Yours truly decided one day after being told DO NOT TOUCH!! to do so.
I got such a trashing,I think I ate dinner standing up for a week afterwards,because my ass was so sore.But I never touched the guns again,unless I was with my old man and under his explicit instruction,and supervision.But I was by the age of ten shooting by myself with my own .410 SBBL shotgun on our farm.Reason ,I was trusted not to go off and do somthing stupid with it.

Grizzly 45

jill_valentine wrote: »

This is very much my problem with the idea that introducing kids to guns at an early age will teach them a healthy respect for firearm safety.

A gun is not like a golf club or a tennis racket. It's not like those things at all, and it should not be treated as such - a gun is a very potentially and instantly lethal piece of kit, and that should carry a healthy taboo with it because that's something that should be taken very seriously indeed.

I've worked with a lot of guns and a lot of people using them, and it's been my experience that the longer people are around them, the more complacent they tend to get about it. It doesn't matter how much they're drilled and trained and lectured, it's just a natural human response. The more you handle them, the more you start to view them as a tool just like any other, and that's something that should be consciously resisted.

You shouldn't ever be comfortable carrying a gun. It only takes the once for something to go badly wrong.

Do tell what exactly is your experiance Jill ??Army or Police??

Jill,you could apply that arguement to power tools,kids in souped up cars,or the " Fiesta pony tail Blonde" woman driver with the 14 kids climbing over ,around and out of the car:rolleyes:...The farmer with the non PTO gaurd on the tractor or the "quiet" bull.They are the ones that have the complacency problem and the most fatalities here in Ireland.
Yes complacency kills,no doubt about it.BUT we have more road deaths than firearm deaths here.I could never understand why in the US they pull you in every 5years to redo your driving test..Until I started driving for a living in Ireland!!Complacency and idiocy rules on our roads.In comparision us gunowners are 99.9% safe.

kildare.17hmr

I think the OP is right to teach his son from a young age if he shows an interest, i think its great! my da thought me to drive as soon as i could see over the steering wheel always in a safe environment like the OP cleaning his gun with his son. Prob not the best idea for security tho puttin the pics on facebook but its his choice and as for the friend, who needs friends like that anyway??? hope your son keeps the interest in the future

Kev

Grizzly 45

WTF anyone would want to put anything on Facebook or such in the first place is wayy beyond me.Do we really have to advertise everything about our lives to the whole world??But please continue to do so.It makes my life in tracking&tracing folks all the more easier..;):D

DeVore

Yeah, wouldnt have put the pics online tbh. Its not a good idea and it advertises that you have a gun in your house to criminals.

DeV.

Sparks

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

WTF anyone would want to put anything on Facebook or such in the first place is wayy beyond me.Do we really have to advertise everything about our lives to the whole world?

Speaking personally, I have photos of me with guns on my facebook pages.
It's just that you guys can't see them because of the privacy settings (well, except for a few taken at matches and the like). I have them there so my folks and siblings can see what I'm up to and they do the same, it's how we stay in touch when all of us are scattered all over the country and only meet up physically every few weeks. Same with some friends of mine who've had to emigrate to follow the work and the like.
It's like a chainsaw - very useful if you use it properly with the right safety equipment; and a fast way to damage yourself if you don't.

Dvs

jill_valentine wrote: »

We fired them very frequently indeed.

It's great to see we have another,
SWAT-Spec Op's-Top Secret-Sworn to Secrecy-Expert,
on the boards shooting forum......





:rolleyes:

Dvs.

P.S.
The tales I could tell about the world of Espionage,
but for my vow sub rosa,
as I was saying to the Director of the CIA the other day.......

:rolleyes:

Tackleberrywho

Dvs wrote: »

It's great to see we have another,
SWAT-Spec Op's-Top Secret-Sworn to Secrecy-Expert,
on the boards shooting forum......





:rolleyes:

Dvs.

P.S.
The tales I could tell about the world of Espionage,
but for my vow sub rosa,
as I was saying to the Director of the CIA the other day.......

:rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Valentine

Say no more, Skirmish did I hear you say? Read between the lines

Sparks

That's not a problem with boards.ie though DvS.
If I had a euro for every time I heard at the post-match banter of how person X was a world-acclaimed expert in field Y and therefore fact Z should be taken as gospel, I could afford to buy some very nice toys by now.
And that's just the stuff we heard face to face. Start reading through the magazines aimed at our small community and you could buy a small house with the same funding model...

Dusty87

Sparks wrote: »

Speaking personally, I have photos of me with guns on my facebook pages.
It's just that you guys can't see them

Sparks, add me pleaaaaase:D:D:rolleyes:

Sparks

Dusty87 wrote: »

Sparks, add me pleaaaaase:D:D:rolleyes:

Ah, they're not that interesting
(And the ones that are are up on 10point9 anyway).


Though it's true that one or two are funny

Tackleberrywho

Sparks wrote: »

Ah, they're not that interesting
(And the ones that are are up on 10point9 anyway).


Though it's true that one or two are funny

Whats the story with the Butchers apron?;)

Sparks

Same story as with the chef's hat - I was cooking at the WTSC BBQ at the time, we had a concurrent fun 5-shot match, so I had just enough time between waves of burger-seekers to get upstairs and shoot the five shots, but only barely, hence the lack of changing kit

Hasn't stopped the comparison's to the Swedish Chef's doughnut-making technique though...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbs64GvGgPU

It wasn't me!

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Whats the story with the Butchers apron?;)

It gives you a good idea what he was doing to that target.

DeVore

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Whats the story with the Butchers apron?;)

Wot, cos the Chef's hat is totally understandable?!

Sparks, every time I think you can't get any weirder, you up your game.....

DeV.

Dusty87

DeVore wrote: »

Wot, cos the Chef's hat is totally understandable?!

Sparks, every time I think you can't get any weirder, you up your game.....

DeV.

You're in with the admins anyway Sparks;)

Sparks

DeVore wrote: »

Sparks, every time I think you can't get any weirder, you up your game.....

Why does everyone who's seen my mascot say that?

DeVore

Not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, not the mascot, please not the mascot I'm still in therapy.


Ummm, on topic, umm, kids yes, not the mascot, kids thread, guns and kids = no. Mascot = NO.

DeV.

Manic Moran

Sparks wrote: »

Why does everyone who's seen my mascot say that?

I have a little Loch Ness Monster which always sat on the firing line with me. Drove one of my colleagues nuts, she was a left-handed shooter, and kept complaining that whenever she faced Nessie she was put off her game.

NTM

jill_valentine

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Do tell what exactly is your experiance Jill ??Army or Police??

Army, and I got within a couple of centimetres of having the head taken off me by a professional soldier who wasn't paying as much mind as he should have been on at least one occasion - so I freely admit I'm possibly a bit more cranky on the issue than many might be.

I'm not going to preach to anybody about what age is appropriate for their kid to start getting familiar with guns, I just object to presenting a gun as being no more than a piece of sport's gear. "Like a tennis racket" was the suggestion earlier. And I don't mean to pick on that particular thing, but it's an attitude I see around and I find it alarming.

I'm not saying most gun owners aren't safe and that's great - but I just feel that often, gun owners/users overcompensate when it comes to downplaying whatever potential risk there actually is so as to present a smiley face on their pursuits to non-gun types. Apart from anything else I don't think it ultimately does anybody any favours, least of all gun owners in the eyes of Joe Public, to refer to firearms in such casual terms, regardless of how much respect I'm sure we all give them in practice.

Sparks

jill_valentine wrote: »

I just object to presenting a gun as being no more than a piece of sport's gear.

Not to be rude, but would you not accept that perhaps your professional training has left you with a degree of bias towards firearms and their uses? I'd happily call a Steyr Aug held by a soldier a weapon; but that doesn't mean that my air rifle is one.

bunny shooter

I have seen lads & ladies who I would trust with my life with any firearm/weapon, including myself, to make mistakes or have lapses in concentration with firearms that fortunately did not result in injury or worse to themselves, myself or others. IMHO "familarity breeds contempt" and the more people handle firearms the more likely they are to simply get lacksadazy with them at times. It's human nature.

Whether a firearm is looked upon as a weapon or a piece of sports equipment is irrevelant IMHO. If someone gets shot it won't matter whether it was called a firearm or a weapon, the result will be the same.

Firearm/weapon should/can be used in the context of what the rifle, shotgun or pistol is being used for. If I use my .22lr to shoot a bunny it could be called a weapon, especially as far as the bunny is concerned :rolleyes:, and if I use it to shoot at a paper target it could be called a firearm, assuming the paper target has no propensity to feel pain, which is open to question after a recent thread here . This to me is just more of the PC crap were are subjected to nowadays. A rifle is a rifle, a shotgun is a shotgun and a pistol is a pistol. They are no more dangerous than a golf club. It's how they are used that could make them dangerous, same as a golf club................

jill_valentine

Sparks wrote: »

Not to be rude, but would you not accept that perhaps your professional training has left you with a degree of bias towards firearms and their uses?

Very possibly, but I think Bunny Shooter hit the nail on the head. If it's a question of carelessness, it doesn't really matter what a firearm was bought for.

I mean, the worst thing that careless misuse of a tennis racket is likely to produce is Tim Henman, there's just a lot less room for error in any firearm context.

Grizzly 45

jill_valentine wrote: »

Army, and I got within a couple of centimetres of having the head taken off me by a professional soldier who wasn't paying as much mind as he should have been on at least one occasion - so I freely admit I'm possibly a bit more cranky on the issue than many might be.

And well you should be.I hope that clown was told to drop and give the DI 60 pushups there and then.However,be as it may,It is hardly the guns fault rather the idiot behind it.The gun is inanimate like anything else,it needs human interface to make it dangerous or safe.

I'm not going to preach to anybody about what age is appropriate for their kid to start getting familiar with guns, I just object to presenting a gun as being no more than a piece of sport's gear. "Like a tennis racket" was the suggestion earlier. And I don't mean to pick on that particular thing, but it's an attitude I see around and I find it alarming.

I'm not saying most gun owners aren't safe and that's great - but I just feel that often, gun owners/users overcompensate when it comes to downplaying whatever potential risk there actually is so as to present a smiley face on their pursuits to non-gun types. Apart from anything else I don't think it ultimately does anybody any favours, least of all gun owners in the eyes of Joe Public, to refer to firearms in such casual terms, regardless of how much respect I'm sure we all give them in p

ractice.
OTOH,you cant go the other way and make them out to be almost animate deadly evil things like a box of unstable nitroglycerine sticks that could explode in a nano second.Like anything they are 100% safe until humans mess around with them.But the point is,we do have to interface with them otherwise we cant use them or many other dangerous things in life.And the only way to learn how anything is dangerous is to be told how dangerous it is and to physically see it happen.A good example is my mate took his 10year old son to Florida last year to a range,and got him shooting a .22 pistol under his supervision.The young fellah did very well, but said somthing very pertinent IMO for a ten year old."Dad,I never realised how powerful and dangerous,and fun a gun actually is,until I actually got to shoot a real one."This coming from a normal Irish kid who has played enough of the shootem up games out there too. He has realised that in the really real world,if you muck up with a gun,no one is going to say "Cut! good take.You can get up now Joe".Nor is a RESTART GAME going to flash in the room either.
It would be better IMHO spending more time educating kids for drivers ed,by taking them down to a mourge and actually getting them to SEE really real DEAD people from traffic accidents,would sort out more driving caused accidents than Gay Bryne finger wagging and lecturing to us all to slow down.
If you have ever seen what a shotgun can do to a person in real life[I have had that " privilige" [?] a sucidie case in LA )
You will be double damn sure of your firearms saftey.But I wont be cowed of them or belive that they cannot be controlled safley by people,nor will I over emphasise the danger level either.If,you can drive a car safley from point A to point B,and repeat that process many times.Which is alot more complex than using a gun.You can shoot a firearm safley too.

Sparks

jill_valentine wrote: »

there's just a lot less room for error in any firearm context.

Yes, but the evidence does suggest that there's also less errors in a civilian target shooting context, mainly because the environment is more carefully controlled than most other contexts.

And bunny, next time a judge stands up and says you can't have a licence for that dangerous weapon, feel a sense of deep relief that he's not being silly and PC about it...

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

..............And bunny, next time a judge stands up and says you can't have a licence for that dangerous weapon, feel a sense of deep relief that he's not being silly and PC about it...

He/she should then be educated so he/she knows what they are actually talking about first. Just because they are a judge doesn't make them an expert on everything. That's why "expert" witnesses are brought to courts

Sparks

bunny shooter wrote: »

He/she should then be educated so he/she knows what they are actually talking about first. Just because they are a judge doesn't make them an expert on everything. That's why "expert" witnesses are brought to courts

Hard to educate them to use the correct term when shooters don't bother to do so...

Tackleberrywho

jill_valentine wrote: »

Army, and I got within a couple of centimetres of having the head taken off me by a professional soldier who wasn't paying as much mind as he should have been on at least one occasion - so I freely admit I'm possibly a bit more cranky on the issue than many might be.


I'm not saying most gun owners aren't safe and that's great - but I just feel that often, gun owners/users overcompensate when it comes to downplaying whatever potential risk there actually is so as to present a smiley face on their pursuits to non-gun types. Apart from anything else I don't think it ultimately does anybody any favours, least of all gun owners in the eyes of Joe Public, to refer to firearms in such casual terms, regardless of how much respect I'm sure we all give them in practice.

I would be MORE afraid of a Soldier with a Rifle than a civie, Hunters shoot game every day, shoot more often. And SEE THE RESULTS

I have served with the DF and i have seen TRAINED soldiers do stuff with Rifles that no Civie would do

ARP's do not equal to thousands of rounds every year in all conditions by civie shooters.

johngalway

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I would be MORE afraid of a Soldier with a Rifle than a civie,

No offense to any army people on here but me too. In town I can't say how often muzzles have been pointed at me (protecting the banks money), not actually AT me, but at me due to carelessness.

Treat all guns as if they're loaded. I've never liked one pointed in my direction, even if I know it's unloaded. All too easy for something to go wrong once in the habit.

Tackleberrywho

johngalway wrote: »

No offense to any army people on here but me too. In town I can't say how often muzzles have been pointed at me (protecting the banks money), not actually AT me, but at me due to carelessness.

Treat all guns as if they're loaded. I've never liked one pointed in my direction, even if I know it's unloaded. All too easy for something to go wrong once in the habit.

Nail head Hit on!

I was once chastised for carrying my "weapon in a non Threatening manner "
By an Orificer

The DF train with blanks, fire a few LIVE rounds a year.
Then they are in the local town with a full auto 30 round mag.

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

Hard to educate them to use the correct term when shooters don't bother to do so...

Lot more wrong than them using the wrong correct terms :rolleyes:

Calling an air rifle a pellet gun does not make it any less dangerous

bunny shooter

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I would be MORE afraid of a Soldier with a Rifle than a civie, Hunters shoot game every day, shoot more often. And SEE THE RESULTS

A soldier is trained to be a soldier, your RDF unit must be trained differently to mine. As you should know as you claim to be a RDF NCO a soldiers weapon is in a certain state while he is deployed in public here and if he/she has been trained properly their weapon is quite safe unless they decide otherwise

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I have served with the DF and i have seen TRAINED soldiers do stuff with Rifles that no Civie would do

Every soldier in this country either RDF or PDF has to have recieved a certain amount of training and be certified as competant by an Officer to use live ammo. How many civvies until recently have to do this before they can do the same?

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

ARP's do not equal to thousands of rounds every year in all conditions by civie shooters.

Or we can bring in the "familiarity breeds contempt" argument again? I have fired ARP's and done shooting team training in weather I would never fire my own rifles in

johngalway wrote: »

No offense to any army people on here but me too. In town I can't say how often muzzles have been pointed at me (protecting the banks money), not actually AT me, but at me due to carelessness.

Treat all guns as if they're loaded. I've never liked one pointed in my direction, even if I know it's unloaded. All too easy for something to go wrong once in the habit.

I'll repeat this from above ...... a soldiers weapon is in a certain state while he is deployed in public here and if he/she has been trained properly their weapon is quite safe unless they decide otherwise

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Nail head Hit on!

I was once chastised for carrying my "weapon in a non Threatening manner "
By an Orificer

You are meant to carry it as a soldier should you're not out on a walk in the country :rolleyes:

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

The DF train with blanks, fire a few LIVE rounds a year.
Then they are in the local town with a full auto 30 round mag.

Shows how little you actually know about the PDF training :rolleyes:

johngalway

bunny shooter wrote: »

I'll repeat this from above ...... a soldiers weapon is in a certain state while he is deployed in public here and if he/she has been trained properly their weapon is quite safe unless they decide otherwise

And yet they're still called accidents

Tackleberrywho

bunny shooter wrote: »

A soldier is trained to be a soldier, your RDF unit must be trained differently to mine. As you should know as you claim to be a RDF NCO a soldiers weapon is in a certain state while he is deployed in public here and if he/she has been trained properly their weapon is quite safe unless they decide otherwise



Every soldier in this country either RDF or PDF has to have recieved a certain amount of training and be certified as competant by an Officer to use live ammo. How many civvies until recently have to do this before they can do the same?



Or we can bring in the "familiarity breeds contempt" argument again? I have fired ARP's and done shooting team training in weather I would never fire my own rifles in



I'll repeat this from above ...... a soldiers weapon is in a certain state while he is deployed in public here and if he/she has been trained properly their weapon is quite safe unless they decide otherwise
Safe or not, A Rifle is always deemed unsafe in public unless Bolt is back mag out


You are meant to carry it as a soldier should you're not out on a walk in the country :rolleyes:
Hard to betray ones better judgement and point a rifle at a human


Shows how little you actually know about the PDF training :rolleyes:

I'd know more than you think on training, you don't know my backgrond.
Muzzle sweep is a NO NO in civie life, Deemed safe or not.
I could say how, but then the powers that be would have me on disclosure..

I'm not getting into a DF Vs Civie arguement BS.
Fact is this, if a civie has an accident with a rifle, end of civie shooting. Not so in DF.

We are WAY OFF Topic here.
Question.


Who trained YOU to shoot and at WHAT AGE did you fire your first rifle shotgun?

Can you answer that Truthfully please?

And question 2.
Would you teach your Kids safe firearm handling, and shooting?

Honestly NO BS BS

bunny shooter

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I'd know more than you think on training, you don't know my backgrond.

Nor you mine

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I'm not getting into a DF Vs Civie arguement BS.

I think you're better off

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Fact is this, if a civie has an accident with a rifle, end of civie shooting. Not so in DF.

What a silly statement. So what your saying is if someone in the DF is not liable to the same laws as a civvie? :rolleyes:

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

We are WAY OFF Topic here.

And who mentioned soldiers first? :rolleyes:

I have noticed when you get in over your depth you wanna change the subject :rolleyes:

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Question.

Who trained YOU to shoot and at WHAT AGE did you fire your first rifle shotgun?

Can you answer that Truthfully please?

My father, when I was about 7 years old, shotgun & .22 rifle. He could consistently shoot the "possible" at 600 yards with a .303 and he was taught by his father before him :cool:

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

And question 2.
Would you teach your Kids safe firearm handling, and shooting?

Honestly NO BS BS

Yes, I would, IF they asked me to and I have 3 x daughters, one is 22, one is 21 and the youngest is 20 and none of them have any interest in shooting or hunting and I wouldn't force it on them

And that's no BS

Sparks

/facepalm

Could we drop the DF-vs-Civilian malarky please? The two are chalk and cheese and you really can't run comparisons between them in either direction, the training on either side is completely different and predicated on completely different requirements and assumptions.

Tackleberrywho

bunny shooter wrote: »

Nor you mine



I think you're better off



What a silly statement. So what your saying is if someone in the DF is not liable to the same laws as a civvie? :rolleyes:



And who mentioned soldiers first? :rolleyes:

I have noticed when you get in over your depth you wanna change the subject :rolleyes:



My father, when I was about 7 years old, shotgun & .22 rifle. He could consistently shoot the "possible" at 600 yards with a .303 and he was taught by his father before him :cool:



Yes, I would, IF they asked me to and I have 3 x daughters, one is 22, one is 21 and the youngest is 20 and none of them have any interest in shooting or hunting and I wouldn't force it on them

And that's no BS

A person called Jill Valentine mentioned DF, not me.

Anyway, you can teach your Grand kids, I have no kids yet.
I look forward to teaching my nephew and nieces in time, if THEY want to learn.

They currently do not like me killing Bunnies.

Although the eldest girl almost 8 helps me clean my motorbikes.;)
maybe in time she may get interested in Rifles

bunny shooter

Sparks wrote: »

/facepalm

Could we drop the DF-vs-Civilian malarky please? The two are chalk and cheese and you really can't run comparisons between them in either direction, the training on either side is completely different and predicated on completely different requirements and assumptions.

He started it

That's what I was trying to point out, just went a different route

I would thank your post Sparks but I'd feel silly doing so

jill_valentine

Sparks wrote: »

/facepalm

Could we drop the DF-vs-Civilian malarky please? The two are chalk and cheese and you really can't run comparisons between them in either direction, the training on either side is completely different and predicated on completely different requirements and assumptions.

Yeah, my fault TBH. But for the record:

a) The DF have a substantial bit of live firing experience, it's not something they only do a few times a year just to tick a box, and there's generally a lot of crossover between DF and civilian shooters.

b) This is why I didn't want to mention where I've had the bulk of my firearms experience, rather than wanting to pretend I was Andy McNab's long lost twin sister or anything. I only brought it up because there were a few um, enquiries as to the point.

bunny shooter

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

A person called Jill Valentine mentioned DF, not me.

Technically your right :eek: BUT I was referring to this nugget of wisdom

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

I would be MORE afraid of a Soldier with a Rifle than a civie,.............

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Anyway, you can teach your Grand kids, I have no kids yet.
I look forward to teaching my nephew and nieces in time, if THEY want to learn.

As I said, if they ask I will

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

They currently do not like me killing Bunnies.

My youngest is a confirmed fur hugger :rolleyes: BUT I encouraged free-thinking so ..............

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Although the eldest girl almost 8 helps me clean my motorbikes.;)
maybe in time she may get interested in Rifles

They have no interest in my bike either :eek:

Tackleberrywho

[QUOTE=


They have no interest in my bike either :eek:[/QUOTE]

I'm not allowed bring my nephew on my bike around the house!

And that is the orders from his mother.

Ask the Gosiún, what do you want to drive when you grow up?

John Deere, Jeep & Mokiebike

Although I did buy him a toy rifle for his birthday

kildare.17hmr

Tackleberrywho wrote: »

Nail head Hit on!

I was once chastised for carrying my "weapon in a non Threatening manner "
By an Orificer

The DF train with blanks, fire a few LIVE rounds a year.
Then they are in the local town with a full auto 30 round mag.

Must have been a very long time since you were in the army tac;-0, i think i fired maybe 5 mags of blanks the whole time i was in the RDF could not count the number of live rounds but id say id need a trailer to transport them

Kryten

The difference between Army ad Civvy is blatently obvious. The Army use their rifles as weapons, train to kill people. Use man shaped targets (sort of). Perform live fire training exercises to get ready for the real thing. (Ex PDF and my experience anyway). Hunters and sports shooters use their rifles to either punch holes in paper at various distances or get a nice bit of meat for the pot.

However the safety aspect is the same. And should always be. On the range or in the field you need to have full awareness about your firearm and stay switched on about it. Generally in a non presssure environment. With Army, you have to have the same level of awareness and then some, as you are moving around with the rifle. You are supposed to watch muzzle direction and act safely while in any kind of a situation be it training or active service.

In both Civvy street and Army street you get muppets on both sides and it gets so easy for an accident to occur. So Jill, I agree with the statement that a firearm should not be treated in the same complacent way as a tennis racket. As for training the kids in the safe handling of firearms, well they are your kids and you should know when and if they are ready. Mine are both 14 and have been ready for the last 2 years, but never practiced with anything heavier than airsoft up to now.