Never too young: Iowa house passes bill to let children of all ages handle guns

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I agree with much of your post, but IMO education, combined with a multifaceted approach to the gun issue will result in a reduction of firearms related injuries and deaths. Restrictions on legal gun ownership or a "guns for everyone" meme by bleating politicians aren't the answer that satisfies the masses--but an unbiased look at the causes of injury/death involving firearms, education and responsible handling and storage, a better means of vetting prospective gun purchases with a clearer way of communicating between agencies to inhibit the mentally ill and criminals from access, and legislation targeting the root causes of urban gun crimes would be a starting point that both sides of the discussion could find common ground.

My grandpa used to think it was important to teach me and my brothers about gun safety and let us fire off a few rounds with his rifles every once in a while, starting from about 7, where he'd be holding the rifle and let us aim and pull the trigger to when we got older where he'd let us fire them ourselves... I have no issue with that.

But handing a kid a pistol and letting them just fire it off sounds incredibly irresponsible to me and is hardly teaching them to not treat guns as harmless toys... imo.

a reply to: MOMof3

No, you said an instructor was shot by a 9 year old with a handgun. Which is false.

And yes, it was monumentally stupid to give a 9 year old a fully automatic weapon. It still wasn't a pistol.

a reply to: Shamrock6

That is for sure.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

our nation outlawed booze

Outlawing Booze but not Military style weapons. Hmm ok.

a reply to: TaleDawn

Sooooo, the PARENT(S) get to decide as to if their child can handle a certain firearm. NOT the Govt.

This is a good thing.

Don't know of any company selling firearms that would allow a child, unaccompanied, to hold a firearm.

Oh, and they can't purchase said firearm either.


You Anti-2 people and your dramatic reactions are pretty funny.

"Child soldiers" *SMH* morons.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

Hey, how is that Muslim invasion going for ya guys over there. Wish you had rights to firearms now?

a reply to: TaleDawn

Yeah because the sentence is sooooo difficult to understand.

"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"

Where is your reading comprehension disconnect?

originally posted by: TaleDawn
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

our nation outlawed booze

Outlawing Booze but not Military style weapons. Hmm ok.

What on earth does this loose association have to do with the discussion?

You go from "a nation of booze and guns" to this?

Can you please narrow down your point so that I can actually figure out what it is you are discussing? Do you have a moral issue with booze? Guns? Booze and guns in the same house? When you say something that is shown to be wholly incorrect, is it habitual to shrug it off, move the goal posts, and make some other non sequitur?

originally posted by: TaleDawn
a reply to: 727Sky

Well i rest my case on the tank one.

I believe some are misinterpreting the second amendment. I read it a couple of times, i dont believe the forefathers had envisioned something like this.

Good to know we have your interpretation.

We're good here guys! TaleDawn's got it all figured out. Who needs that pesky supreme court anyway?