In Wake Of 18 Murdered In Yet Another Mass Shooting, NRA-Funded Federal Agency Trains Children To Shoot Guns - eviltoast
  • SPRUNT@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, because what America REALLY needs are school shooters with better aim.

  • SeaJ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s 4-H. That is not exactly a radical organization.

  • eric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    So glad to see the NRA are finally training the kids. It’s always been obvious that the main reason for school shootings is that the children have been failing to protect themselves. After all, more adults with guns has greatly reduced the number of adult shootings, because why wouldn’t it? Good guys with the guns always stop bad guys with guns.

    • porcariasagrada@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      the next american generation will be trained from kindergarten to live with a war mentality. they’ll train in escape tactics, how to be always aware of exits, how to identify the sound of gun fire, and this will be a constant presence in their daily lives.

      also those kids will buy guns on mass once they reach adulthood, after all they have been trained from birth that they live in a war against an always present unknown enemy.

    • FireTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This isn’t something new the NRA has always had a role in training Americans to shoot. This article is just complaining that they let 4-H kids learn firearms safety and shoot a 22lr. Which they’ve been doing for decades.

  • Eggyhead@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a teacher of children I’m beginning to think maybe it actually would be better if fancy LLMs just took my job.

    • _danny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m actually beginning to believe the setting for Ready Player One. In the next ten years it might just be cheaper and safer for children to be given a nice VR headset and attend school fully virtually, hell they might actually get a better education since it’ll be easier to mute misbehaving children.

      Not exactly going to work for kids under 12 or so, and there’s probably lots of eye strain associated with being in a VR headset for hours upon hours, but hey at least the risk of being shot will be lower since there’s clearly no way in hell that we will get laws to control weapons.

      • ashok36@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You assume that the primary purpose of public schools is to educate children. It’s not. It’s free daycare so both parents can go to work and contribute to gdp while barely treading water even with two incomes.

        • _danny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That was the primary reason I mentioned the whole age thing. Teenagers really don’t need a babysitter.

      • Eggyhead@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’d have to fundamentally change how education is presented first in order to get 15-18 year olds to put on a headset for most of the day without “losing connection”, having “audio issues”, dogs “chewing cables”, or homework “getting corrupted”, etc.

  • BigMacHole@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Another mass shooting! How PERFECT! I can finally pretend to care about the Constitution again! I’m a Pro Life Republican!

  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m surprised the NRA aren’t giving away a free gun to every family member over the age of 6 months. /s

    • SPRUNT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That would NEVER happen.

      If the NRA had its way, the kid would be fitted with a holster in the womb.

      • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        They wouldn’t pay for the surgery. Why cover medical costs when you can buy more guns!

        • SPRUNT@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They wouldn’t pay for the surgery, but they’d spend millions to pay for the politicians who would sign-in-to-law a mandate that it must be done “for the safety of the children”. It’s then up to the parent to comply with that law at their own cost.

          The end game makes a lot more sense when you factor in the GQP’s forced-birth policies.

  • Additional_Prune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m as anti-NRA as anybody, but 4-H teaching kids to shoot is not a big deal. I taught at a high school in Los Angeles that used to have a shooting range. It also had a marching band. Both are gone. Cutbacks, focus on the required classes, no money for frilly electives.

    • gentooer@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As someone from Belgium (a country where there’s quite a lot of firearms in the hands of hunters and farmers (especially where I grew up) and where FN Herstalt is located), it sounds absolutely insane to have a shooting range at a school.

    • tegs_terry@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s not sarcastic. You fools can’t even use that bollocks right.

  • Something_Complex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hahaha so they have better skill in the future when they snap and kill half their school.

    Omg republican really do be thinking with their wallets and not their pea sized brains

  • Dead_or_Alive@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is such a bullshit article. Yeah the NRA is a terrible organization and there are a lot of reasons to attack them. But attacking the educational, gun safety and shooting sports programs that they offer or fund is complete bullshit and is detrimental to the public good.

    This is like saying we shouldn’t offer driving classes because one day a student might get into an accident.

    Correlation is not causation.

    • Mr_Blott@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Interesting take

      Would it not be better to teach kids that handguns are unnecessary, and only owned by criminals and cowards?

      Or is that a bit too 21st century?

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Except for all the parts in the world that have proven it true. No, you should just keep your head in the sand and rely purely on hope that someone you know won’t be killed.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Young children shouldn’t be using guns at all. Teenagers should only be using guns at authorised shooting ranges with direct 1 to 1 supervision with a trained and certified staff member - not just any adult or parent at home.

                  There is no need to play with guns, and the risk of harm to others is grossly disproportionate to your desire to have a bit of fun. Your freedom for fun impinges on the freedoms of others to merely be alive and healthy, thus your freedom should be heavily restrained in this instance.