Real Gun Safety

We’ve all read about “gun safety groups” lobbying state legislatures for ever-increasingly restrictive firearms regulations, but then along comes a proposal like they were considering in Kansas as this was written, and suddenly “gun safety” advocates are cool to the idea.

It’s probably because the “gun safety folks” are really gun control zealots, and they don’t like the idea of youngsters being exposed to genuine firearms safety education, especially in the public schools. They might learn guns aren’t terrible.

Senate Bill 116 is a single-page document blessed by simplicity. Anyone in another state looking for a piece of model legislation ought to print this out and forward it to a friendly lawmaker in your state. Here’s what it says:

AN ACT concerning education; relating to firearms; standardizing firearm safety education training programs in school districts.

Section 2. This act shall take effect and be in force from and after its publication in the statute book

That’s 263 words of real “common sense.” The reaction? According to the Kansas Reflector, opponents offered the predictable arguments. One opponent insisted to a Senate committee the Eddie Eagle program was “absolutely ineffective.” He also offered this: “We know why we’re choosing the NRA’s program. It’s not about gun safety. It’s about promoting the NRA to young kids so when they grow up they say, ‘Oh, Eddie Eagle. I remember him.’ You want to indoctrinate young kids into loyal NRA supporters.”

‘Whatsamadda U’

There was the School of Hard Knocks, and Basil Rathbone’s rendition of Sherlock Holmes habitually referred to his educational roots during conversations with his sidekick, Dr. Watson: “Elementary, my dear Watson.”

But the one dominant institution of higher learning, which seems to attract gun prohibitionists, is Whatsamadda U.

When I was in grade school well into the last century, talking about guns and hunting, and getting your first hunting license because you graduated from a hunter education course was a rite of passage. More than one of my school pals awoke on a Christmas morning to find a new .22-caliber rifle or .410 shotgun under the tree with his name on it.

While some things have changed over the decades, the need for solid firearms safety education has never been more important than right now. Ergo, the effort to make gun safety part of the public school curriculum.

Want to reduce the number of gun-related accidents in the home involving youngsters? Teach them about gun safety starting at an early age. From the moment my hunter safety class began at the tender age of 11, we learned the important rules: 1) Treat every gun as if it were loaded; 2) NEVER point a gun at anybody; 3) Keep your finger off the trigger until you’re ready to shoot; 4) Keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction at all times, up or at the ground, and so forth.

Whatsamadda U grads obviously think gun safety rules should be 1) All guns are evil, don’t touch them; 2) All guns should be banned, and 3) Only the police and military should have guns, and we’re not sure about the police!

As noted above, Kansas Senate Bill 116 wants to start the process early and if there’s a downside to that, I haven’t found it.

Cost Effective

According to the Kansas Reflector report, if SB 116 becomes law during this session, it will take effect July 1 and could reach an estimated 500,000 students.

The best part about this program is the estimated cost to taxpayers — $70,000. Any way you do the math, that looks like a very good cost-benefit ratio, especially if one applies the same principle to the Kansas proposal that anti-gunners routinely apply to every gun control scheme they manufacture: “If it saves just one life, it’s worth it.”

Hats off to Darren LaSorte, representing the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who reportedly told the Senate committee, “History and experience show that education must be encouraged, not suppressed. The anti-firearm zealots have weaponized firearm safety education and it is tragic. They cannot be suppressed and discouraged due to the political agendas of the most radical elements in our society.”

Want to strike a blow for gun safety? Teach one kid to shoot this year. Pass along a tradition of safety, marksmanship, firearms care and maintenance, and proper storage.

State AGs Sue ATF

You read that right; 24 state attorneys general have joined in a federal lawsuit challenging the new rule regarding “stabilizing braces” published by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The complaint names ATF, Attorney General Merrick Garland and ATF Director Steve Dettelbach as defendants.

All of the plaintiff AGs are Republicans, and Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen announced the legal action by noting, “This rule is simply a continuation of President Biden and his ATF puppet Steve Dettelbach’s assault on the gun rights of law-abiding Montanans. Under their gun control regime, millions of Americans owning these simple accessories now have a choice: register them with the ATF with a ridiculous fee or face federal criminal charges. This rule is flagrantly unconstitutional. Attaching a common pistol-stabilizing brace does not magically transform a pistol into a federally regulated short-barreled rifle.”

The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, Western Division.

This group of top state law enforcement officials appears to be on very solid ground, noting in their lawsuit, “ATF repeatedly issued letter rulings assuring manufacturers and the public that attaching a stabilizing brace would not alter the statutory or regulatory classification of a pistol or other firearm. As a result, millions of Americans have for years lawfully purchased stabilizing braces and pistols equipped with stabilizing braces from authorized, legitimate manufacturers with ATF’s full knowledge and express approval.”

Knudsen is the fellow who recently sent a letter to President Biden — signed by 15 of his fellow AGs — advising him they will fight his gun control efforts.

Now it’s ‘Deadly Carry’

The gun prohibition lobby evidently has a new slogan with which they hope to vilify the millions of law-abiding, legally armed citizens living in 25 states where it is no longer necessary to obtain a license or permit to carry.

Henceforth, this practice will be known as “deadly carry.” If that isn’t suitably inflammatory, they’ll come up with something else.

This term first surfaced last month during a public hearing on the “permitless carry” bill — House Bill 543 — and it came from a young woman testifying against the measure. Representing the “March for Our Lives” student movement, she told lawmakers, “Our leaders aren’t keeping us safe — so we called them out. Today, we testified AGAINST the Permitless Carry Bill introduced last week by Gov. DeSantis and the Florida House Speaker. It’s clear: Deadly carry just allows for firearms to be used dangerously and irresponsibly.”

Richard Nascak, a pal involved in the Florida Carry effort, fired right back by posting an image of a gun-toting bad guy on Twitter with this caption: “Worried about permitless carry? Criminals have enjoyed it for centuries!”

Court Order

There’s justice, and then there is just desserts justice.

Not long ago, the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association sued Illinois over its new law banning so-called “assault weapons.” Naturally, defendants in the case, including Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, get a chance to respond to the federal complaint, which seeks a preliminary injunction.

The judge in this case, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois, has advised Raoul and his fellow defendants that with their response, they “shall provide illustrative examples of each and every item banned” under the new law. Translation: The court wants photos of every firearm on the list, and there are a bunch of them.

The digital camera is going to need lots of replacement batteries!

Twits at Twitter

Last month, U.S. Senator Steve Daines (R-Montana) found himself at the center of a screwball — even by my standards — story in which he was suspended by Twitter for posting a photo of himself and his wife, Cindy, with her pronghorn, taken on a hunt in eastern Montana.

The image, according to the faceless censors, violated some sort of “community standard.” Considering some of the stuff that’s been allowed on Twitter over the years, it’s never been clear Twitter had any standards.

Daines, like any good outdoorsman, felt he had been wronged, and he had a lot of support from some fairly prominent friends on Capitol Hill and in the outdoors. Next thing you know, Elon Musk — the new owner of Twitter who has sent a fair number of folks packing since taking the helm — is reaching out to the senator.

In a detailed account of the misadventure, Daines wrote, “We had a very good conversation. 13 hours after my account had been shut down, had been censored, Elon intervened. He reinstated the account. We had a conversation as well about how he will work to change the policies at Twitter. Here is the problem, you have San Francisco elites who want to impose their values on the rest of America. Sometimes these elites who preach tolerance are the most intolerant people as evidenced by taking down that very awesome picture that I had with my wife and that antelope that we killed.”

Daines called the incident “absurd.” We saw others call it much worse.

Subscribe To GUNS Magazine