Rifle Shooting: "Go ahead, make my day"

[Proud Eagle]

I certainly hope mk's comment wasn't really supposed to be quite so universal and definitive as it came out being. However, the statement by itself certainly seems like something from Mars, so foreign is that to me. Now certainly a law enforcement officer shouldn't be passing around his loaded service pistol to just anyone, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't ever give anyone else a weapon to fire. There are plenty of times that it would be quite normal for a LEO to give someone else a weapon to fire. Training new recruits, their kids, friends, neighbors or other intersted parties in proper and safe use of arms seems to me to be a reasonable idea. Then there are all the strange "what if" type scenarios that can happen out on the street. Maybe an officer is injured, under attack, unable to defend themselves, and a citizen happens to be available to assist but is unarmed. I must assume that mk was referring to some narrowly defined situation, such as an officer handing over his loaded service weapon to someone elses kid without the permission of the parent or the adult supervising the youth.

[mk9750]

Well, yet again, I am caught by my own inablity to succintly say everything I mean, and, in an effort to keep my message short, left out part of my thoughts.

 

Of course there are some reasonable situations that a Policeman would give someone else his gun, including the possiblity that he is instructing a MB with Scouts. My comment was based on the scenerio presented as I imagined it, in which two very seperate groups, Scouts and Policemen, are using a firing range at the same time, but not together, and a boy wondered over out of curiousity. In that specific scenerio, in my opinion, a reasonable Policeman would not hand any firearm over to a Scout.

 

Sorry my lack of communication skills caused confusion. Of course, I am not a cop, and therefore my assumption could be wrong.

 

Mark

[Fat Old Guy]

" In that specific scenerio, in my opinion, a reasonable Policeman would not hand any firearm over to a Scout."

 

One of the most common conversations between strangers at any range goes as follows:

 

"Dude, wotcha got there?"

 

It's a .450 Kaboomenthumper. I just picked it up.

 

"Killler, dude. That sounds sweet."

 

It sure is, would you like to shoot it?

 

"Dude! Excellent!"

 

In a perfect world, we'd get signed releases from the parents but too often the assumption is made that since the kid is there at the range, already shooting, that he is allowed to shoot anything.

[Sturgen]

I am aware that BSA does not permit the use of pistols in the program, outside of Venturing, and I can understand in part the reasoning behind this. However, part of scouting is teaching boys how to survive and an unfortunate fact in todays world is that there may be a time that basic use of a hand gun may be critical to saving a life. Since I could walk I have been trained to use weapons, ranging from BB-guns to .30-06 and .54 cal rifles and .40 and .44mag hand guns. I am fortunate enough to have been trained by retired Air Force, retired Marine, Police Officers and Federal Range Masters. Because of this I have always respected firearms, and to this day I am comfortable with almost any fire arm legal for civilian carry (have yet to get my hands on any fully auto assault weapons.) In the interest of firearms safety shouldnt the BSA train boys in how to use these weapons, the best way to get a boy to be dangerously interested in something is to make it forbidden. I am not suggesting that we intergrate .44 magnums or .30-06 rifles into the program, simply that as part of the rifle merit badge boys also learn about and fire larger caliber weapons than .22s as well as learn very basic skills in regards to handguns.

(I am quite aware that weapons do not exist in the BSA)

 

[KoreaScouter]

Personally, I'm comfortable with the rules the way they are right now. The most important thing Scouts need to know about weapons are the universal safety rules they're taught through the program, whether they're firing BB guns or .22s.

 

I've spent a fair amount of time on ranges myself, both as a student and instructor. In my experience, the most dangerous times on the line is when your student is firing a handgun. Smaller, shorter barrel length, in and out of holsters, that business end is much more likely to be all over the place compared with a long gun. The least danger I've ever felt on a range was at MPRC in Korea, firing the mortar.

 

I can't get inside BSAs head, but if I had to guess a commonsense reason for the handgun restriction, the increased safety risk has got to be it.

 

KS

[PinkFloyd]

KS,

I've tried sending you PM's to get a copy of your Eagle Scout Ceremony comments, but no reply thus far, so I'm trying this route.

Thanks,

PF

[KA6BSA]

With the BSA emphasis on range safety in our council we avoid the "w" word (weapon). The rangemaster has a coffee can there because the rule is anyone using the "w" word must put 25 cents in the can for every "w" word he hears. Rife, gun, firearm is fine... but not weapon, because the meaning is specific to fighting. Same reason laser tag is on the BSA bad list in the G2SS from pointing the business end at another person.

[Fat Old Guy]

" Rife, gun, firearm is fine... but not weapon, because the meaning is specific to fighting."

 

firearm (frrm) noun

A weapon, especially a pistol or rifle, capable of firing a projectile and using an explosive charge as a propellant.

 

An "arm" is a weapon, so by your reasoning "Firearm" should be taboo as well.