Gov. Bob McDonnell Brings The NRA Into Virginia Elementary School Classrooms

[cal04]

Gov. Bob McDonnell Brings The NRA Into Virginia Elementary School Classrooms
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/25/nra-virginia-classrooms/


The right-wing Virginia government led by Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) has steadily been pushing the National Rifle Association’s (NRA) agenda, recently passing a law allowing “concealed carry permit holders to bring loaded guns” into bars. Now, McDonnell is bringing the NRA into elementary school classrooms to tell children to be careful around this proliferation of guns.

Earlier this year, the Virginia legislature passed a bill allowing public schools to “offer gun-safety education to students in kindergarten through fifth grade.” Included in the legislation was a provision directing these gun safety programs to use materials from the National Crime Prevention Center as well as the NRA:

The curriculum guidelines shall incorporate, among other principles of firearm safety, accident prevention and the rules upon which the Eddie Eagle Gunsafe Program offered by the National Rifle Association or the program of the National Crime Prevention Center is based.

There is no National Crime Prevention Center. However, there is a National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) — the group behind McGruff the Crime Dog. But when McDonnell signed the legislation, he didn’t insert the NCPC’s name. Instead he offered this change:

Strike or the program of the National Crime Prevention Center.

With this simple move, McDonnell ensured that the NRA has a monopoly on elementary school classrooms. A McDonnell spokesperson “said that rather than fixing the name, the governor deleted it because the council doesn’t have a current stand-alone gun-safety program.” Lori Hass, a board member for the Virginia Center for Public Safety, a nonprofit committed to reducing gun violence, said McDonnell was “playing a game of semantics to force a lobby and their interests into the curriculum, into what they would offer local school boards.”

The NRA’s Eddie Eagle Safety Program has been around since 1988, and gives children this advice if they come upon a gun: “STOP! Don’t Touch. Leave the Area. Tell an Adult.” However, this program has been heavily criticized for being “insufficient.” As Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, writes:

In fact, a study published in 2004 by the American Academy of Pediatrics found that children could memorize Eddie’s simple advice about avoiding guns, but that advice went unheeded when children were put in real-life scenarios and asked to role-play a response. Indeed, not a single child out of 11 in the Eddie Eagle program study “used the skills in a real-life situation.” The authors noted, “Studies have found that when children find guns, they often play with them,” and concluded: “Existing programs are insufficient for teaching gun-safety skills to children.”

Another study published in the late 1990s by the Violence Policy Center (VPC) noted that Eddie Eagle was like “Joe Camel with feathers,” pointing out that: “The primary goal of the National Rifle Association’s Eddie Eagle program is not to safeguard children, but to protect the interests of the NRA and the firearms industry by making guns more acceptable to children and youth... The hoped-for result is new customers for the industry and new members for the NRA.”

ThinkProgress recently attended the annual NRA convention, where we found that NRA members often disapproved of the extreme agenda pushed by the organization’s leadership, including the campaign to bring guns into bars and allow people on the terrorist watch list to have firearms.

[joeybee12]

1. Ridiculous...res'ing before the you-know-whos get to this...and try to

spin this program as "common sense." They're half-right...common, but no sense.

[slackmaster]

3. I accept and agree with the American Acacemy of Pediatrics' statement on this one, joeybee12

I would bet a lot of money that I have taught gun safety to a whole lot more people than any member of our anti-gun contingent on this board has.

[Winterblues]

4. How do children from homes without guns learn about them?

I am not one that believes guns solve problems. I believe they create them but since America is inundated by them our children need some education about them. Whether the NRA is the proper organization to do that is arguable but education needs to happen.

[slackmaster]

6. They learn about them by watching examples of poor and irresponsible gun handling on TV

And in video games.

[gorfle]

20. What parts of the program do you disagree with?

Here is one of the Eddie Eagle teaching videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIEBrb_wRYc

In what way is this video not common sense?

[Callisto32]

35. It's the EEEEEBILLLL NRA?

That seems to be the (.22?) long and short of it.

My favorite part is where the Brady bunch calls it "insufficient." If there were any more to it they would complain they were "teaching kids to be crazed mass murderers," or something.

[katzenjammers]

43. Some people would rather have others remain ignorant than taught by the "wrong" people.

...

[slackmaster]

2. I certainly hope that a child has much less than a 1 in 11 chance of finding an unsecured firearm

Both adults and children need to be taught gun safety.

The authors noted, “Studies have found that when children find guns, they often play with them,” and concluded: “Existing programs are insufficient for teaching gun-safety skills to children.”

Based on my experiences teaching gun safety to people of all ages, and dealing with children in general, the conclusion doesn't surprise me and I agree completely that existing programs, including Eddie Eagle, are inadequate.

A good gun safety training program IMO necessarily involves hands-on behavior training, with at least simulated firearms. Models made of solid bright blue or red plastic are commonly used for situations where the presence of a real gun or a realistic mock gun is inappropriate.

One of the first things I often do as an instructor is hand a simulated or real, disabled gun to a novice student. More often than not, the person will grasp the gun and put his or finger through the trigger guard, and point it at something. Those actions violate at least two of the basic rules of safe firearm handling, and that can provide a good starting point for re-training people to do it right. That includes what NOT to do, like pointing it at your friend, as well as what TO do, e.g. how to safely unload common types of firearms.

I think elementary school is too young for that kind of training. High school is fine.

[JBoy]

5. Isn't that the same technique as for abstinence education?

STOP! Don't touch! Leave the area. Wait till you're an adult.

[slackmaster]

7. Yes, and it has the same fundamental problem of making the object seem forbidden

And therefore somehow attractive to many kids.

[gorfle]

21. Absolutely.

Isn't that the same technique as for abstinence education? STOP! Don't touch! Leave the area. Wait till you're an adult.

Absolutely. The correct approach to teaching about firearms, just like when teaching about sex, would be to teach how to engage in the activity safely and responsibly.

But they would never allow such pro-firearm instruction in schools. So we are left with an abstinence-only approach, which is better than nothing, I guess.

[X_Digger]

8. "National Crime Prevention Center" doesn't exist

National Crime Prevention Council does exist, but they're not prepared to participate-

Andrew Fois, a managing director of the National Crime Prevention Council, said that his group would be "thrilled to be included" in the program but that it does not have the resources to revise its gun safety material.

"We weren't consulted before we were put in," Fois said. "And we weren't consulted now that we've been taken out."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/20/AR2010042003752.html

[TheCowsCameHome]

9. So what's next?

This is a slippery slope.

[slackmaster]

10. How so?

:shrug:

Maybe the way it's being done is ineffective, but that doesn't mean that teaching gun safety is inherently a bad thing.

[TheCowsCameHome]

11. Special interest groups will want in on the act once the door is opened..

Let's try to stick to academics in the classroom.

[Statistical]

12. So you are against DARE, sex education, and "stranger danger" programs in school too?

Nothing wrong with teaching kids that guns are dangerous and they should tell an adult if they see one.

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. Do we need the NRA to come in for that?

Let's have Brady come in, too. And all the other pro and anti gun organizations, not just the NRA. Who the heck is the NRA to be the chosen one?

Let's get Operation Rescue to drop by, while we're at it. And Planned Parenthood. We need lots of diverse pinions on a host of subjects.

[Statistical]

16. Brady campaign has no weapons safety programs.

They simply want to pretend guns don't exist or that they can ban them.
NRA safety programs are recognized as one of the nations best.

Eddie Eagle program has been around for 20+ years. NRA provides grant funding and makes the information open and available.

There is nothing in the program than encourages gun ownership. The protagonist is never shown touching a firearm.

STOP. DON'T TOUCH. LEAVE THE AREA. TELL AN ADULT.

Pretty no nonsense stuff there.

[jazzhound]

18. Brady and other pro-control organizations won't "come in" because they're

entire reason for existence is to delegitimize firearms. To counsel kids on gun safety would be tantamount to "legitimizing" firearms. Historically, pro-"control" groups have shown complete disinterest in any policy which doesn't include restricting or eliminating guns from public ownership. This has been demonstrated repeatedly by their complete lack of interest w/regard to dramatic reductions in gun-related accidents and homicides which coincide with large increases in the national gun supply. I've quoted Don Kates frequently on this subject:

"Were health advocates rationally concerned about preserving human life, a two-thirds decline in fatal gun accidents should have been of great interest to them. Even in the absence of such concern, any honest scholarly proponent of the health advocacy shibboleth would be deeply interested in a phenomenon that diametrically contradicts that shibboleth. The interest should have been particularly intense and urgent for scholars motivated not by academic curiosity alone, but also by concern to preserve human life. After all, there must be some explanation for a two-thirds reduction in accidental gun deaths, and particularly for it's coinciding with a 173% increase in handguns. If that mysterious explanation could be determined, it might suggest strategies to reduce gun suicide or gun murders as well.<179> This potential should especially have attracted health (p.558)advocates; for, as we shall see, they have a penchant for combining statistics of gun fatality by suicide, homicide and accident into one homogeneous group, as if the three were related or homogeneous phenomena.

Of course, upon investigation it might turn out that no ready explanation can be found for the decline in gun accidents. Or, if an explanation is determinable, it might not be helpful in curbing gun murders and/or suicides. But the possibility that investigation could be fruitless does not explain, much less justify, the health advocates' total lack of interest in pursuing such an investigation--the fact that the decline itself has gone virtually unmentioned and that there has been no focus at all on its implications in the health advocacy literature against guns.<180>(p.559) This total disinterest has an interesting implication of its own. Without denying that health advocates do care about reducing gun death, their disinterest in the twenty-year decline in accidental death implies that their concern is severely compromised by their hatred of guns. Though avowing a deep and single-minded concern to save lives, they seem interested only in ways of doing so which involve reducing access to guns. At least we can think of no other reason for their total lack of interest in finding out how and why accidental gun death could decline by two thirds over a period when the handgunstock was increasing by 173%."

From "Epidemic of Violence or Pandemic of Propaganda"

[gorfle]

22. Does the Brady group have a firearm safety curriculum?

Let's have Brady come in, too. And all the other pro and anti gun organizations, not just the NRA. Who the heck is the NRA to be the chosen one?

I'm open to any organizations that have a proven firearm safety training curriculum. Does the Brady group have one?

[AtheistCrusader]

24. We had Planned Parenthood come to my school to teach sex ed.

At least the contraceptive part of it.

Why not the NRA for gun safety? If there's a better curriculum out there, by all means, point it out. Maybe they are using the NRA training materials because it is popular, widely used, well developed, and probably as effective as anything else you're going to find.

[Callisto32]

36. NRA and NRA/Ila

There is a difference.

[Euromutt]

37. The Eddie Eagle program doesn't come with NRA people attached

Anybody can order the program materials, and the NRA doesn't attach any conditions regarding who can teach it. If a school district wants to integrate the materials into the curriculum, to be taught by the kids' regular teacher (with the school janitor hoisting on the suit, if desired), that's just fine. The program materials don't mention the NRA at all, so you practically teach the program without bringing the NRA into it at all (aside from ordering the materials from them).

Look, it's fair enough to be cynical about why the NRA set up the Eddie Eagle program, but give the NRA credit for having some public relations savvy. The Eddie Eagle program itself is impeccable (for an abstinence-only program), precisely because it serves the NRA's cause better to be perceived as doing good, than it is to be seen to be demonstrably trying to indoctrinate America's youth via the country's public institutions.

[slackmaster]

13. I take it you are opposed to sex education, drug abuse prevention programs, and physical education

The kids would be very bored in your ideal world.

[TheCowsCameHome]

14. Are you willing to have the Brady group visiting K-5 classrooms,

or any other organizations opposed to guns? They preach about guns, too.

My question stands - where does it stop?

You can't pick and choose.

[DonP]

17. Last time I checked the Brady people have no gun safety program

Other than their patented Paul Helmke/Mr. Mackey program - "Gun's r bad, mmmkay?"

If they have one it comes as a surprise to many of us.

On the other hand the NRA has been teaching gun safety for decades, to the point where your local police force and the US Army uses them for everything from basic gun safety and marksmanship to running the SDM (Squad Designated Marksman) program for AIT in the Army.

Let's see who do I want to teach gun safety to children? The group I don't like, but they actually know what they're doing and have proof of success or the group I agree with that doesn't really know jack shit about the subject?

Oh and yes you can pick and choose. Based on competency on the subject, not political fears.

[AtheistCrusader]

25. I'd be perfectly happy if the Brady Bunch would do gun safety training.

Because to little kids, it's going to probably be the same thing. Don't touch it. Tell an adult. Same as Eddie Eagle.

[slackmaster]

27. I'd rather not have either the NRA or the Brady people visit K-5 classrooms

That's a little too young.

As for the Brady people, all they have to offer is political indoctrination. The NRA does actually teach gun safety.

[TheCowsCameHome]

28. Neither, but, but, but since it's the NRA, well......OK.

And political indoctrination isn't unique to Brady, by any means.

The last NRA mailing I received was a real pantload.

[slackmaster]

29. The last one I got from the NRA was telling people who NOT to vote for for Sheriff

They didn't try to tell people who to vote FOR.

[TheCowsCameHome]

30. I noticed that, too.

Always against someone.

That's why I throw their stuff away.

[Euromutt]

34. Again, the NRA has an established gun safety program

I can see that any state board of education would take an attitude of "why re-invent the wheel?" when there's an established program readily available. And the Eddie Eagle program doesn't contain any political indoctrination; it doesn't advocate gun ownership, or NRA membership, and in fact does not even mention the NRA (nor is Eddie shown so much as touching a firearm). The program doesn't have to be taught by NRA employees or NRA-certified instructors, it's available in English and Spanish, and the NRA even provides grant funding (http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/grantfunding.asp) for school districts et al. who can't pay the full cost of the materials.

Honestly, if you know of a better, cheaper and more readily available alternative, I'd love to hear about it.

[jazzhound]

31. True, this.

As for the Brady people, all they have to offer is political indoctrination. The NRA does actually teach gun safety.

This is why you'll never see the VPC or Brady campaign involve themselves in safety training. To do so would be to admit that firearms have a legitimate (defensive) purpose in the hands of citizens.

Gary Kleck makes an extremely compelling case for the covert prohibitionist intentions of the pro-"control" movement. He points out that their rhetoric doesn't line up with their actions in many areas. They say that all they want is moderate "common sense" controls, while all of their actions indicate that they're taking an incremental approach in hopes that a political opening will allow for more draconian restrictions.

[PavePusher]

26. A slippery slope to being educated?

Lions and tigers and bears, Oh My!!

[gorfle]

19. What would be sufficient?

The NRA’s Eddie Eagle Safety Program has been around since 1988, and gives children this advice if they come upon a gun: “STOP! Don’t Touch. Leave the Area. Tell an Adult.” However, this program has been heavily criticized for being “insufficient.” As Paul Helmke, the president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, writes:

In fact, a study published in 2004 by the American Academy of Pediatrics found that children could memorize Eddie’s simple advice about avoiding guns, but that advice went unheeded when children were put in real-life scenarios and asked to role-play a response. Indeed, not a single child out of 11 in the Eddie Eagle program study “used the skills in a real-life situation.” The authors noted, “Studies have found that when children find guns, they often play with them,” and concluded: “Existing programs are insufficient for teaching gun-safety skills to children.”

So one naturally wonders, then, what the Brady Campaign considers "sufficient" in a firearm safety training program?

If the message in this video is insufficient, what would they do to improve it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIEBrb_wRYc

[AtheistCrusader]

23. The Violence Policy Center is a bunch of idiots.

Well, a couple anyway, I know their membership is down. To... a few. Maybe 3. Something like that.

Anyhoo, if they want to have a dog in this fight, and 'Stop, don't touch, leave the area, tell an adult' isn't good enough, why doesn't the VIOLENCE POLICY CENTER come up with a better curriculum?

[Euromutt]

33. The VPC doesn't have members, it has employees

The VPC essentially consists of Josh Sugarmann, Kristin Rand, three or four employees and maybe an intern or two. And a generous injection of funding from the Joyce Foundation.

[jazzhound]

32. Did anyone else catch Olbermann's moronic rant on this story tonight?

The NRA = pure evil (implied) ergo McDonnell = nut job.

Sadly, Keith is a raging hypocritical bigot on the gun control/gun violence issue, and dumber than a tub of mud.

[slackmaster]

38. He's either totally right or totally wrong about just about everything

Usually right, but when he's wrong he's way wrong.

[jazzhound]

39. Agreed.

His obvious hatred of guns doesn't allow him to see straight on the guns/violence issue ---- much like the gun-aversive dyslexia we see so regularly from posters here.

[slackmaster]

40. I saw part of his spitting-mad rant about how people on the "terror watch list" should be prohibited

From buying guns. He was completely out of his skull and dead wrong.

[RamboLiberal]

42. Yeah this was one time I disagreed with KO

He was all wet on this one.

[katzenjammers]

44. He's a world expert on everything. If you don't believe it, just ask him.

grr

[RamboLiberal]

41. This is one of the rare times I disagreeded with KO on a worst person

I do think McDonnell shouldn't have struck out the National Crime Prevention Center but trying to paint the NRA Eddie Eagle program as Joe Camel with Feathers is ridiculous. IMHO Eddie Eagle is a very good program that teaches children to not handle a gun without an adult present and to call an adult if they find a gun and to not touch it.

VPC and Brady Center tend to go in to hysterics where guns are concerned.

[jazzhound]

45. "......but trying to paint the NRA Eddie Eagle program as Joe Camel with

feathers is ridiculous."

Yeah ------ hard to imagine a line more dishonest and stupid than that one.