Actually, this isn't all bad....

[Oscar]

Just ran across this article in one of my more trustworthy newsources. Despite the natural first reaction, it actually gives me hope for my own kids -- hope that they won't have to "socialize" with a bunch of idiots that feed our good kids with the constant diet of anti-gun BS they get fed by their namby pamby parents. These people, blindly led by their omniscient pediatricians (surprise surprise), thinks they will be able to "marginalize" law abiding gun owners. Just one problem -- there's way too many of us to be "marginalized" by anybody.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200108\CUL20010820a.html

Johns Hopkins Lays Out 'Ask-Tell' Gun Program
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
August 20, 2001

(CNSNews.com) - The Johns Hopkins Children's Center Monday is launching a national campaign that will encourage parents to ask other parents if they keep a gun in the house before sending their children over to play.

The new campaign is called ASK, which stands for "Asking Saves Kids."

According to press reports, the ASK campaign was developed by the Johns Hopkins Children's Center, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Maryland Attorney General's office.

The Johns Hopkins School of Public Health includes a Center for Gun Policy and Research, which describes itself as being dedicated to preventing gun-related deaths. The Center also tracks the number of children who are killed each year by guns.

The Johns Hopkins program parallels other efforts that also encourage people to inquire about firearms in private homes.

Earlier this year, a New York-based non-profit group called Pax launched an advertising campaign urging parents to ask if the home where their child is going to play has a gun.

A spokesman for Pax told CNSNews.com in May that the group doesn't get involved in the politics of gun control legislation per se, but does support government control of private firearm transactions and the making of "ballistic fingerprints" of guns, a process in which a cartridge is fired from a gun and a ballistic record made before the buyer takes possession of the weapon.

But the 2nd Amendment group Gun Owners of America considers Pax an organization that wants to erode gun rights and demonize gun owners.

"Pax is a politically motivated organization that would rob people of the most effective means of self-defense," claimed John Velleco, spokesman for the Gun Owners of America.

 

[Dave R]

Although it bugs me that the assumption behind this program is "you shouldn't let your kids play with kids whose parents keep guns, because that's dangerous", I have no problems with people asking me if I keep guns. I can always choose whether/what to answer.

And personally, I feel safer with my kids at a home where I know the homeowner is qualified to use a firearm safely.

 

[ctdonath]

Beware of agreeing with the enemy. You grant them strength to pull the rug out from under you. Noble causes born of evil intent use/abuse good to achieve disasterous ends.

 

[longeyes]

Got to hand it 'em, pretty diabolical. Nothing will make a parent renounce his guns faster than his kid's becoming a social pariah. Social exclusion can indeed be an effective psychological weapon. The challenge is to find the appropriate counter-measure. The REAL "gun war" is going to be fought in the hearts and minds of the next generation, not this one.

 

[AnotherPundit]

"Of course I have a gun. You don't? Don't you care about defending your children?"


That's it.

 

[Mike Irwin]

A friend of mine (Ok, a friend of a friend) is a pediatrician, and is an absolutely RABID anti-gun fanatic.

Her husband is a shooter and hunter, though.

 

[Mike in VA]

They had a boo-hoo vignette about ASK on FoxNews this morning. I'm sorry about the loss of the kid, but it was stupidity and negligence that caused the accident, not a gun, per se.

As usual, it was an emotional arguement, rife with inuendo that 'guns are bad, therefore gun owners are bad', ignoring the pragmatic solution, i.e. beyond securing your guns, gun-proof your kids.

 

[longeyes]

Trouble is, emotional arguments are effective, especially in politics. "AnotherPundit" has a good answer: Having a gun equals a desire to protect children. The issue is getting that across in a way that turns the debate around. I believe what JH is doing should be watched very carefully and responded to aggressively. Stigmatizing gun ownership as a kind of noxious "social disease" is the kind of strategy that over time can win an overwhelming constituency of voters to their side. If we don't want to end as an embattled and increasingly marginalized minority clinging to what are viewed as outworn and vile habits, we'll have to make a better case for the positive presence of firearms and not just defiantly wave the Second Amendment banner.

 

[Oscar]

I have no fear of my kids becoming social pariahs, not even here in ultra-liberal Minneapolis. I ran this article by a couple of buddies (who happen to have kids that my kids play with all the time), and their reaction was essentially the same as mine -- e.g., "let the little nazis socialize with themselves, and let our kids hang out with other good kids from well-adjusted families."

I'm hardly "agreeing with the enemy". All I'm saying is that this initiative simply won't have the impact on our families that it was intended to have. It's both irksome and laughable to me for people with little if any discernable moral foundation to become so sanctimoniously condescending on issues such as gun ownership, global warming, smoking . . . you name it.

Regards.

 

[Coronach]

I, too, like AnotherPundit's response. Thats my answer whenever anyone asks me if having to own a gun 'bothers' me, since I am a LEO.

I usually respond with a quizzical expression. "No, why?" Then I pretend to 'get it.' "You mean you DON'T own a gun? Do you pay attention to the news?"

That usually takes them down a notch and actually has opened up some good conversations.

Mike