Volokh has a story about a state legislator in California who wants to create an optional firearms safety curriculum. Of course, opposition is strong. What struck me most is Volokh’s heading for the post: he wonders if there are “shades of the sex education debate.”
Obviously, gun use, unlike sex, is not a natural biological function. Teenagers do not spontaneously acquire guns (and an intense urge to shoot them) at puberty.
However, there is a common principle: if a problem exists, education is a much better solution than denial. So in areas where gun usage is common, I think that a gun-safety curriculum at school makes sense. And I think that Volokh is very insightful in recognizing the instinctive repression–one could almost call it prudery–inherent in anti-gun activists’ reactions to proposals like this.
[powered by WordPress; 7 queries. 0.085 seconds ]
This is not the site of journalist and author Daniel Glick. His website is at danielglick.net
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Dec | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||
Sick Transit: A directionless train of thought. Sic transit cogitationes Danis.