Gun Rights versus Gun Responsiblities.

[nicki]

The general public percieves us as promoting gun rights, but many people don't see us promoting gun responsiblity.

That is the perception and this is a area where I think we should look at for across the board public outreach.

This is something that maybe we could even work with government officials.

Imagine if there is a accidental child shooting and then it comes out that certain officials stopped firearms safety training for children not because of money, but because they had a political agenda.

The spin is they are willing to kill children to promote their agenda.

BTW, firearms safety bills have been introduced in the past in the Ca legislature, but the bills got killed by the CTA.

The MSM didn't cover the story then, but today we have alternative media, so the info won't stay suppressed like it did in the past.

We don't have to promote gun rights, what we promote is safe handling of firearms, particularly with children.

For example, a population group who generally votes for gun laws are single mothers.

Many single moms know little about firearms other than they hate guns.

What will get them to the class is will be "what if my little Johnny goes over to Billy's house and they find a gun".

Their concern to keep their children safe will open up a door for us and then they will see that we are not the insensitive, killers that we are portrayed to be by our opponents.

For you single guys on the forum, do I need to say more.

Nicki.

[bohoki]

yes there is the responsibility of ownership to take reasonable precautions to prevent said item from getting into the wrong hands

[radioburning]

This is a good point, Nicki. I never thought about it this way. Now I have a little more ammo for my arguments. Thanks!