Glock / Legos experiment

B

Ben

New member
I was really surprised that a local television station in Atlanta (WGCL (local CBS)) did something that was NOT ------- sorry.

At first, the anchors mentioned to the viewers that tragedy's involving firearms & kids were rare, but that 40% of the gun-owners in America had kids. From there, they proceded to do a little test. An Ackworth police officer stuck an unloaded Glock in a Lego box and hid with the parents behind a 2-way (?) mirror. The kids were released into the play room, and promptly went to the lego box.

Sitting on top of the legos was a Glock. They all dove for it.

Initially, the parents were all extrememly confident that their kid would do "the right thing" and report it; but during the actual test, the kids all mentioned that they SHOULD report it, but I think only one of them did. Two or three of the others played intently with it for three whole minutes. Bear in mind, this is still only the media's account of the experiment. Two of the kids cried after they were corrected by the Ackworth officer, and I figured they learned a lesson the hard way that they will NEVER forget.

Besides the obvious flaws, what do you guys think about with trying a similar experiment with YOUR kids at YOUR home? I'll bet it left a lasting impression on these kids.

just wondering,
Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited August 17, 2000).]
 
Umm,

I think you mis-spoke when you called that piece "not anti-gun".

But, letting that pass...

No, I will not leave a weapon in a toybox to "test" a child.

First, that implies that a firearm is a toy for children.

Second, I believe that test was flawed, The obvious mistake is that the children were left unsupervised. (Some will say the gun was unsupervised. I say leave the gun in the room alone for a week and see how many accidents there are.)

Third, what were the results really. The way I remember this type of test, children who had been thru the Eddy Eagle program (or similar)were most likely to say they needed to tell an adult. Children who had no education were most likely to "PLAY" with the gun, due to the mystery of the object.
All the children eventually played with the gun, whether they had been thru a safety program or not.

The incorrect conclusion the program tried to bring out was children (even the ones who have been thru a safety class) WILL play with your guns. The implied correct conclusion is all parent should NOT have guns.


The conclusion(s) that SHOULD be made from such an event: (IMHO)


1) unsupervised children WILL get into trouble. (is the answer getting rid of guns? no, unless you are also going to get rid of electricity, bathtubs, 5 gallon buckets, pools etc...)

2) there is no more screaming testimonial to the fact that EDUCATION is the best answer to this scenario. (no, I do not think that ALL 4 year olds should be shooting. But education like the Eddy Eagle doesn't put guns in the hands of every child, but info in their heads.)

YMMV, but I doubt it. My 13 month old will explore everything within her reach, and since she started walking at 9 1/2 months her reach has been farther than one thinks. Do I get rid of my guns? NO.
Do secure my guns out of her reach? As far as you know, YES.
Will she get an education in firearms? yes, as soon as indicated by my child.


IMHO, sorry for the rant, but it's before my first cup of tea.

Gfrey
 
Even though a handgun was used in the "experiment", this is a General Discussion topic. Please look for it there...
 
There was a study done on this and it was discussed on rec.guns in the past.

The basic point is that at a certain age level even well meaning education doesn't work as the kids don't have the capacity to
inhibit themselves, even if they can articulate the reasons why they shouldn't do something.

So if you use kids below that age, of course, they pick up the gun. Kind of a cheap trick if you know the work.

So it is definitely antigun. One would have
to break it down by age to get a meaningful result.
 
Hey, no fair!

If I was gonna roll outta bed last night and crank up the browser to write MY POST, I would have done it. Seeing that someone would have stolen the story I was suppose to write about (obviously, I forgot to tell you Ben) :D I probably should have done such.

Check out MY POST my post Ben and let me know if everything I wrote was pretty much factual. I managed to capture quotes from the kids too!

------------------
God, Guns and Guts made this country a great country!
 
I remember one of those 'newz' shows doing the same thing a couple of years ago. [[Dateline. 2020..whatever.]]

Roo with ten kids about 5 and under.

some toys..and of course, a gun or two tucked away in plain site.

A couple of the kids wanted to tell and adult..but after a bit they were all playing 'cops-n-robber' or 'cowboys' and shooting each other.

Well, if you stick em in a room together by themselves with NO toys, guns, matches, nuclear weapons, rattlesnakes, etc...they'll play 'Doctor'.

Maybe we should ban sex too?

These are just little kids that don't have the reconicense of a pea. THAT's why ya gotta tell them over and over..."Don't- eat the glue, stick yer finger in a wall outlet, pull the dogs ears/tail/nuts, wipe yourself after poopy, yada-yada.

Not rocket science...unless yer an antigun goofball.

Heck, I know some people over the age of 25 that ya gotta keep tellin them the same thing. :D

------------------
Satanta, the Whitebear
Sat's Realm: http://SatantasRealm.tripod.com/Entrypage/entrypage.html

My Disability petition: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/DisbHelp/petition.html
 
How about another experiment?

Put a bunch of the pills that keep AIDS patients alive in a dish of candy. See what the kids do.

OR

Lay out a snow-white carpet. Set a table with china and crystal. Fill the glasses with red wine and pile the plates high with pasta and marinara sauce. See what the kids do.

If you have kids and you agree that it takes a family-not a village- to raise children, then you get my point.

Liberals are surprised that children need to be supervised because they believe it is OK to ship their kids to daycare 60 hours a week starting at 6 weeks of age.

I like this test the best:

Load a handgun. Make sure there is a round in the chamber. Place the gun on the shelf in your 1000 pound fire-proof gun safe and close the door. Let a dozen three year-olds into the room. Point to the safe and say, "There are fuzzy kittens and candy in there...and cookies and ice cream...". Then leave the room and watch from behind one-way glass.
 
Substitute the Glock with one of the following items and the result will be the same.

-Power saw
-Clothes iron
-Butcher knife
-Bottle of sulferic acid
-A block of C4 expolosive
-Bottle of crack rocks
-Bag of heroin

As mentioned earlier, put a deadly object in a toy container and it becomes a toy. If you stocked jewelry displays with nuts and bolts, children will think its jewelry. If somebody put acid (God forbid) in a wine bottle, somebody will drink it.

Here's and experiment they should try:
Put a loaded handgun, knife, telephone, and 4 rabid wolves into a room. Release the journalist into the room and lock the door. Watch from behind the glass and see what happens.
 
I was up late watching the local news re-runs... my brain was tired, and that could explain all the mistakes... or at least I'm going to blame them on that. But I'm glad someone else saw it.

I asked that you guys look BEYOND the obvious flaw of having a gun in a lego box easily accessable to children (albeit a BIG flaw). I was just thinking that these sorts of things make BIGGER impressions when they're caught in the act like in this case. But thanx for the great responses, and keep 'em coming.

Thanx,
Ben

------------------
Almost Online IM: BenK911
ICQ # 53788523
"Gun Control Is Being Able To Hit Your Target"

[This message has been edited by Ben (edited August 17, 2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top