Should kids be playing with toy weapons?

Post Reply New Topic

Here in the Netherlands the distribution of firearms is subjected to very tight regulations and restrictions, and their civilian use is pretty much limited to shooting ranges and hunting. They typically do not enter the general public space, unless through illegal means; every now and then there are shooting incidents and armed robberies.

Having said that, squirt guns and other toy guns are fairly popular among children (especially boys). I myself had much fun playing with squirt guns. They are virtually always very brightly coloured so that they do not resemble actual firearms. I think the fact that guns in general do not occur in Dutch households make them more of an 'alien' phenomenon to children; something they see on television in action cartoons or in video games, but not something they encounter in real life (unless their parents or other relatives enjoy hunting). Kinda like rocket ships or racing cars; something that exists, but is out of their reach (for the moment).

The most impolite thing that happens to me is when some entitled brat points a toy gun at me and pulls the trigger.

That's one thing I was always glad my parents kicked my ass about.

If it's spilling over, fuel for the fire and all that, maybe need to introduce an equal balance of chill and alternative outlet material. I never turned out too much of a savage and I took monumental delight in waving sticks, launching boulders or snowballs or bricks from pulverized buildings we went exploring pretending we were fighting off undead hordes from a split in the bowels of hell, firing all manner of gaudy firearms carrying water (usually it was acid and not bullets in my head, probably less considerate than bullets), hockey sticks acting as scythes the grim reaper would be proud of, play fights with cushions as boxing gloves, building figures out of every material imaginable only to smash up in brutal apocalyptic death matches... swimming in creative violence, just like capitalism! There's a limit to the acceptable delight in basking in innocently explored violence obviously.

I don't think realistic looking guns are an appropriate toy because of the danger of somebody thinking it is real but kids are going to make toy weapons out of anything. That is just the nature of how little boys play, me and my brother use to have fights with beanie babies so it really can be anything. A stick can be a toy weapon. I do think children should be taught firearm safety and the proper respect they need to have for it, my father taught me and I was always aware of what the potential grave consequences could be.

Try buying a Nerf gun. They are so benign and different from firearms that I doubt children would ever mistake the two.

So the officer should wait until they're shot in the head by a gunman before they shoot back?

Some toy guns look real.
Some real guns look fake.
Some real guns are disguised as innocuous objects.
Some minors get hold of real guns. The fact that they're in the hands of minors doesn't make them less deadly.

Completely disagree with your statement.

Suppose all toys guns, toy swords etc. were banned from being sold in stores? How would things be? Kids would take sticks and other objects and make pretend weapons out of them, wouldn't they?

Next time if you quote me, quote my entire sentence. As the second part is very important... The "gun" is not the issue. The officer had a history of poor performance and poor training. But the biggest issue, was poor parenting. Kid played stupid games and won a stupid prize.

I have zero issues with cops defending their self.

Article

I had no issue to take with the other part of your statement. It was absolutely poor parenting.


The police responded to a 911 call about "a male black sitting on a swing and pointing a gun at people" in a city park. The dispatcher, who was suspended for eight days, failed to relay all of the relevant information- such as the fact that the caller said the individual was a juvenile and the gun was "probably fake." With only the information they had, the officers came with guns ready. Not because they were bad cops, but because you don't use a taser on a gunman.

When they got there, they saw a gunman who was 5'7 and 195lbs. In another article, it said that "The police department has said that Rice was reaching for what appeared to be a weapon tucked in his waistband as the car approached."

The lawsuit, being a lawsuit, is full of accusations and claims that will need to be proven in court. With the information they had, I don't think they were acting "unreasonably, negligently, recklessly, wantonly, willfully, knowingly, intentionally, and with deliberate indifference to the safety and rights of Tamir Rice."

The officer who fired the fatal shot was Loehman, who was released from his previous employment for being '“distracted and weepy” during a firearms qualification course the previous day. “He could not follow simple directions, could not communicate clear thoughts nor recollections, and his handgun performance was dismal,” (Police Deputy Chief) Polak wrote in the letter to the city’s human resources director.'

He wasn't fired for shooting a kid or a little old lady. He wasn't fired for discharging his weapon at a baseball field when he got really excited. He was fired because he was clearly upset about something (he said it was his girlfriend breaking up with him) and he failed to hit his target for qualification. Obviously he must have got a handle on it eventually, because there isn't a law enforcement job out there where you carry a gun but you don't have to qualify with it. I think most people would have told him to take some time off to get over the girlfriend.

had neighbors [I think they were Quaker or something like that] who punished their children when they'd do that, they were not allowed to play-act violently at all. no cops and robbers games for those kids. many schools nowadays no longer allow cops and robbers-style play on school grounds, either.

Yes, partially nibbled Pop-Tarts and pointed five-year-old fingers are quite popular (and in the minds of some scaredy-cat people, criminal) in any generation. This is also a factor in the idea that banning firearms couldn't possible result in people making their own. Building a firearm is dangerous, but can be done with some basic skill. As with the toy versions, banning firearms is a fool's errand.

If the latest budget proposal is any indication, the job outlook for people wanting to work with real ones in the future look real good.

Children aren't gonna stop playing "cops and robbers", and "cowboys and Indians", nor stop playing with little plastic "army men" any time soon.

My mom just a few days ago bought new squirt guns for the swimming pool. Of course they don't look anything like real guns, so who cares? Still, I'm very bewildered by Americans' obsession with guns.

Personally, I'd rather play around with my squeezable, squirting plastic toys of Dory, Marlin and Nemo in the pool. They're much cuter.

No American has ever done what Prince William and Prince Harry did years ago when they obliterated every living animal at one of the "royal preserves" managed by Prince Philip ... in a single day. Talk about obsession with firearms. It was a bloodlust as far as the next royal generation was concerned (something to worry about, in any case). The younger princes have done this frequently in their nations and others; find it all in an Internet search.

No, Americans don't do this. We leave that to the inbred upper-class twits.

I found that all roads lead back to the Daily Mail. I share their suspicion about royal twits, but they have the same credibility as The National Enquirer. Also, the story uses an anonymous source for anyone counting. Is "I'm told" code for anything in England?