Hunter Education Discussion

[hdshot]

I just did boaters ed online last summer learned a lot.  I always joked about the red-green light as x-mas lights until now.  But back to the subject, my Dad did hunters ed and was always annoyed by how hunting was looked at as brain surgery and the world will be destroyed if you even sneeze.  Students treated as if they didn't have a clue.  Firearm safety comes down to the family and friends the person hangs around and that involves with every thing in life.  Hunters ed should stress hunting is a privilege and one whoops that gets a person into law trouble that's it.  DWI, forget hunting in Canada.  No one can take your b-day away but hunting another story.  Have a fun hunt and don't loose it. 

There is just so much that could go into hunters ed but keeping it simple and like the boaters online course is about the best way.  Reason is people need to get a taste to go and educate themselves.  When I took hunters ed I was propped up to think I know every thing there is to know about the hunting after I got my card.  And reading hunter ed posts it seems most want the class to teach almost everything possible.                       

[Bob33]

The three basic things that every graduate must know: (1) which end of the gun is the muzzle, and that is must never be pointed at something that should not be shot; (2) every firearm is loaded; (3) positive identification of a target and what is beyond it are minimum requirements before putting a finger on the trigger.

Learning first-aid, survival, and how to field-dress a dead animal are nice to haves but not essential, in my opinion.  Those are disciplines that can be learned in more depth via other methods.

[ghosthunter]

The three basic things that every graduate must know: (1) which end of the gun is the muzzle, and that is must never be pointed at something that should not be shot; (2) every firearm is loaded; (3) positive identification of a target and what is beyond it are minimum requirements before putting a finger on the trigger.

Learning first-aid, survival, and how to field-dress a dead animal are nice to haves but not essential, in my opinion.  Those are disciplines that can be learned in more depth via other methods.

I don't disagree with that.

[ghosthunter]

I just did boaters ed online last summer learned a lot.  I always joked about the red-green light as x-mas lights until now.  But back to the subject, my Dad did hunters ed and was always annoyed by how hunting was looked at as brain surgery and the world will be destroyed if you even sneeze.  Students treated as if they didn't have a clue.  Firearm safety comes down to the family and friends the person hangs around and that involves with every thing in life.  Hunters ed should stress hunting is a privilege and one whoops that gets a person into law trouble that's it.  DWI, forget hunting in Canada.  No one can take your b-day away but hunting another story.  Have a fun hunt and don't loose it. 

There is just so much that could go into hunters ed but keeping it simple and like the boaters online course is about the best way.  Reason is people need to get a taste to go and educate themselves.  When I took hunters ed I was propped up to think I know every thing there is to know about the hunting after I got my card.  And reading hunter ed posts it seems most want the class to teach almost everything possible.                       

As a instructor for a while now. I got in to this for one reason. To teach safe gun handling with real working firearms. I don't think that first aid, conservation really make any impact. After I taught for many years I added ethics to my list of important topics.
I think there are alot of good parents out there who teach their kids gun safety better than I ever could. But there are alot who do not have a clue. It is not my job as an instructor to sort them out. My job is to teach a program. The program says I will teach this ,this and this and that's what I do. But I teach safe gun handling that is my intrest. And any student who passes my class can safely handle a variety of long guns. Any student who does not pass just isn't ready.
How can I say that. By the time the student gets to the skills handling he or she has had 5-6 hours of hands on skin to stock instruction. If that student cannot go through a short 20 minute skill test without pointing the firearm at an instructor or someone else. Than that student is not ready.

My class will have range day sunday. Tonight they had skill testing, they had already passed the written exam. We were running them through the short skills coarse. Select a pump shotgun,select the ammo (dummies) cross a fence,demonstrate zone of fire, 2 different carries, put it in a truck ,back in the rack. 3 students per group.
Eight year old boy walks up to the ammo, and levels his shot gun at another group of students 50 ft, away while reading the gauge from the barrel of his gun. He finshed the coarse and I failed him. Now he knew what he had done, other instructors observed him through a window. But he was upset. He worked hard,he studied,his brother 2 years older made it. I wish he had passed. All he had to do was keep the muzzle up and he would have been home free.
Am I lacking because he didn't. I don't think so. I gave that little guy all the instruction and time he needed to succeed. He leveled that gun for one reason.
He was not ready. He was not able to do what he needed to do to keep the gun in a safe direction.
Now here is the parent part.
His dad calls me tonight after I got home from class, says he is heart broken. Wants to know if the son  could go through a internet skills coarse after our range day with another instructor who teaches internet reviews. Really??
I gave him the instructors number and said I know little about internet classes but you can call him.

This is my point all indications are this little guy needs another year or two. Why push it?
Its a competive world succeed at any cost. Not sure that is the best thing for hunting.

I have had 3rd generations through my classes. I have had fathers and grandfather's come to me and tell me that their kids still as adults when hunting practice working the action three times every time they pick up a long gun.

The point is you can only do so much in the time allotted and the student either gets it or they don't.
I would be perfectly happy if a class was gun handling, range ,and ethic  it pertains to hunting only. With real Firearms.

[hdshot]

Lot of good points ghost, agree about the 8yr old, still has time.  One thing I have learned and never talked is to also watch the other muzzles around you.  I can't count how many time I stared down a barrel during non-shooting times.  I have learned to move out of the way and announce my self.  Felt bad when I lost track or thought my barrel was safe.  Out hunting watch out for your partner even when out of site.  A hunter has to be careful when joining back up with a group.  When VP Cheney shot is friend, that hunter put no thought into what Cheney's line of fire and did nothing to announce himself when he was joining back.  Like walking in the wally world parking lot, watch out for the other guy.  May not be at fault but your dead or hurt and believe people can never be defensive enough.  Can never practice enough gun safety, but be ready to learn from real life failure because it will happen.  Just a believer never give someone who fails later an out to say they passed and know what we are doing.  No easy answer but making class longer and harder just turns people away.  I know with my job hunters ed would be totally out of the question if I had to do it today in class room sessions.                   

[Brownarola]

GH - if a kid muzzles someone in the classroom during hands on instruction use that as a teaching moment. Stop the class and ask the other students what did he do wrong? You should get the correct response. By putting the student in the lime light typically this will cure the issue and hopefully they will no longer repeat this behavior. After that use the student to demonstrate the correct method of securing a firearm which then gives the student experience. One method you may wish to try is to have the student turn their classmates when loading or unloading a firearm. If you think about it, a person would not naturally shoulder a firearm to load or unload it and with their back to the other students, the chance of muzzling has dramatically decreased.  You also need to remember you have had many years of firearm handling experience and you are aware of muzzle control. A student of eight does not possess the same amount of knowledge and the only way this will occur is for the student to construct that knowledge through hands on training. Older students will not require as much hands on training as younger students so you may need to increase the amount of hands on training for younger students. If this occurred during the actual hands on skills evaluation  after the test, I also agree with your decision because during the evaluation phase of the class, we are assuming he knows how to handle the firearm safely. One more thing to also realize is that kids don't think as we do and when you asked him to verify the shell length and gauge his and his mind was focused on that one task and he forgot about the muzzle which is better caught in the classroom then in the field. Like you mentioned he just needs more firearm handling time.

[Brownarola]

The debate over firearms in classroom has presented only one side of the argument. Instructors feel there must be live firearms in the classroom because it's different when students handle the real deal. Let's look at this in a different perspective. What if you were someone who simply wanted to teach firearm safety but you did not possess any firearms. You do not have the funds to go out and purchase firearms but as many instructors have pointed out you learn by doing. What would be your advise? Go out and spend your hard earned money on firearms just so you may teach hunter education or let the state provide you with a set of inert firearms? Don't say the state will lend you some or borrow some from a friend. That never works. Is it fair that this person cannot teach because they do not have live firearms? Would it be fair to the instructor that they are forced to borrow firearms from someone or the state and then something happens where the instructor must replace the missing firearm?

Now suppose you wish to teach at the local schools. What people fail to realize is that schools have the right to restrict the bringing of live firearms on to their property even if it is for a hunter education course. It just takes a vote by the school board to nix firearms. However they have no issues with inert firearms. If the instructor cannot line up a fire department or other public meeting place and the public schools are the only option and they do not allow working firearms, the only choice for an instructor in this scenario is to not use firearms or use inert ones and inert ones are better than no firearms at all. 

Here is something else I want you to think about. How many students do you personally know. Do you know their background? Do you know them? If you watch the news something is starting to appear more often; home invasion robberies and daylight burglaries. What makes you think something like this would not occur to you? Think about this. When you are bring live firearms into your classroom you are telling students, "Hey, I have these guns in my house." What happens when one of your students happens to be a gang member? You are probably scoffing at me. "I don't have gang members in my class." I'm going to tell you that you are gravely mistaken. Gangs typically recruit members from middle school students. i.e. 9 - 14 year old kids, and in order to become full members they have to perform some task which just might be a home invasion robbery. Don't be tricked into judging a book by it's cover. You can sugar coat poison but the fact remains that under that sweet outer shell is something that can kill you.

Your next thought may be "they do not know where I live and if they break in, I'll shoot them" or "my guns are in a safe; good luck." First if you think students cannot follow you home or look you up your address online you are 100% mistaken. If collection agencies can find you, so can students. Next if you think a burglar cannot break into your safe, you are also mistaken. There are a number of YouTube videos that show exactly how they do it. You may also think you are going to have enough time to go for a gun when someone breaks into your home. News flash; these guys are breaking in armed with shoguns and pistols during broad daylight and they have no problems killing you. Why? Because our kids have become insensitive to violence and they think nothing about pulling the trigger. They see this online, in games, and on TV. 

Ladies and Gentlemen we live in a very interesting times and you should be asking yourself do I wish to continue showing my firearms in class? Forget about the liability to the state. Think of this as an issue of your personal safety. Also you need to check your firearm insurance policies. Many policies will give you x amount of dollars and then you are just out of luck unless you talk to your insurance agent and get the extra coverage. I have to ask you, is bringing a live firearm into the classroom worth risking your safety over? For the most part nothing may never happen but that's what we said about terrorist attacks before 911 so to rule out this possibility would not be prudent.

[Brownarola]

Let's throw another scenario out there. What if you are a teacher who wants to introduce a firearm safety course into your school curriculum. The school will not allow you to bring live firearms into the classroom. What can you use? Sticks or inert firearms? I would actually suggest using Laser Shots and inert firearms instead of sticks.

As far as teaching with real firearms.  Imagine a world where you learned completely online and with non-functional equipment for the following:
Drivers Ed
Pilot's License
SCUBA
USCG Captains License (Hey, let's steer the cruise ship to the right so people on shore can wave to those on board)

However I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. In my opinion you are trying to compare apples to oranges. Yes they fruit but they are totally different. Driver's Ed, Flight Schools, ship piloting do use simulators. Why? Because you want the person to be placed in a non life threatening situation without the risk. However they also want the persons to be prepared in the event of emergency and the only way that is done is with hours of practice. With a plane this can get rather expensive and dangerous. That's why Boeing invested millions in flight simulators so they could put crew members in various situations and that's why the military does the same thing. Unless you tell someone that these firearms are inert, they will think they are real. In essence you are putting the student in a live situation without the danger. Also one major difference between what the things you listed above and firearm safety, the later is meant as an introduction which is why the number number of hands on hours is greatly reduced when compared to driving a car, or flying a plane where one mistake can kill hundreds or thousands if you make a mistake. Worried about the orange stocks. Paint them with Krylon plastic paint or swap out the stocks with synthetic ones. If you do not tell students the firearms are fake, they will never know. Treat them the same as a live firearm and your instruction will be just as effective. 

[Special T]

So if these are state certified "non guns" then we should be able to hold hunters ed in any school or public building that is traditionally gun free. Before some you quit teaching HE i would push the state on this issue. 

I would agree with HF that if you couldn't find a place to train with real guns you aren't looking very hard. 

[Brownarola]

Special T -- that is exactly what means. If a school district has a policy of no guns, they should now be fair game. In regards to the comment of not looking hard enough to find a place to teach with real guns, it's quick to assume that all instructors have access to ranges and sporting clubs when they actually do not. Granted there may be a vast majority of instructors who do have places to practice but on the same token, there are instructors who do not have access to these facilities due to no fault of their own. For example, say I want to hold a course in a building in down town Seattle. There are no available ranges and students are from the downtown district. This would be an example of an instructor not being able to teach where real guns are permitted. 

[ghosthunter]

GH - if a kid muzzles someone in the classroom during hands on instruction use that as a teaching moment. Stop the class and ask the other students what did he do wrong? You should get the correct response. By putting the student in the lime light typically this will cure the issue and hopefully they will no longer repeat this behavior. After that use the student to demonstrate the correct method of securing a firearm which then gives the student experience. One method you may wish to try is to have the student turn their classmates when loading or unloading a firearm. If you think about it, a person would not naturally shoulder a firearm to load or unload it and with their back to the other students, the chance of muzzling has dramatically decreased.  You also need to remember you have had many years of firearm handling experience and you are aware of muzzle control. A student of eight does not possess the same amount of knowledge and the only way this will occur is for the student to construct that knowledge through hands on training. Older students will not require as much hands on training as younger students so you may need to increase the amount of hands on training for younger students. If this occurred during the actual hands on skills evaluation  after the test, I also agree with your decision because during the evaluation phase of the class, we are assuming he knows how to handle the firearm safely. One more thing to also realize is that kids don't think as we do and when you asked him to verify the shell length and gauge his and his mind was focused on that one task and he forgot about the muzzle which is better caught in the classroom then in the field. Like you mentioned he just needs more firearm handling time.

We extensively handle firearms in every class. Students are taught to load and unload and all that goes with it. As I posted this student had over 6 hours of hands on loading and unloading with the very gun he was tested with.
We do this so they can watch the muzzle.
He was in the skills Field coarse when he covered other students. No excuse for that.  Yes different ages need more instruction. But testing is uniform for all ages . Unless the state want to have a age limit.

[ghosthunter]

The debate over firearms in classroom has presented only one side of the argument. Instructors feel there must be live firearms in the classroom because it's different when students handle the real deal. Let's look at this in a different perspective. What if you were someone who simply wanted to teach firearm safety but you did not possess any firearms. You do not have the funds to go out and purchase firearms but as many instructors have pointed out you learn by doing. What would be your advise? Go out and spend your hard earned money on firearms just so you may teach hunter education or let the state provide you with a set of inert firearms? Don't say the state will lend you some or borrow some from a friend. That never works. Is it fair that this person cannot teach because they do not have live firearms? Would it be fair to the instructor that they are forced to borrow firearms from someone or the state and then something happens where the instructor must replace the missing firearm?

Now suppose you wish to teach at the local schools. What people fail to realize is that schools have the right to restrict the bringing of live firearms on to their property even if it is for a hunter education course. It just takes a vote by the school board to nix firearms. However they have no issues with inert firearms. If the instructor cannot line up a fire department or other public meeting place and the public schools are the only option and they do not allow working firearms, the only choice for an instructor in this scenario is to not use firearms or use inert ones and inert ones are better than no firearms at all. 

Here is something else I want you to think about. How many students do you personally know. Do you know their background? Do you know them? If you watch the news something is starting to appear more often; home invasion robberies and daylight burglaries. What makes you think something like this would not occur to you? Think about this. When you are bring live firearms into your classroom you are telling students, "Hey, I have these guns in my house." What happens when one of your students happens to be a gang member? You are probably scoffing at me. "I don't have gang members in my class." I'm going to tell you that you are gravely mistaken. Gangs typically recruit members from middle school students. i.e. 9 - 14 year old kids, and in order to become full members they have to perform some task which just might be a home invasion robbery. Don't be tricked into judging a book by it's cover. You can sugar coat poison but the fact remains that under that sweet outer shell is something that can kill you.

Your next thought may be "they do not know where I live and if they break in, I'll shoot them" or "my guns are in a safe; good luck." First if you think students cannot follow you home or look you up your address online you are 100% mistaken. If collection agencies can find you, so can students. Next if you think a burglar cannot break into your safe, you are also mistaken. There are a number of YouTube videos that show exactly how they do it. You may also think you are going to have enough time to go for a gun when someone breaks into your home. News flash; these guys are breaking in armed with shoguns and pistols during broad daylight and they have no problems killing you. Why? Because our kids have become insensitive to violence and they think nothing about pulling the trigger. They see this online, in games, and on TV. 

Ladies and Gentlemen we live in a very interesting times and you should be asking yourself do I wish to continue showing my firearms in class? Forget about the liability to the state. Think of this as an issue of your personal safety. Also you need to check your firearm insurance policies. Many policies will give you x amount of dollars and then you are just out of luck unless you talk to your insurance agent and get the extra coverage. I have to ask you, is bringing a live firearm into the classroom worth risking your safety over? For the most part nothing may never happen but that's what we said about terrorist attacks before 911 so to rule out this possibility would not be prudent.

I really like this post. I like it so much I am going to print it out and take to a meeting with Boes this weekend.

I have one question ; How does banning working guns from the classroom change any of the possibilities you listed?

The truth is it changes nothing.

The fact you are posting on this forum could make you a target. You think BG cannot track you down through your posts here ?

The state having student information on line makes every student and instructor state wide a target. If you are in a Hunter ed class or on a Hunting forum one could conclude you have guns.

If the state keeps live fire. BG could come to range observe live fire follow instructor home and rob guns.  Heck they could bump the instructors car when he got out ,steal his car and guns.

I have several 20 ga. shotguns that are state owned ,the state comes around every year to inventory them.
However no one from the state knows how I store those firearms or where. And no seems to care. If those arms are stolen you think the state wont be liable if something happen???

No one asks how I maintain the firearms either. What if one blows up on range day when a kid is shooting?

The same instructors the state does not trust to have working firearms in class are the same instructors doing live fires and storing and caring for state owned guns.
The same instructor who could not open and check a firearm before his class is still conducting live fire and still I presume storing state guns.

If the state is so afraid they need to pull the plug. NO live fire, No state owned guns.

[ghosthunter]

So if these are state certified "non guns" then we should be able to hold hunters ed in any school or public building that is traditionally gun free. Before some you quit teaching HE i would push the state on this issue. 

I would agree with HF that if you couldn't find a place to train with real guns you aren't looking very hard. 

School have a no tolerance policy on firearms. If you kid takes one of these orange guns to school he will be kicked out.

if some one gets beat with the orange gun you are still liable.

[ghosthunter]

Special T -- that is exactly what means. If a school district has a policy of no guns, they should now be fair game. In regards to the comment of not looking hard enough to find a place to teach with real guns, it's quick to assume that all instructors have access to ranges and sporting clubs when they actually do not. Granted there may be a vast majority of instructors who do have places to practice but on the same token, there are instructors who do not have access to these facilities due to no fault of their own. For example, say I want to hold a course in a building in down town Seattle. There are no available ranges and students are from the downtown district. This would be an example of an instructor not being able to teach where real guns are permitted.

Really  schools is off track. i could teach im my local schools with working guns, they all have FFA Shooting teams and I have done it. But I dont like schools because kids are comfortable there. You are on their turf. I find that they behave better at other locations.

If brown is saying we need these orange guns so we can teach in schools because there is no where else? I doubt that , but if so let the instructors who teach in schools use the orange guns. I dont teach in schools and I am not using them.
The truth is this was huge waste of PItman Robinson Funds.

[ghosthunter]

Brown: If someone wants to teach with orange guns let them. The poor instructor who doesn't own guns can use the orange guns.

But orange guns should not be forced on the rest of us.