WASHINGTON -- After a student gunned down 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida, talk turned to training and arming teachers so they could intervene in a school shooting. Even President Donald Trump endorsed the idea, saying it could make a school "a hardened target."
But what if students were taught, too, about gun handling and safety? What if that were part of the school curriculum?
The goal wouldn't be "to create Rambo," said Jon Godfrey, of Parish, New York. Rather, it would be "to create safe life knowledge."
This is not an idea specifically prompted by Parkland.
Rather, it is the result of ongoing conversations that involve more than school shootings. A number of gun owners -- people who target-shoot and hunt or keep guns for protection -- say they see the need for young people who may handle guns to learn to handle them safely.
A gun is a powerful and deadly weapon, they acknowledge, but that's exactly why more training is needed. There are "millions and millions of guns in America; chances are, you will come in contact with one, one way or another, in your lifetime," said Ambar Ramos of Boston. "Therefore, I think people should know at least basic safety."
Today's topic: Should gun safety training be taught in schools?
The comments in this story are not just random. They were among those given in the course of "Guns, An American Conversation" an initiative by Advance Local newsrooms from across the country in partnership with Spaceship Media.
The monthlong project has brought together 150 engaged readers with a broad spectrum of opinions to talk about guns in an honest and civil way through a closed Facebook group
"It's not that you are promoting or demoting guns, it would just be educating on safety," said Vanessa Kooper, of Slidell, Louisiana. It would be "kind of like you teach kids about water safety."
Or, adds Ade Kelly, of East Orange, N.J., it could be "similar to how driver's ed is mandated at least in my state."
No way, said a Cleveland, Ohio teacher, Charles Ellenbogen. It's not as if teachers have time to add to the current school curriculum, he said.
"Don't expose my kids to gun culture," said Joe Vargo, of Columbus, Ohio. "It's not part of us and we're not part of it."
The conversation is still continuing, and it involves parents, students, police officers, teachers, a resolution-conflict advocate, gun-rights advocates and proponents of more gun regulation. This is not just a pro-or-con gun dialogue. It is seldom that simple.
But ideas and seeds of ideas emerge in the the project's closed, moderated Facebook group, and the use of school curriculum has come up twice in these extended conversations. Critics may scoff, but proponents say guns are so prevalent in American society, whether they're legally owned or stolen, that it might be wise to make sure students know about their safe handling.
"There are around 400,000,000 guns in the US with another 20,000,000 being added every year," said Dan Zelenka, a Louisiana attorney, firearms rights activist and participant in the gun conversation. "It is not possible to completely insulate anyone from coming into contact with them. Gun safety training, including hunter's education classes, has led to a significant decrease in the number of gun accidents in the country. It is actually at a 115 year low with 495 in 2016. Why wouldn't gun safety classes be a good idea for everyone?"
Pew Research Center polling shows that 58 percent of rural households have at least one gun, and 48 percent of suburban households say the same. The number drops to 28 percent when only urban residents are asked.
Inside the conversation
Here is a taste of how this conversation arose and played out.
It was sparked in part when Robert Davis, of Winter Haven, Florida, asked, "If 'education beats fear and ignorance,' why can't we talk about teaching kids gun safety and responsibility at schools? If a large part of the gun problem comes from kids, why don't we start there?"
Todd Bozes, of Fountain Hill, Pennsylvania, replied, "I think that is a very complicated proposition. I'm also not sure if a large part of the gun problem comes from kids."
In a subsequent email discussion, he explained what he meant. School boards would have to come up with a plan implement such training, including how it would be funded. School districts could face insurance ramifications for districts that wanted to offer this, Bozes said, and there could also be "major pushback" from parents in many areas of the country, especially if districts planned to have have real guns in the classroom. "I think it would have to be an optional course in most areas," he said.
Annie Du, of Cleveland, Ohio: "I agree. Many mass shootings are committed by adults, and they do not just occur in schools, but a variety of other public settings."
Davis: "If there wasn't a problem with kids and guns, there wouldn't be talk about raising the age to own a rifle... And how many school shootings were done by students?"
Rev. Kris Eggert, of South Euclid, Ohio: "I would not give permission for my kids to take training on guns."
Davis: "Since most propositions when it comes to guns are 'what if' situations, what if it it did help stop school shootings? Possibly other shootings as well? Would it at least be worth a look?"
Charles Ellenbogen, of Shaker Heights, Ohio: "We have enough to do (as teachers). Every time there's a societal problem, our only answer is 'Teach it at school.' I am no more going to teach gun safety than I am going to teach you how to do your taxes or change a tire."
Jon Godfrey, of Parish, NY, brought up the topic in another discussion, saying, "I feel school is an excellent venue, because it exposes the masses and doesn't need to be prolonged. It could also meet a basic requirement for those who need to have a safety standard level of training for responsible ownership. I bet the NRA would even offer instructors. Both my wife and I took our "hunter's safety course" in our schools. My wife's (great state of Wyoming) was done as part of her science class!"
John Noel Bartlett, of Oil City, Pen replied that the National Rifle Association might best be feft out of it.
"I would rather not have the NRA involved," Bartlett said. "I will be the first to say they have excellent programs, but the political baggage brought to the table would likely be bothersome to many. It is to me. Individually, whether you love guns or hate guns, it is imperative that you teach your children at a very young age what to do and NOT do if they find a gun, or one of their friends shows up with one."
Godfrey: "If we are considering parents objecting, how about parents rejecting sex education? It was deemed a public safety risk and the training is still in schools. The argument being, just because kids learn about condoms, doesn't mean they need to have sex. The same argument works here."
Joe Vargo, of Columbus, Ohio: "To be fair, way more people have sex than have guns."
Godfrey: "Do you think guns would be as large a public health issue as teen pregnancy?"
Vargo: "I think safety education is fine, unless it's about actually using or showing real guns. I'd be very against a training from the NRA, or one that glamorizes gun culture... Also, teen pregnancy is not usually fatal."
Vanessa Kooper, of Slidell, Louisiana: "You could always use dummy rounds instead of actual ammo in the classroom."
Ruth Grunberg, of Cortland, NY: "High schools have kids take care of a sack of potatoes, pretending it is their baby for a week. Safe gun storage could be included in that class."
Godfrey: "I look at this much like any other public health crisis. Teenage pregnancy and STD's were much worse until the introduction of sex education in school health classes. I remember parents not wanting that because it was their personal belief that they should be the deciding teacher of their children when and if they felt it appropriate. Public safety won and it's now taught, with limitations. Do you see a parallel?"
Jennifer Brush, of Solon Ohio, replied that she sees a difference, because while she wanted sex to someday be part of her child's life -- "just not yet" -- guns "don't have to be."