Benjamin over at Reasonablenut had an interesting post, regarding the introduction of shooting to the untrained. He points out that new shooters might have a tendency to put the .22 in the same category as the Daisy Red Ryder bb gun. It sparked quite a bit of thought.
I think he has a good point. Someone who is told that they are using a starter gun (small caliber, low recoil) might very well think the .22 is a less dangerous round. As a result, they might not follow safe and proper gun handling techniques, thus endangering themselves and everyone around them.
Though the .22 may very well be small, have low recoil, and a poor reputation as a stopping round; it is capable of killing almost as easily as a large caliber. I have read an account of two Englishmen in Africa who brain-shot two elephants with .22's, from about 10 yards. Both elephants dropped dead, without charging.
Further, I would hazard a guess and say that .22's probably kill more people in the U.S. than any other caliber, if one were to look a shooting statistics nationwide. It is an easily available round, and there exists no shortage of guns to shoot it from. Its small size makes it easy to build a small gun to shoot it out of, and many so-called pocket pistols are .22 caliber.
I do lament the fact that most newcomers to the shooting sports are coming in as target shooters, as opposed to hunters. Do not misunderstand me; I welcome all new shooters into the fold. However, we are seeing more and more people learning to shoot without ever having a concrete example of what a bullet can do to a living target. A .22 rimfire is more than adequate to kill something.
I think most people in my generation learned to shoot on a .22 of some sort. In addition, we learned to shoot in the context of hunting, in some form or fashion. For a kid in rural Texas, it is not uncommon to use a .22 to dispatch nuisance varmints, poisonous snakes, or small game animals.
Forgive the morbidity of the next paragraph or so, but when a bullet strikes an animal and kills it, it is a terrible thing. Indeed, watching anything die under any circumstances is a horrible experience. All the life flees the creature at once, leaving it an empty shell of meat and gristle. Whatever exists inside a creature that makes it alive is now gone. There is a terrible finality to the transition, and one that can be seen and felt. One can literally see the light go out in the animal’s eyes.
Regardless of how one may feel religiously about the soul, I think it is undeniable that SOMETHING exists which makes our flesh and blood alive. It is something that cannot be explained by the simple interaction of living organs and tissues. The divine spark (if you will) that animates the husks of clay we call bodies can be snuffed out. Whether one believes that animals have a soul, SOMETHING leaves when an animal dies.
Every hunter knows this.
For that reason, I think every hunter at some level appreciates the delicate nature of life. The hunter knows that it doesn’t take much to end life. They understand the firearm is a most deadly tool, one that can cause damage that is absolutely irreparable. Even the lowly .22.
Hunters also understand the balance of life. Death is something that is part of the whole cycle. Some creatures exist because they are prey. Theirs is a practical knowledge of how the world works. Animals live, and are killed by other animals to survive. This is how nature works. Lions are not going to be vegans, no matter how much we hate to see them eat gazelles. The gazelles exist to feed the lions. Cattle exist for people to have meat and milk. It’s much easier to eat them when they are dead.
This is simply the way it is. Do no think this is a criticism of hunting. Far from it. I think hunters probably have a better understanding of natural conservation than any New York liberal, sitting in a swank apartment in Manhattan. The hunter knows how the real world actually works, especially guns.
This is probably an overstatement as well. I have hunted with some clods who should not be allowed to possess firearms. They handle their guns in an unsafe manner, pointing it without regard to who they might kill if the thing went off. I don’t hunt with these people anymore. It’s not worth the risk. However, these were people who had come into shooting relatively late in life, not having hunted as children.
By and large though, hunters are taught the basics of gun handling. More so, they have seen the effects of a bullet on a live target. This serves only to emphasize the importance of why a gun is never pointed at someone, even accidentally. I do not think someone who has only punched holes in targets really understands. Until they see what destructive power a .22 is capable of unleashing, they do not fully understand that even this pea shooter is a deadly weapon. Sure, they’ve heard it a thousand times, and they’ve seen in on tv a million more. I don’t think it sinks in, until they actually see it for themselves.
Gun owners have an awesome responsibility, to themselves, and everyone around them. Learning the basics of safe gun handling is essential to owning a firearm. Every time an accidental discharge happens, it is going to get more worse press than any other type of accident. Each time, it gives the anti-gun faction more ammunition to work with. We really don’t need that. An awareness of what a tiny .22 bullet can do is a good way to illustrate why gun safety is so very important.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Kyle, I appreciate your putting the humble .22 into perspective. I confess to being guilty of belittling it in my mind, though I should know better. However, I am lucky to have been well trained in gun safety. I was born and raised in Alaska, where guns are as prevalent as in Texas I assume. My dad was an avid hunter and cherished his 30.06 M1. It was a different time and place back then, but growing up, I remember his rifles standing loaded and ready in the front entry coat closet (and with 4 small children in the house!)! I myself received a .22 single shot rifle for my 10th birthday, and used it avidly to rid the family farm of unwanted critters (porcupines, chicken hawks, squirrels, etc.). But even before I was 10, I knew well that "every gun is loaded", and any gun could kill. My third grade classmate killed his older brother when a gun discharged that they were 'messing around' with. My second grade 'girlfriend's' dad killed himself while cleaning his guns. People who own guns really have to understand how deadly they are, and what all that means, as you have eloquently stated. I am, like you, a strong supporter of safety training for gun owners.
This is a perfect example of my point. Thanks for putting it into perspective, and sharing your story of growing up with guns. This is exactly the way it should be, and I think your background is pretty typical of how our generation learned to deal with and appreciate firearms, hunting, and the fragility of life.
Kyle
As someone who has only shot at targets, I cannot agree more. Shooting at clay, paper and cans does not give the true life taking ability that a round has, even a 22.
I've been lucky to be shown by safety minded shooters and have a respect for what I'm doing when shooting.
Something else to consider is that when you only shoot at a range, you never learn how to completely handle your weapon.
It sits in a case, and you carry the case out to the shooting table at the range. You take the weapon out, fire it, and when done, put it back in the case. You never walk or hike with it, as hunters do.
On a bit of a side track, not hunting for food also takes away from the relationship of living animals to food on the plate. Almost everyone buys meat in a styrofoam, plastic wrapped package, or butcher paper. Unless you hunt, meat is another package at the store. I feel something is lost in the translation.
Post a Comment