ABC Plants Guns Among Toys and Candy, Shocked That Kids Touch Them


What happens when you plant two real, unloaded guns among toys and a backpack in grade school classroom and then tell kids that, while unsupervised, they should indulge in some nearby candy? ABC reporters did just this, and breathlessly revealed their discovery: the kids will touch the guns! …Before notifying an adult. "Can you really hide guns from children?" asks the network.
This less-than-scientific experiment was part of a 20/20 "unsettling special" called Young Guns, which aired last Friday. Its aim was investigate the supposedly deadly world of households in which both children and firearms reside. ABC also posted instructions on how to confront gun-toting friends without making it awkward and provides a handy quiz on the differences between fake and real weapons.
"The new numbers are arresting," assures the ABC's David Muir, "nearly one child or teen every hour [is] injured by a firearm in this country." He speaks to a doctor who "at one point was seeing gunshots and children twice a week." Diane Sawyer reports that a "groundbreaking" study implies that, "every other day, a child is shot to death."
But, the study doesn't match the ABC's far-fetched image of young kids finding guns among their playthings in school. Children, in this case, includes individuals aged 18 and 19, i.e. people who are legally adults and able to buy rifles.
The presentation is not reflective of America's gun community, which owns a total of 310 million firearms (by far the highest concentration per capita of any nation in the world). Major gun rights advocacy groups, as well as firearms instructors, and others in the community explicitly teach and advocate for the safe use and storage of guns. Gun forums are rife with advice on educating kids about gun safety and keeping weapons accessible for self-defense but out of children's reach.
One need not rely on anecdotal evidence, though.
Despite the massive number of guns in the US and ABC's hysterics, data collected by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in 2010 states that among children aged 1-14 there were 396 firearm deaths. Among the 15-19 demographic, 2,331 deaths were recorded, including legal intervention. Although this may seem dramatically higher than the younger group, it is hardly more than .0001 percent of the total 15-19 year old population. While each deaths is a tragedy, putting the numbers into context reveal a far less dramatic side of the story.
And, while ABC focuses on the accidents caused by guns, the network overlooks how many lives guns save. Gun Owners of America (GOA) states:
Guns [are] used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.
Unlike ABC's extrapolations from an in-house trial, GOA's information comes from peer-reviewed academic research.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
..."This less-than-scientific experiment"...
Yeah, that would be true.
This is why I refuse to allow children into my home.
OT: Gil Kerlikowski was just on PBS Newshour warning about the latest upsurge in the heroin front in the WoD. Of course the only solution was to expand his budget.
Yeah, that actor guy just couldn't score ANY!
PSH corpse has assumed room temperature by this point in time. Surely, the period of time where it would not be appropriate to use it for personal gain has passed.
Gun grabbers lie. They have to argue in bad faith because they have no case. Their cause is unjust and their motive is evil.
This is obviously an implementation of Eric Holder's mandate to brainwash people against guns.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Justice Department handed ABC a curiously thick white envelope.
You kidding, HM? News organizations like ABC don't need bribing to do the bidding of their federal masters.
They only need an ideology that worships state power.
I really wish people would stop fucking using the "guns used 2.5 million times for self-defense number" since isn't that just an extrapolation from much smaller numbers by (I believe) John Lott? Not only did Lott disgrace himself by sockpuppeting and getting caught (which is a shame because much of his work is excellent; way to give your opponents something unrelated to your work to dismiss you with, genius), but it's not based on much more than "I have a small sample of reported uses of guns for self-defense which I will then extrapolate to 300 million people". Bullshit and unscientifically-derived at numbers are just as bullshit when they support your cause as when they oppose it.
It's been a while since I've been on top of the Lott thing so if I remember incorrectly, somebody please let me know.
Up yours, I used MY gun 2.5 million times for self-defense last year.
Lott definitely used questionable statistics in that study and was rightly criticized for it.
I don't remember all the datapoints, but unfortunately, his statistics were as bad as "You're statistically less safe with a gun in the home".
The 2.5 million uses number comes from criminologist Gary Kleck, not Lott. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Kleck) His numbers have been challenged, but nobody claims he's a phony.
Sorry, thanks, it was Kleck, but my point remains the same. And I didn't claim that either he or Lott was considered a phony; it's just that if I saw a study from gun grabbers extrapolating tiny samples of gun violence to the entire country, I'd immediately call bullshit. And I call bullshit on Kleck too, because he's doing the exact same thing.
According to statistician Michael Siegel, Gary Kleck's work actually is pretty good (he told me in an e-mail that Kleck probably did overestimate, but as he states in the following article, it's unlikely that he overestimated by a factor of 30). Check here (under #5):
http://michaelsiegel.net/?p=5790#more-5790
Kleck was actually anti-gun before he finished his study. He started it with the intent to prove that self defense with a firearm almost never happens, and changed his mind after the data started rolling in.
"As many as" -- could be read as "fewer than," no?
Somehow "as many as" was dropped from the immediately following sentence:
Actually it is from a Government study. Obama asked the question and a government funded and selected group reported that the number of defensive gun uses was between 500,000 and 2,500,000 a year.
"Can you really hide guns from children?" asks the network.
There are these things. They're called gun safes. They come in all shapes and sizes, from closet sized to hand-sized for next to your bed. Of course ABC employees are far too stupid disingenuous to look at them.
Secondly, you don't need to hide guns from your children. "If you touch this without me present you will be so dead that even the dead will think you're dead" worked just fine on me and everyone else I knew.
Having the child watch as you shoot, or better yet, having the child him or herself shoot a firearm at a watermelon so they can visualize the destructive potential a bullet has works as well.
You are both correct, and you cannot start too young.
My father learned to shoot at 8yrs old on the piling of the Jean Lafitte bridge in lake Charles. I learned on the banks of the gila river at 5yrs old. My son learned in the abandoned Camp Livingston at 4yrs old.
None of us have ever had a gun accident. Gun safety is our religion and we are zealots.
banks of the gila river at 5yrs old
Really? So did I? Where on the Gila?
No shit?
Do you know where the Christmas mine is? My father is a metallurgist and ran a concentrator there.
Where were you?
To answer you quickly, I'm foregoing google maps, but we were in the general area of the Cliff Dwellings. I recall the name of the Christmas mine, but I don't remember its location.
So, can I make the bold assumption you grew up in Silver City?
The Christmas mine was about half way between Globe and Oracle, middle of nowhere. We lived in the little mining town called christmas, but the mine, which was then underground, has since become open pit and took the town. It is closed now.
We moved away when I was ten and I grew up here in Louisiana where my family is from.
My wife just read this and asked me if two more generations will we be born strapped and knowing how to use it.
God willing.
Or, I don't know, not being a lazy arse and locking the damn thing up (or at least unloading it) when you're not at home.
Yep, this. Although my dad died when I was 12, and my mom just left the padlock open on the homemade gun cabinet (made of thin wood - could have smashed open). My dad had taught me to shoot at age eight, and I knew "the gun is always loaded, and don't point it at anything you don't want to kill." He had 16 or so guns - I never touched them or the bazillion rounds of ammo unless we were packing some off to go shooting.
Howeever, when I finally moved all the stuff to my house (when my mom decided she didn't "want them in the house anymore"), I bought a proper gun safe. Later taught my own kids to shoot, but still always have the guns locked up. Now I have a couple too many for the safe, so I leave a couple rifles out, but put trigger locks on them.
You shoot yourself with my guns, you 1) were trying really hard and 2) scared up my pretty-well-hidden "gun stuff" keys (which are cleverly marked as something else).
Anyhoo...
People used to keep guns above their hearth and children used to be trained in their use. We used to be nation of pilgrms, settlers, ranchers and explorers.
I clearly remember my dad's glass case that held the two Colt revolvers and one Colt semi auto that I still had. Sliding front - no lock 🙂
Please three rifles on a rack over the fireplace.
He finally took them all down when some of the people from the college where he worked, who had NOT grown up on a farm as he had - and were apparently not avid hunters as he was - seemed a little freaked out when they were over.
He ended up building a gun closet in the basement as noted above. I miss the guns being displayed - thinking about putting a couple out at my house, although I'm brainwashed enough now that I'd have trigger locks on them (never saw one till a couple years ago - we just never used them, cause you KNEW "the gun is always loaded", so you "don't point it at anything you don't want to kill"....)
Secondly, you don't need to hide guns from your children. "If you touch this without me present you will be so dead that even the dead will think you're dead" worked just fine on me and everyone else I knew.
Rather than childproofing my guns, I gunproofed my children. "If you touch this without me present you will be never touch one again." They learned how to handle .22 rifles first, bolt action, then lever action, then semi-auto. We went out and shot regularly, and the kids always took part in stripping, cleaning and reassembly.
The threat of being excluded worked like magic. Before the youngest was in kindergarten we could securely leave loaded weapons anywhere.
This, except my dad started my sister, brother and me with trusty Daisy BB guns - THEN bolt action, wheelguns, lever and semi autos/pumps.
I'm so happy I passed this on the my kids. I started them WAY later (in their teens) - my daughters used to be afraid of guns, now they beg to go to the range 🙂
Oh no, we have to comply with the Liberals "Ignorance Only" gun safety policy. They are the Only Ones who know enough about how terrifying guns are and how the only way to "Save the Children", who by the way include anyone under 20 years old, is to pretend that guns are Evil and will jump up and kill everyone in the area.
Thanks for reminding me why I haven't viewed an ABC product in over two decades.
Meanwhile, CNN (I think) was running a story about, "Despite improved security, school shootings still happen." Complete with Randi Weingarten quote.
School shootings statistically flat for decades, but... SCHOOL! SHOOTING!
I don't know if ABC is off base here. I hide my loaded guns in my special candy, toys, balloons, and puppy closet. I keep it unlocked and have it playing ice cream truck music all the time.
...in your windowless white van, you mean.
Why would someone with boobs need a white van to lure children in? She has boobs.
I like to label my gun cabinet with a sign that says "Candy dispensers inside." Each of my guns has an arrow painted on it that points toward the muzzle and a note that says "candy comes out here."
Sort of like this?
Something needs to be done about the American Saudi obesity epidemic!
With everyone wearing those robes, how does anybody know?
Simple: Bigger hijabs.
Does this burka make me look fatwa?
your mother gives great hijabs
Something needs to be done about the American Saudi obesity epidemic!
Great. They say he's lost nearly twice what I ever weighed -- 5+ times what I lost -- but they don't tell how.
Anecdata about guns around kids: When I was a kid, I wanted to shoot just like my dad and older brother. There were certain landmarks at certain ages for being around them, handling them, eventually shooting, and I knew that if I *ever* violated any rules I would not be allowed to shoot. Ergo, I learned to handle them safely.
Kids are fascinated by guns. Let them be around them and learn to handle them safely if you want to reduce kids getting shot. Keeping them mysterious and forbidden just increases their allure as something to play with if they ever get their hands on one.
Kind of like how teenage/early-20s binge drinking is unheard of in many continental European cultures?
And drug use in general. And sex.
Gee, it's almost as if knowledgeable people can make responsible decisions.
I wouldn't say unheard of, but there's certainly a healthier attitude to alcohol where drinking alcohol is just not considered a big deal. My wife was drinking beer with her meals when she was in her early teens as it was considered healthy for digestion.
I was buying six-packs for my father on the way home from school at 14.
I keep it unlocked and have it playing ice cream truck music all the time.
You twickster!
Among that 15-19 cohort, how many of those deaths occurred during the prosecution of other crimes? And how many as a result of suicide?
Because I imagine once those numbers are disaggregated the pressure to ban handguns would seem a bit like napalming the everglades to prevent mosquito-borne illnesses.
Among that 15-19 cohort, how many of those deaths occurred during the prosecution of other crimes? And how many as a result of suicide?
How many were shot by cops? Those are included in firearms stats.
Next they should hide pythons in children's cribs to show everyone the dangers of stupid pet choices. Or maybe plant Mastercards in bubblegum cards to teach the kids' parents a lesson about debt or something.
I remember as a kid playing with my old man's 22 revolver all the time. I think it was mostly unloaded.
You never got shot... lot of people around you mysteriously getting shot. But you? Unscathed.
I blame the gun.
I blame the primer.
I have browsed ABC "news" site and its various side-bar elements to the Young Guns feature.
From what I can gather, the 'news' is apparently this =
"Kids exist. Guns exist. Sometimes, kids and guns COEXIST. This is a problem. Because Kids."
The outrage and pearl-clutching is actually *embedded* in the very nature of the scenarios they describe, sans any actual explanation.
In the 'real or fake guns!?' they show a 2yr old with a cap gun, then a 12yr old with a .22, then what looks like a teenager (16-18) looking at an AR-15.
This is supposed to make us go OH MY GOD PEOPLE LIVE LIKE THIS??!!
WTF. It seems the Piers Morgan types of this world feel that we aren't frothing-retarded enough, and have devised what they consider to be NUCLEAR FROTH-FUEL TO RETARD PEOPLE UP ASAP.
The piece, "how to tactfully find out if your neighbors are crazy gun-nut peoples so you shouldn't let your kids near them" was cute.
A few commenters offered a counter question = "Do you watch mainstream TV news in your house? MSNBC?? I'm sorry = my children are not allowed within 100 yards of that horrible, lying, awful propaganda"
I haven't run the numbers, but if it's really 1%, that's a startlingly high percentage.
More small children drown by falling over head first into 5 gallon buckets every year than by gunfire.
Do not fear; apparently libertarians aren't as good at math as we thought we were. In 2000, there were 20,000,000 15-19 year olds in the U.S.; it's probably more than that now. Divide 2,331 by that number and you get a MUCH smaller number than 1%--more like a hundredth of a percent.
If it were 1%, then your local high school could expect ten or more gun deaths every year. I don't think that's happening in many places.
Thanks for doing the math- it seemed fishy (for much the same reason you mentioned) but I didn't have time to research it.
Thanks for catching that. Careless mistake on my part.
Next they should hide pythons in children's cribs to show everyone the dangers of stupid pet choices.
Also a good way to find Hercules reborn when he strangles them as a baby.
What's this? What is this? Why is this not a threaded reply?
Zeus interfered. Blame him.
1 injury an hour = 8,760 injury a year
3,144 counties in the US (including 137 county equivalents)
8,760/3,144= 2.7 injuries per county per year. Doesn't seem like something to get worked up on. My county, for example, has 200,000 people in it, 29% (roughly) under 18 gives us 58,000 children.
I'm willing to bet that there are more than 2.7 *deaths* (from other causes) per 58,000 children each year in this county.
I was a little confused as to which shell the ball was under at the end of this comment, till I noted that the average county population is not 200,000 so your analysis is off a bit (though probably only by a factor of 2).
Wait, 20/20. Didn't 20/20 do that highly discredited gun-carriers-don't-make-us-safer experiment where they sent a cop into 'classroom', they told the cop where the gun carrier was in the room so they could shoot him first and then start slaughtering the rest of the victims?
God that was so epic stupid.
Why do you need 20/20 to do a 'test' when you've got video of actual events?
I R too lazy to look it up.
Because real life isn't as dramatic as 're-enactments'.
Dateline got into hot water (along with 20/20) in the past - once for using a robot arm to turn the steering wheel (of the SUV they were filming for a segment) far faster than is humanly possible to get it to roll over.
Another was when they were doing an expose on trucks with 'defective' fuel tank placement. To get the truck to catch fire in the staged wreck they used pyrotechnics.
Then there's the 'unintended acceleration' exposes.
Another was when they were doing an expose on trucks with 'defective' fuel tank placement. To get the truck to catch fire in the staged wreck they used pyrotechnics.
I believe that was a show called Hardcopy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.....rs_vs._NBC
Then there's the 'unintended acceleration' exposes.
Was that the Audi 5000? Cause my father picked one up cheap, after there was supposed to be some such problem.
The "problem" was the buying demographic wasn't used to having the brake and accelerator pedals so close together. In a panic the pressed the wrong pedal.
Dateline didn't get into hot water for this, but they once sent a team of union activist trying to organize workers at Food Lions to go in and taint the food. The spoiled meat they reported on as being sold to customers as recut and rewrapped scraps, their own unedited tapes showed that the very people they hired to do the undercover work were responsible for putting the product out in acts of sabotage.
they told the cop where the gun carrier was in the room so they could shoot him first and then start slaughtering the rest of the victims?
That episode was indeed biased and stupid but that wasn't the problem; other people in the room got pretend-shot before the "defender" did. The defender only got shot after the perp saw them trying to pull a gun out (and failing).
The problem was that they took as defenders 3 people who had never shot or handled a handgun in their lives, gave them a quick crash course with a Glock 17, and most importantly gave them those "pop" holsters that are designed to be difficult to pull the gun from. I would totally concede the point that a person with a couple of hours of range time with a handgun, and with no practice drawing from their carry holster, is unlikely to make a good defender against a skilled shooter.
Don't forget to add that they put the "defender" in thick gloves and a fireproof hood, limiting visibility and dexterity. Plus the shooter was a SWAT officer, with a bit more marksmanship than your typical street thug.
I recall the fake shooter "shot" the class instructor and immediately went after the "defender". I certainly saw no pause between targets.
I don't think you could rig that "experiment" any harder.
As an aside, one of the subjects did get a hit despite having the deck stacked against them. One of the girls nailed him on the inside of the thigh.
My 4yr old will learn to shoot as soon as her hands are big enough to safely hold the thing.
My mom on the other hand... Finally convinced her to do some shooting this past weekend. Her hands are now too old and decrepit to safely work the revolver.
Oh well.
She did get to watch me shoot a terrible grouping from not very far away!
My ammo supplier tells me the supply of ammo, as bad as it is, is about to get worse. "Dry up" is the term she used. I asked why, she said they can't give her an answer.
I don't know what that means, but you might want to start hanging onto those rounds rather than firing them.
I buy mine in the 1000s at a time, but I like to keep a 50 percent reserve on hand at all times.
I don't believe it. It's only because of the letter next to the guy in the White House. If an R gets in there, prices will plummet. Then I'll stock up.
Possibly due to the EPA shutting down the last lead smelter in the US. From now on we are dependent on foreign lead, which Benito Obama can shut down whenever he feels like it, and lead recycled from car batteries and the like.
Speaking of which = browsing ABC "News" site...
...it seems like all the fuck they seem to care about in the world is Superbowl Ads, Amanda Knox (SEX CRIMES!), Philip Seymour Hoffman (Celebrity Sad!), Superbowl Ads, Dylan Farrow (Celebrity, Sad!), Superbowl Ads, and OMG Johnny Depp is Getting Married! (Celebrity, sad?)
That was the FRONT PAGE. But don't worry, there's always the *lifestyle section* if that's too hard-hitting for you.
No mention of
- Yellin taking over @ Fed
- recent release of info on NSA data grabs from US Corporations.
- report suggesting Keystone XL would reduce risk of accidents, deaths in oil transport
- Obama admin acknowledging problems with ACA appeals process
- Libya becoming even worse shithole than it was before, on verge of civil conflict between east & west.
You know, 'News'-news. ABC don't play that, apparently.
-
Over 62% of ABC's audience is female.
Not to be completely sexist but..umm..well..uh...yeah.
This is the first comment to crack me up in a long time
God damn chicks! Why can't they get their own network! That's it, I'm going to go watch Oxygen.
I wish I could remember who did it (I believe it was Maria Shriver), but there was a program by some 60-Minutes style news program back in the '90's that placed very small children in a playroom with assorted toys and guns and found that surprise the children played with toys. They even made the argument that the placement of the firearm was irrelevant.
Didn't she marry some actor dude that made his career by playing a cold blooded commando that ran around blasting everything that moved with an M-60?
Yes, but that doesn't invalidate her argument. I've never much liked the "but X anti-gun celebrity is in violent movies" shit anyway. It's a pretty obnoxious form of ad hom, on top of being just a horribly anti-liberty argument. Violent movies/videogames don't cause violence anymore than gun ownership does.
I have a staunch libertarian friend who married a died-in-the-wool progressive. She lied to him about her politics during the courtship and when she "came out" as it were he decided (against the advice of nearly everyone) to stay with her. They seem to be making it work. Does his marriage to a women who is a left-wing douchebag (think on the level of our trolls Jackand Ace and Tony) mean that his political opinions are now invalid?
I was too busy cooking to reply timely but I will anyway just in case.
I think it is appropriate to slam someone who makes a living by glamorizing violence, enjoys armed security yet advocates that no one else can.
In this particular case you are correct. The Governators actions have no bearing on her position.
"'I hope I didn't offend you, but I'm just not comfortable with my child playing in a house with loaded guns easily-vandalizable possessions just lying around,'" Sanfilippo suggested saying.
A variant.
The obvious answer to a hoplophobe asking about your firearms would be, "That is quite alright with me, if you have kept your precious snowflake so ignorant that they have to be observed every second of the day I really don't want them around."
lol, I thiunk its hilarious dude. LIke seriously.
http://www.Anon-Works.com
Well Yea. Put a piece of candy in a box of flowers and which one do you think a kid will pick-up? What Liberal moron figured this would be revolutionary?
data collected by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in 2010 states that among children aged 1-14 there were 396 firearm deaths. Among the 15-19 demographic, 2,331 deaths were recorded, including legal intervention.
That's probably fewer kids than died from falling out of trees, and way less than those who drowned in swimming pools. And, I'm gonna guess that quite a few were due to young would-be gangbangers or hardasses finding out the hard way that that is dangerous, or they got unlucky as innocent victims of drive-by shootings, or whatnot.
Any program on ABC should always be viewed with skepticism.
Any program on ABC should not be viewed.
It's always amusing to see anti-gun types hyperventilate about NRA's Eddie Eagle gun education program, and demand it be removed from schools, et al.
Amusing because then they hyperventilate - see this report - about kids finding guns and fooling with them.
I guess "Stop. Don't Touch. Leave the area. Tell an adult." is too hardcore and controversial for the public schools, and would doubtless somehow make the kids Love The Guns.
The useful lesson learned from this ABC News experiment is, "Don't hide your gun(s) with your toys and candy." Other than that, the ABC 'kids 'n guns' sting was useless.
It is also quite possible that they committed a felony by allowing children access to an unsecured firearm.