Firing ranges for schools debate on beeb

This article in the Guardian on Saturday caused Radio 5L to have a debated yesterday morning.

The number of schools introducing rifle ranges for pupils has surged since ministers backed shooting sports last year, say gun groups.

I don't normally listen to these Sunday debates as I am usually playing golf or sailing but yesterday I was free and was appalled at the level of the debate. The anti's only line seemed to be emotional blackmail.

The woman speaking against teaching children to shoot was from Mothers Against Murder and Aggression (As opposed to mother for murder and aggression!). She had set up the charity when her own son was killed in a gun incident. Now I am sure that she is very sincere in her opposition to guns and I am sure she runs a much needed charity that provides support to others, but is she the best person to argue against? No, she is far too emotionally attached and the BBC did nobody any favours.

Her main comments were along the lines of I'm shocked, I can't believe we are doing this, think about the children etc. The only time she got close to a relevant argument was assert that a child could go made. She proferred no evidence that this could had ever happened or psychological evidence that x children could be at risk.

We really need to up the quality of debates on subjects like this rather than just continuing with emotional blackmail.

There are a number of arguments against this move - cost, time (we put too much pressure on schools)and these should be made, along with the benefits and then we can carry out a cost benefit analysis.

As a result of this I am all for the motion.