They had an article in this month about squirrel hunting. with it the had a whole page picture of a 7 y.o kid and a .22.

Had to fire off an e-mail:

Page 41 of the sept issue of Iowa outdoors is way way out of bounds for an article about Iowa Hunting,

Shame on whom ever chose to place it in this issue. Showing a picture of a small child holding a gun without adult supervision is a huge , almost egregious problem.

Showing a picture of a small child out hunting with out the requisite blaze orange gloves or vest or jacket is coming close to criminal.
And!
showing a picture of a small child holding a killing device with his finger on the trigger ,with out aiming is just plain irresponsible.

I don't know who was in an all fired hurry to get his kids picture in a magazine , but the message you are sending is three fold wrong , inappropriate and shamefully irresponsible.

These are the pictures that the anti gun people wait for , to show in their anti gun propaganda. this can not happen again . Please inform the non gun owning , non hunting staff of this huge error in judgement. or better yet please print an apology to your readers in next months magazine. Sincerely, yadda yadda yadda

I had Iowa Outdoors for a couple of years but didn't renew because I didn't like waiting 2 months between issues - I'd rather have a monthly thinner mag, it cost too much with too many ads, all the articles are written too artsy fartsy with whimsical flair, and Iowa has far too little state areas to write about anyway. I get the Missouri Conservationist for $7/yr out of state, which is a far more interesting publication, even if you don't frequent or are from Missouri.

...and the section at the end that was like Real Stories of a DNR agent was always an eye roller.

I'd like to see the picture first. This is the kind of thing none of us would have thought twice about 20 years ago. Hell, when I was a kid, other kids brought their 22s for show and tell. I think the bigger shame of this is that nowadays we see a picture like that, which once was normal, and get hysterical thinking about all the PC bullshit it dredges up.

This is the kind of thing none of us would have thought twice about 35 years ago

I had that very sentence in my original draft,
but deleted it for brevity.

I looked for the picture on line ,
but they did not have it up yet

So why are you thinking twice about it now? Were you offended or were you worried about how those who were offended might use it? If the latter, screw them. We need to stop giving the "anti's" such a wide birth. I like guns, I like hunting and I like to see kids engaged in both. Poor trigger discipline, yeah well....so what? No Hunters Orange, really? I think you got bent about things that are inconsequential and might discourage the publication from presenting kids enjoying shooting or hunting in the future which would be a real shame. Remember, perfect is the enemy of good.....or something like that.

you are right why should I care if some kid shoots someone else, why should anyone give a shit how gun owners are portrayed by the media.

If gun owners don't care about the safety or general welfare of their own , so be it, the kids probably a stoop , anyway.

besides who in the world has time to teach a kid a thing or three, they will figure it out.

in fact screw kids all together, All hail Oregon !

I, too, would like to see the picture/article before judging too harshly.

A few things though...

Regarding the adult supervision, I would think that that is implied, so I wouldn't get too bent out of shape for that one.

Blaze orange? Maybe blaze isn't required during squirrel season in Iowa. It isn't required around here until big game rifle season, leaving archery and upland/migratory bird seasons open to wear whatever you want.

The trigger finger doesn't bother me at all.

I understand the concern about presenting us in a favorable manner to the antis, but maybe this isn't the right battle to pick.

Just my thoughts.

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
you are right why should I care if some kid shoots someone else, why should anyone give a shit how gun owners are portrayed by the media.

If gun owners don't care about the safety or general welfare of their own , so be it, the kids probably a stoop , anyway.

besides who in the world has time to teach a kid a thing or three, they will figure it out.

in fact screw kids all together, All hail Oregon !

Shit, I forgot who I was talking to....the all knowing bendable who can see the future from a single still photo

To your point, what has changed in the 35 years since "no one would have thought twice"? Absolutely nothing except that we have all cowed to the idea that we must present a perfect picture to the world in order to be safe from the scrutiny of the "anti" this or that. Did more kids shoot people 35 years ago when no one thought twice? What do you think would harm our way of life more, this imperfect picture of a boy doing what we all did as boys or never having these type of pictures published again for fear of the type of hysteria you belched upon the publisher?

FROM THE REGS (http://www.iowadnr.gov/Hunting/Hunting-Licenses-Laws)

I can see nowhere in here requiring blaze orange for small game hunting. Upland birds, ruffed grouse, and deer only.

The kid has adult supervision... who do you think is taking the photo?

quote:

Originally posted by TXJIM:


To your point, what has changed in the 35 years since "no one would have thought twice"? Absolutely nothing except that we have all cowed to the idea that we must present a perfect picture to the world in order to be safe from the scrutiny of the "anti" this or that. Did more kids shoot people 35 years ago when no one thought twice? What do you think would harm our way of life more, this imperfect picture of a boy doing what we all did as boys or never having these type of pictures published again for fear of the type of hysteria you belched upon the publisher?

^^ this, absolutely.