Last updated: June 30. 2014 2:18PM - 376 Views

Story Tools:

Font Size:

Social Media:

Dear Editor;

I write in reference to the article in the June 25 edition of The Anson Record, “Bill would let more kids use BB guns.”

The use of air rifles, BB guns and pellet guns should be restricted or at least supervised. It would be an accident waiting to happen to hand this type of gun to a five-year-old child unsupervised. I recall my ownership of a Daisy Air Gun— it reduced the sparrow (bird) population (70 years ago).

The accident most likely to happen is the ricochet effect— the bouncing of the pellet at the same angle at which the surface was struck. To fire straight ahead at a wooden target, the pellet would bounce and return close to the person (shooter) of the gun. (The pellet not being strong enough to penetrate the wood surface, for example.) This effort is reduced if a 22 rifle were used as the bullet, in case of wood, would penetrate the surface, although not true with metal.

At a minimum, supervision is necessary. Lost eyes cannot be replaced. Is it not better to be safe than sorry? What are we gaining by eliminating supervision? Do we need to plan for and schedule accidents? I can live with an idea that is mostly crazy but “not dangerous.”

Theodore Carr

All user comments are subject to our Terms of Service. Users may flag inappropriate comments.
comments powered by Disqus

Featured Businesses


Info Minute

Gas Prices

Wadesboro Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com