Children and Guns - Photojournalism

[OmerV]

As near as I can tell, within Luminous Lanscape there is a kinda agreement as to what constitutes good, artsy photography. The photographs in the article don’t toe that line but are effective nonetheless.

The context is somewhere within the issue of whether children understand just how dangerous guns are. So in that context the photographs work well. The photographer succeeded in showing the inocence and naïveté of the children who probably don’t understand the real consequences of a bullet brutally ripping through a body.

I think both monochrome and careful lighting would have put a veil between the photographs and the viewer. The color of their skin effectively connects the fragility of the human body to the machine, gray indifference of the guns. These are not photographs to put up in a living room but to point out a weird dichotomy of our gun culture.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Much of Diane Arbus's work was in a similar style and is highly regarded.

Not for her photography, but for her subjects. Just like the posting of those kids' pictures here (and by The New Yorker) is not about photography.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... the innocence and naïveté of the children who probably don’t understand the real consequences of a bullet brutally ripping through a body...

Oh, but they do. That is why they are not shooting bodies, but paper and clay targets. It is like saying that kids in cooking classes don't understand the real consequences of a chef's knife brutally ripping through someone's heart.

[degrub]

If you hunt for meat, you understand the consequences of a bullet or shot. It is useful education for a young person of any age. It can get you past the "cool" blow 'em up you see on video games and movies. Instead you get down to the real consequences of the act.

[Two23]

The photographer succeeded in showing the inocence and naïveté of the children who probably don’t understand the real consequences of a bullet brutally ripping through a body.

I disagree.  Most of them are from Montana, Texas,  etc., and a couple of the photos are taken of kids out hunting.  I used to skin and prepare all the game I shot for dinner, and I assume many if not most of these kids do the same.  If they are farm/ranch kids they certainly do.


Kent in SD

[RSL]

Most of the photos are of kids shooting skeet/trap with shotguns.  A few of the others are kids with a target-type .22 pistol or rifle.  In the Midwest, this is a family activity like riding snowmobiles, little league baseball, or riding on the bike trails.  I.e., this is entirely normal and I've never heard of a single problem.  When I was in the 6th grade, i.e. 11 years old, I was allowed to save my money and buy a .22 rifle.  I would go out after school and shoot rabbits and squirrels for dinner on our farm.  Other kids I knew did the same.  Parents were relieved we weren't doing something harmful like smoking dope or cigarretes.  I taught both my kids how to load and fire shotguns and .22 rifle/pistol when they were 12 years old, the year they were eligible for a hunting license.  It's entirely normal here.  And because there is a dad in the home involved with the kids, it doesn't cause problems.  The article seems to be pretty balanced, and to be candid that surprised me.


Kent in SD

Kent, you beat me by two years. My maternal grandfather, who by the way had been a prosecuting attorney, gave me my first rifle when I was 13. I was on the rifle team in high school, and for a couple months in 1947 I was the Michigan state junior smallbore champ -- until a better (or luckier) shooter came along. I'd often borrow a shotgun and hunt pheasants with my uncle, and I'd usually borrow a 30-06 and hunt deer in northern Michigan during deer season. Later on I handloaded for a variety of weapons, cast bullets for the 38 Combat Masterpiece I'd carried in Korea, and for my Ruger 44 Magnum, and was captain of the pistol team at Richards-Gebaur AFB the year before I went to Vietnam. I taught my four sons to shoot and handle weapons safely. All that was normal stuff in those days. After I returned in 1965 I sold my guns and haven't had one since.

But the main point, and you made it, is that in those days most people had guns but none of the crap that's going on now happened. I think it partly was because people knew that other people had guns in their homes, and schools weren't gun-free zones. Plenty of principals had weapons secured in their offices. But more importantly the whole moral environment was different.

[JoeKitchen]

Which ones do you find "troubling," Alan?

I would say half of them, the half where the gun is pointed up into the air (aside from the shotguns).  Who taught these kids gun safety; never point a gun into the air unless you are ready to shoot.  At least none of them have their finger on the trigger. 

[degrub]

i would say the photographer "posed" them to elicit an emotional response, not to demonstrate handling guns safely. The "Rambo" poses illustrate that.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Does anybody else find it ironic that kids today are protesting guns, NRA, grownups, politicians, Congress, anybody... but themselves. After all, it is kids, their schoolmates, who are shooting other kids. It is kids who are forming cliques, mercilessly mocking others who are not fitting in, bullying, physically and in social media. All this talk about diversity and inclusion... and yet there is zero tolerance for being different.

[RSL]

. . .never point a gun into the air unless you are ready to shoot.

Right, Joe. Point it at your foot.

[Two23]

But the main point, and you made it, is that in those days most people had guns but none of the crap that's going on now happened. I think it partly was because people knew that other people had guns in their homes, and schools weren't gun-free zones.

In the high schools around here many kids in the rural areas keep a 12 ga. shotgun in their car/truck and will go pheasant hunting with friends after school.  I'm going to stray a bit from topic, but I honestly think the biggest difference between when I was growing up and now is I grew up with a dad in the home who was involved with his family.  My own kids had their dark & scary moments when they were teenagers, and I was able to handle it.  I locked up all guns in the house, removed key parts (trigger, bolt) and hid them in the attic, and ammo was kept locked in the trunk of my car while the kids got professional counseling.  I don't see any way my wife could have handled those moody boys by herself, and it could have been a problem.  And THAT is what I think the real problem is now.


Kent in SD

[degrub]

Does anybody else find it ironic that kids today are protesting guns, NRA, grownups, politicians, Congress, anybody... but themselves. After all, it is kids, their schoolmates, who are shooting other kids. It is kids who are forming cliques, mercilessly mocking others who are not fitting in, bullying, physically and in social media. All this talk about diversity and inclusion... and yet there is zero tolerance for being different.

Nothing new there. What is different is kids are able to act on their impulses and cause more harm to others, including their schoolmates. The magnitude has changed.
Now they are crying out for responsible control to limit the risk.
i grew up with kids that brought guns and explosives to school, not to mention drugs and other things. Things that happened were one on one until the bombings started. Fortunately, a quarter stick of dynamite or a pipe bomb can only do so much harm in a metal locker.

[OmerV]

Oh, but they do. That is why they are not shooting bodies, but paper and clay targets. It is like saying that kids in cooking classes don't understand the real consequences of a chef's knife brutally ripping through someone's heart.

Do you believe any of these kids would not have been traumatized by being in one of the emergency hospital rooms during the night of the Las Vegas shooting? Not as a victim but as a fly on a shoulder of one of the attending doctors. Or perhaps having to take care, without adult supervision, the victims of that shooting.

As adults we protect children from as much savagery of the world as we can, and rightly so. Using clay and paper targets is one way, but a gun replaces the naturally intuited bodily force needed to harm with the simple, non-difficult and disconnected effort of pulling a trigger.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Right, but guns, explosives, kids and their impulses, existed for 200+ years in this country, without mass shootings. What has changed? Morality?

[degrub]

perhaps, on average,  how we raise our kids and the social environment they grow up in. And access to materials and devices.

[RSL]

I think the underlying problem is television. I've been around since that pestilence began and I've watched it envelop the world. To get viewers the damned thing has to be exciting, and killings look exciting -- as long as you're not personally involved in them. To a kid, killing somebody with a gun looks like a game.

[JoeKitchen]

Right, Joe. Point it at your foot.

Better yet, the ground. 

Lets not forget that the horizontal momentum of a bullet is not effected by gravity.  Thus if you angle the gun enough towards the ground, even minimally, the lateral velocity of the bullet will still be fast enough to penetrate flesh. Although you may think it is safe to point a gun up, it is not. 

There have been several instances of someone shooting a gun into the air, purposely or accidentally, and killing someone several yard away.  In some cases, so far that no one around the person who was killed even heard the gun. 

[Two23]

I generally keep all guns muzzle up when I'm out.  Partly that's because the ground is often frozen hard and bullets are likely to ricochet, and partly because I don't want to chance getting the barrel packed with mud and then have it explode.  Since I'm covering lots of ground when antelope hunting, rifle is usually shouldered on a sling anyway.


Kent in SD

[Rob C]

One might say the same thing about some of Helmut Newton's works of which I am a fan.

That's a bit contrary, too. Helmut was into fashion and obsessed, by his own account, with the decadence of a certain level of wealthy Berlin society, an obsession that informed a great deal of his life's work. (His tenure with British Vogue was relatively brief, and I suspect that it was due to the different cultures of London and Paris, with Paris far more welcoming to his ways. God knows how he got on in Australia!)

Apparently, he came from that level of German society, and so it's not odd that it called out to him even after the family and it's fortunes were destroyed due to the intellectual cancer going down in that country and elsewhere. If there is a positive side to persecution, it's that it spread the Jewish diaspora far and wide, giving places such as the States a wealth of artistic talent it might never otherwise have managed to cultivate.

I have often wondered about the unusual level of artistic ability with the Jewish community; perhaps it's a part of being the so-called chosen people or, more prosaically, the result of hard work and hangin' in together, much as the Italians were once wont to do. Either way, it works well!

But regardless, unlike Arbus, Newton had an eye for beauty and sophistication (not something that I think anyone would accuse Arbus of harbouring!) even - or especially - in strange circumstances. I enjoy his work too, but never bought a monograph of his until Sumo. I would never buy Arbus.

Rob

[Alan Goldhammer]

Right, but guns, explosives, kids and their impulses, existed for 200+ years in this country, without mass shootings. What has changed? Morality?

pistols used to be revolvers that only fired 5-6 shots before they had to be manually reloaded.  Growing up the police in San Diego carried S&W revolvers.  Now everyone has access to Glocks with magazines that are easy to swap out.  Sporting rifles fired few rounds before they had to be reloaded.  The semi-automatic assault rifles can be used with high capacity magazines that are also easily swapped out.  I've seen YouTube videos that show even without a bump stock one can get off a lot of rounds in a short period of time.  I don't know when the assault weapons became popular but prior to that it would be difficult to carry out a mass shooting without having multiple weapons.