Four years ago, I wrote a column on the controversy over boys and toy guns. In my column today in USA Today I return to the issue to discuss some recent research in the area.
Four years ago, I was publicly identified as a danger to children. As the doting father of four, it was a bit of a surprise, but my “outing” occurred after my boys and I built an authentic Conestoga wagon to ride in our Northern Virginia neighborhood’s “Wheel Day.” Mid-parade, an irate mother confronted me after spotting toy guns in the covered wagon — objecting to my instilling violent values in my boys. I later received an e-mail from another parent that this covered wagon was no “innocent fantasy” since I must be aware “what guns were used for in the Old West?” It turns out that my kids were apparently rehearsing the genocidal massacre of Native Americans.
Truth be known, I actually did not view the wagon as a tribute to ethnic cleansing. But the real issue was not Western fantasies or phobias. It was guns.
I let my boys play with toy guns and swords. With many parents and schools enforcing a zero-tolerance policies toward toy guns, such toys are producing an increasing divide on playgrounds and play dates.
Early this year, a 7-year-old in Oklahoma City was suspended from school for pointing his finger like a gun and shooting at a wall. He is not the first “finger-gun” suspension — part of zero-tolerance policy in schools that recently have led to the suspension of kids for everything from drawing stick figures with guns to wearing a hat with an image of an armed soldier on it. In December, Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch organized an annual “bashing” of toy guns at which parents bring their children to destroy toy guns in exchange for non-violent toys such as puzzles. In January, Hawaii legislators sought, but ultimately failed, to make it a crime to sell a toy gun to anyone younger than 18. While the crackdown on toy guns has continued to grow, this debate has been remarkably detached from developmental studies and seems to be more about parents than their kids.
Toys and gender
As someone on the nature side of this debate, a new study in Current Biology magazine caught my eye. After 14 years of observing young chimpanzees in Uganda, leading researchers found that they shared the same innate preferences in toys and games as human children. Males and females were found to gravitate toward what are called “biological predilections” in toys. The researchers found that females tended to treat sticks like dolls to mimic their mothers while males used sticks as weapons. Most interesting, when Richard Wrangham of Harvard University and co-author Sonya Kahlenberg of Bates College gave juvenile monkeys sex-stereotyped human toys, the females tended to play with the dolls while the males are more apt to play with “boys’ toys,” such as trucks.
Joyce Benenson, associate professor of psychology at Emmanuel College, told Discovery News that this study reinforces her own research that “biological mechanisms (underlie) children’s toy preferences” and “suggests … a biological basis for human sex differences.”
Of course, who needs a Uganda chimp research center? I had Madie. Surrounded by brothers (now 12, 10 and 8), Madie (now 5) grew up in a house overflowing with boys and boy toys. Madie is certainly competent with every model of Nerf weapon. However, she primarily maintains a legion of dolls with enough clothes to outfit an Army division.
Psychologist and author Glen David Skoler has argued that games involving toy guns and swords most often occur as boys are transitioning from the “amoral, self-centered, and unsocialized” world of toddlers. He calls this an “intermediary level of moral functioning,” where boys experiment with “games of good guys vs. bad guys and epic struggles between good and evil.” Child psychologist Penny Holland reached the same conclusion in her book We Don’t Play with Guns Here, saying that toy gun play is often “part of … timeless themes of the struggle between good and evil.”
Potsdam vs. pirates
In truth, my kids are not obsessed with guns and show no signs of being nascent Hannibal Lecters graduating to higher and higher forms of carnage. Ironically, I grew up in a zero-tolerance household, where my mother destroyed any toy guns that she found. We became obsessed with secretly hiding squirt guns around the house like adolescent drug users.
What is astonishing to me is how detached the zero-tolerance movement is not just from research but also from reality. One Mothering magazine article advised mothers on how to respond to their boys found playing with guns or swords. The writer suggested that parents take their boys aside and “emphasize healing” and show their boys how to make “magical medicines.” The magazine also advised that parents could also “transform guns into magical wands” and “channel energy into other games.” My personal favorite, however, was that parents should stop such games and have the kids play “peacemaking” by creating “a roundtable with a mediator and write a peace accord.”
Perhaps Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could pull off the peace accord game, but I doubt that most kids would find re-enacting the Potsdam Conference of World War II to be a good substitute for a pirate war.
Toy guns are no more the cause of violence than toy kitchen sets are the cause of obesity. Hundreds of millions of men grew up with toy guns and never turned to a life of spasmodic violence. On this issue, kids seem a lot more sophisticated than their parents. They know it’s just a game.
Jonathan Turley, the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, is a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors.
March 8, 2011
‘I think public schools vary greatly–from town to town and from state to state.”
Elaine,
It’s not the teachers that give us a screwed up school system, it is the “stuck in the box” theories and the depredations of politics.
I would think martial vigor in defense of yourself and your principles is a virtue to be instilled and nurtured. It always was in the past. Playing with toy guns is a about as dangerous as playing with toy cars.
KV
By contrast, I’m 62 and have never fired a gun of any sort for any reason. My father did not own guns, nor any uncles (or aunts) as far as I’m aware. Growing up in NE Ohio in the 1950’s, my brother and had toy guns, played cowboys/indians, etc., but I’ve always avoided real weapons then and now. I’ve never had a scintilla of a reason to change that view. I’ve heard the gun/criminal line before and find it quite unpersuasive mostly because neither I nor ANY individual I know, whether a gun owner or not, has ever been confronted with the extremely rare instance of direct criminality. I’d venture to say that’s probably your–and most everyone else’s–experience as well.
Otterray
Only a handful? Doesn’t move you though? How many dead children dead from gun accidents would it take? How many road rage victims? How many dead from domestic violence? What number of senseless deaths would make you give a damn about the victims?
KV,
Did you look at the evidence as to why they thought the number was high?
“For example, in only a small fraction of rape and robbery attempts do victims use guns in self-defense. It does
not make sense, then, that the NSPOF estimate of the number of rapes in which a woman defended herself with a gun was more than the total number of rapes estimated from NCVS”
According to the study estimate, more people defended themselves against rape with a gun, then the total number of rapes that was estimated to happen.
“NSPOF estimates also suggest that 130,000 criminals are wounded or killed by civilian gun defenders. That number also appears completely out of line with other, more reliable statistics on the number of gunshot cases.”
Just because you like the numbers doesn’t mean they’re good.
Gyges,
Two years ago two men broke into my apartment and robbed my wife and I at gun point. Prior to that night I had never owned a gun and hadn’t planned on getting one either. After many nights lying awake with my wife because we were too anxious to fall asleep, I decided to purchase a hand gun.
Now, I have no way of knowing whether or not a gun would have prevented what happened to us that evening, but I did notice that we slept better after I purchased the gun.
Im curious to know if you’ve ever been the victim of a violent crime?
Gyges,
The DGUs mentioned were 1.5 million. The fact that they did some research to find that 1.5 million number and found that they didn’t like the results doesn’t mean the results are bad.
Do you expect a GOP controlled department to accept a study showing that global warming happens or that marriage equality really WON’T cause any damage to ‘real’ marriages? Of course not. They’re going to throw something in there saying that the results REALLY don’t match what would/will/does actually happen.
KV,
Well, if you don’t agree with the study’s findings perhaps you shouldn’t have brought it up. It makes it look like either: a)you knew what the study said and where being intentionally dishonest
b)you didn’t know what the study said, but were claiming it supported your cause anyway.
Neither of which is all that flattering.
Gyges,
“Evidence suggests that this survey and others like it overestimate the frequency with which firearms were used by private citizens to defend against criminal attack.”
Of course. It was the Clinton DoJ. Do you think they wanted to recognize a high DGU number? Clinton was not a friend of the gun owner.
“Much debated is whether the widespread ownership of firearms deters crime or makes it more deadly—or perhaps both—but the
DGU estimates are not informative in this regard.”
I won’t argue this point. I would say that I’d rather have the option to fight back with lethal force if needed than be at someone’s mercy.
At this point, I’ve not seen supply side gun control help cut violent crime figures. Gun related violence is a VERY small part of violent crime (8% per FBI, 2009.) Why don’t we attack the root causes of ALL violent crime with better social safety nets, better education, jobs, legalization of marijuana….and more.
Excuse me, that should read “claims require proof.” Sloppy bit of editing on my part.
KV,
For future reference, I’m a bit of a skeptic. Claims require extraordinary proof, and an anecdote is not proof (although I am glad your friend wasn’t injured). You’d have been better off linking to the ’94 study. Although not much better, because I’m familiar with the study. Here’s a couple of quotes from the Research in Brief:
“Evidence suggests that this survey and others like it overestimate the frequency with which firearms were used by private citizens to defend against criminal attack.”
“Much debated is whether the widespread ownership of firearms deters crime or makes it more deadly—or perhaps both—but the
DGU estimates are not informative in this regard.”
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf
Like I said, I’ve heard this line many times, and have yet to see anything that backs it up.
R. Pennington,
Thanks for the links – I’ll pass them on to my friend.
“Your friends child may not even be autistic.”
She and I were talking about this very thing the day before yesterday. He does exhibit some autistic behaviors (repetitive and atypical eating behaviors, lack of verbal communication) which leads us to believe that he is at the very low end of the autism spectrum.
I went back through my aging memory bank and looked at some old cases that I worked on personally. In that forty year history, I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of child deaths that were due to gunshot. On the other hand, I have worked on many cases involving dead children. Most were beaten to death by a caregiver. In one case, the weapon was a clothes iron. In another a golf club. In still another a piece of chain. I also have seen a number of suicides in children and teens, every one of them involving hanging, although there were a number of failed suicides involving pills. I do not recall offhand any that involved a gunshot. There have been accidents. There was one recent case where a teenager found a black powder rifle and decided to shoot it. He loaded it with way too much powder, essentially turning it into a pipe bomb. It blew up, killing him.
Most accidental child deaths I come across involve motor vehicle accidents. There are far too many of those. If you talk with first responders and ask what their worst experience on duty has been, the reply is invariably, “It is the kids,” referring to dead children who are either crushed or ejected from a vehicle.
Rather than spending political capital on losing issues like gun control, IMHO, we need to focus on better mental health care, better enforcement of seat belt and child restraint laws, and getting impaired and unsafe drivers off the road.
Stamford Liberal:
Thomas Sowell has written about lake talking children. I believe his research indicates they are very bright. Your friends child may not even be autistic. Here are the links to a couple of web sites:
http://www.tsowell.com/latetalk2.html
http://www.tsowell.com/latetalk1.htm
Gyges,
A 94 study sponsored by the DoJ (Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms) found that there are 1.5 million defensive gun uses annually.
On the other end, the National Crime Victimization Survey in 1993 found DGUs in the 108k range.
Either way, still more than the injuries and non suicidal deaths related to firearms.
Here’s another example, my coworker’s:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/01/12/683055/-Gun-Used-Wisely-(or-It-does-happen-in-small-towns-too)?showAll=yes
That’s my DKos page.
KV,
I was with you till right about here, “The firearm is an equalizer. A civilian without a firearm is left at the mercy of the stronger criminal, or a group of criminals, or an armed criminal.” I’ve heard that line (well variations of it) several times, and quite frankly haven’t had anyone back it up with anything other than hypotheticals. A firearm isn’t a panacea against being the victim of a crime.
Sorry rcampbell. I completely disagree with you. I’ve over 20 firearms. I’ve grown up around firearms. I was shooting before I was 10.
No property damage.
Haven’t killed anyone (or maimed them for that matter.)
Civilian owned firearms are a good thing. You want no one to touch guns? Yeah, explain to me how you’re going to pull that off, especially with an amendment enshrining a right to keep and bear arms.
The firearm is an equalizer. A civilian without a firearm is left at the mercy of the stronger criminal, or a group of criminals, or an armed criminal (Why would a criminal turn in his guns? He’s already a criminal.)
There are millions and millions of guns in this country. Millions of firearm owners. There are less than 100k firearm related injuries and deaths a year. That’s a damn small number.
Mike S.,
I think public schools vary greatly–from town to town and from state to state.
That said, I think the present focus in education on prepping children for standardized tests and spending less class time on developing children’s problem-solving and creative abilities is going to be the cause for more children to become bored, frustrated, disengaged, and unhappy in school. I doubt I could teach children the way I used to if I were still a public school educator today.
Mike S,
” Some kids who are considered unruly and inattentive may just be bored by the teaching methodology.”
One of my best friend’s son is autistic, at the very low end of the spectrum. He’s four and a half and he just started speaking simple words. Because his teachers (who are, for the most part, good) are focusing on the autistism only, and not on speech, he is beginning to act out (biting his teachers and other kids) because he is bored to death. His mother has met with his teachers and explained to them repeatedly that her son has a very keen sense of awareness and understanding but is unable to verbalize. His private speech therapist has stated the same thing, yet, the teachers are convinced of the opposite.
I’ve been with this child and he has never acted out at anyone in his presence. He is bright, he gets it, so we don’t talk to him or guide him as if he doesn’t. His mannerisms and body language convey he knows exactly what is going on around him, he is just unable to fully express himself verbally.
Also, I agree with your last paragraph. I used to play with toy guns as a kid, but have personally developed a lack of interest in the real thing as I’ve gotten older.
“I wish someone would start worrying about the psychoactive drugs that are being given to children vs playing cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians or earth men and aliens. Those drugs are far more destructive than a kid with a cap gun.”
R. Pennington & SL,
I couldn’t agree more. I think the use of psychoactive drugs on children, which is based mostly on a subjective description of the behavior is very dangerous. Our public school system is set up in a terrible way, that encourages conformity of behavior and sublimation of feelings. As I learned doing child welfare cases, techers while on the whole great people, are mostly bad judges of behavioral issues.
Then too the experts,Psychiatrists & Psychologists, they get sent to are in many instances imbued with false premises. Some kids who are considered unruly and inattentive may just be bored by the teaching methodology.
As far as children having toy guns, most often they are objects of fantasy and play, which are very important developmentally. Left to their own devices children use play not only as a pastime but as a means to develop a social sense. I had many toy guns as a boy, many quite realistic, yet the thought of harming another person makes me cringe. I used fantasy to work out and learn to control my aggresive nature, also it was quite fun to play out stories with me as their hero.
I see the push to ban weapon play from boys in the same light as trying to force natural southpaws to use their right hands; both are misguided.