How to improve attitudes towards firearms in society through education?
The main reasons why Firearm training should be a requirement is due to the amount of feel you get with the firearm and feel features that can't just only be explained in words. Most firearms have recoil, some are heavy, and many have not practiced how to aim or how to use it correctly. This means that onsight training would significantly help many owners have a feel for their weapon and make sure that it would protect them. Though some people aren't close to an outdoor location where firearms are used, then the next best thing is to use shooting simulators to understand the type of firearm they have and to give a demonstration of what shooting with said firearm will be like. With many people being visual learners owners will see and check some of the details of the simulation and how it will likely be used in real life. Some simulations such as the iShooter app will allow you to shoot firearms through practice targets to have an idea of the speed of the bullet and the accuracy of how the shot did for more comfortability with the weapon.
With the increase of firearms used in today's age, many owners need to have a feel for them to protect themselves and others around them if they have to. This is why firearm training should be one of the first considerations in how many Americans test out firearms rather than be thrown into immediate life-threatening action where they wouldn't have any idea of how to use it. Even if many can't do on-visit training many could resort to simulations to have a feel of every feature and be able to improve their firearm technique. Due to its accessibility, many are resorting to simulation firearm training to improve their accuracy. Showing that there is demand and importance for many owners' security and protection with times being difficult. Many resorted to unimaginable situations to use their firearms which could be the difference between life and death all with some training.
TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Business News
20 hours ago
- Time Business News
What Do Ancient Artifacts Tell Us?
Ancient artifacts aren't just old objects buried in the ground—they are time capsules that give us a glimpse into the lives of people who lived long before us. These items, whether small or grand, help us understand history, culture, and even the emotions of past civilizations. Throughout the world, archaeologists have discovered a wide variety of artifacts. Tools made of stone or bronze tell us how early humans hunted, cooked, and built their homes. Pottery reveals how people stored food, celebrated, and decorated their spaces. Coins give us clues about trade, economy, and the rise and fall of empires. Even simple jewelry and clothing fragments show us what people valued and how they expressed themselves. Some of the most famous ancient artifacts include the Rosetta Stone, which helped us unlock the language of ancient Egypt, and the Terracotta Army in China, which revealed the grand vision of Emperor Qin Shi Huang. In South America, the golden artifacts of the Inca Empire speak of a culture rich in art and belief. In Europe, Roman mosaics and ruins tell tales of war, love, and everyday life. These artifacts tell us what happened but they also tell us how people felt. A carved statue can show grief or joy. A buried weapon can hint at a tragic war. A painted wall can reveal ancient celebrations or religious beliefs. They help us connect with our ancestors on a human level. But what if these objects tell more than just historical facts? What if they hold stories that were never written down—stories of love, sacrifice, and mystery? Imagine this: archaeologists uncover the remains of a Roman soldier buried beside a local Britannic woman, along with artifacts that suggest a powerful, forbidden love. Could such a tale be true? Could ancient items reveal a romance lost to time? This is the heart of Hidden Beneath by Amir H. Kasra a gripping novel that brings the past to life through fiction. The story begins with a discovery at Hadrian's Wall in England and unfolds into a thrilling journey across time, involving archaeology, human trafficking, and deep emotional truths. If you've ever wondered what ancient artifacts truly reveal, and whether they might hint at a love story forgotten by history, this book is for you. Read Hidden Beneath by Amir H. Kasra available now on Amazon. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Hamilton Spectator
a day ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Emancipation Day talk to highlight Haldimand's Black history
Free on Friday? Heritage Haldimand invites the public to an Emancipation Day gathering that explores Haldimand County's ties to the Underground Railroad. Emancipation Day refers to the declaration of the end of slavery in the British Empire in 1834. In the United States, some African-Americans fleeing slavery took refuge in Canfield, a hamlet in Haldimand where Black and European settlers lived harmoniously, according to local historian Sylvia Weaver. 'Canfield was a special place,' Weaver told The Spectator in an earlier interview. She described how Black, Scottish and Irish inhabitants 'worked side by side' to clear the land. 'They lived together, went to school together, went to church together,' Weaver said. 'They were all equal and they got along.' The story of one of Ontario's oldest Black settlements is told in ' Canfield Roots, ' a documentary by Haldimand filmmaker Graeme Bachiu. Friday's free Emancipation Day event runs from 6 to 8 p.m. at the Canfield Community Hall at 50 Talbot Rd. The centrepiece of the program is a talk by historian Rochelle Bush, a descendant of Samuel Cooper, the first Black settler to make Haldimand his new home. Bush will tell stories of the Cooper and Street families, some of whom are buried in a historic cemetery in Canfield for Haldimand's earliest Black settlers. In an earlier interview, Bush said the African-Americans who came north to Canfield were authors of their own liberation and should be referred to as 'freedom seekers' rather than runaway or escaped slaves. 'They were self-emancipated (and) found their way to British soil, where they could find freedom,' Bush said. Haldimand's fourth annual Emancipation Day celebration 'serves as an opportunity to reflect on the history of slavery in Canada, acknowledge the contributions of Black Canadians and address ongoing systemic anti-Black racism,' the county said in a press release. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Atlantic
a day ago
- Atlantic
The Birth of the Attention Economy
This is an edition of Time-Travel Thursdays, a journey through The Atlantic 's archives to contextualize the present. Sign up here. Early in the Civil War, Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. announced in The Atlantic that the necessities of life had been reduced to two things: bread and the newspaper. Trying to keep up with what Holmes called the 'excitements of the time,' civilians lived their days newspaper to newspaper, hanging on the latest reports. Reading anything else felt beside the point. The newspaper was an inescapable force, Holmes wrote; it ruled by 'divine right of its telegraphic dispatches.' Holmes didn't think he was describing some permanent modern condition—information dependency as a way of life. The newspaper's reign would end with the war, he thought. And when it did, he and others could return to more high-minded literary pursuits—such as the book by an 'illustrious author' that he'd put down when hostilities broke out. Nearly 40 years after Holmes wrote those words, newspapers were still on the march. Writing in 1900, Arthur Reed Kimball warned in The Atlantic of an ' Invasion of Journalism,' as newspapers' volume and influence grew only more intense. Their readers' intellect, Kimball argued, had been diminished. Coarse language was corrupting speech and writing, and miscellaneous news was making miscellaneous minds. The newspaper-ification of the American mind was complete. The rise of the cheap, daily newspaper in the 19th century created the first true attention economy—an endless churn of spectacle and sensation that remade how Americans engaged with the world. Although bound by the physical limits of print, early newspaper readers' habits were our habits: People craved novelty, skimmed for the latest, let their attention dart from story to story. And with the onset of this new way of being came its first critics. In our current moment, when readers need to be persuaded to read an article before they post about it online, 19th-century harrumphs over the risks of newspaper reading seem quaint. Each new technology since the newspaper—film, radio, television, computers, the internet, search engines, social media, artificial intelligence—has sparked the same anxieties about how our minds and souls will be changed. Mostly, we've endured. But these anxieties have always hinted at the possibility that one day, we'll reach the endgame—the point at which words and the work of the mind will have become redundant. Worries over journalism's invasive qualities are as old as the modern daily newspaper. In New York, where the American variant first took shape in the 1830s, enterprising editors found a formula for success; they covered fires, murders, swindles, scandals, steamboat explosions, and other acts in the city's daily circus. As James Gordon Bennett Sr., the editor of the New York Herald and the great pioneer of the cheap daily, said, the mission was 'to startle or amuse.' Small in size and packed with tiny type, the papers themselves didn't look particularly amusing, but the newsboys selling them in the street were startling enough. Even if you didn't buy a paper, a boy in rags was going to yell its contents at you. These cheap newspapers had relatively modest urban circulations, but they suggested a new mode of living, an acceleration of time rooted in an expectation of constant novelty. Henry David Thoreau and other contrarians saw the implications and counseled the careful conservation of attention. 'We should treat our minds,' Thoreau wrote in an essay posthumously published in The Atlantic, 'that is, ourselves, as innocent and ingenuous children, whose guardians we are, and be careful what objects and what subjects we thrust on their attention.' This included newspapers. 'Read not the Times,' he urged. 'Read the Eternities.' But the problem was only getting worse. The Eternities were steadily losing ground to the Times—and to the Posts, the Standards, the Gazettes, the Worlds, and the Examiners. In the last third of the 19th century, the volume of printed publications grew exponentially. Even as more 'serious' newspapers such as the New-York Tribune entered the marketplace, the cheap daily continued to sell thousands of copies each day. Newspapers, aided by faster methods of typesetting and by cheaper printing, became twice-daily behemoths, with Sunday editions that could be biblical in length. A British observer marveled at the turn of the century that Americans, 'the busiest people in the world,' had so much time to read each day. American commentators of high and furrowed brow worried less that newspapers were being left unread and more that they were actually being devoured. The evidence was everywhere—in snappier sermons on Sundays, in direct and terse orations at colleges, in colloquial expressions in everyday usage, in the declining influence of certain journals and magazines (including The Atlantic). If I may apply what Kimball deplored as 'newspaper directness,' people seemed to be getting dumber. Those who were reared on slop and swill wanted ever more slop and swill—and the newspapers were all too ready to administer twice-daily feedings. Writing in The Atlantic in 1891 on the subject of ' Journalism and Literature,' William James Stillman saw a broad and 'devastating influence of the daily paper' on Americans' 'mental development.' No less grave were the political implications of a populace marinating in half-truths, seeking the general confirmation of what it already believed. In such a market, journalists and their papers had an incentive to perpetuate falsehoods. Was all of this hand-wringing a little too much? Has not one generation predicted the doom of the next with each successive innovation? Socrates warned that writing would weaken thought and give only the appearance of wisdom. Eighteenth-century novels occasioned panic as critics worried that their readers would waste their days on vulgar fictions. And as for newspapers, didn't Ernest Hemingway famously take 'newspaper directness' and make it the basis for perhaps the most influential literary style of the 20th century? Each innovation, even those that risk dimming our broader mental capacity, can stimulate innovations of its own. But at the risk of sounding like those 19th-century critics, this time really does seem different. When machines can so agreeably perform all of our intellectual labors and even fulfill our emotional needs, we should wonder what will become of our minds. No one has to spend much time imagining what we might like to read or pretend to read; algorithms already know. Chatbots, meanwhile, can as readily make our emails sound like Hemingway as they can instruct us on how to perform devil worship and self-mutilation. Thoreau may have never divined the possibility of artificial intelligence, but he did fear minds smoothed out by triviality and ease. He imagined the intellect as a road being paved over—' macadamized,' in 19th-century parlance—'its foundation broken into fragments for the wheels of travel to roll over.' 'If I am to be a thoroughfare,' Thoreau wrote, 'I prefer that it be of the mountain-brooks, the Parnassian streams, and not the town-sewers.'
