Bill, the obvious is being missed and I wonder if there is an accidental new purpose (to emphasize gun safety)?
Guns: Firing range. Point at target down range. Practice. Deadly. To do wrong requires leaving the range, loading, unholstering and shooting at folks a projectile that can cause death or destroy (the original text of "Thou shalt now kill" was "Thou shalt not destroy," meaning eyesight, vocal cords, etc.)
Martial arts: Firing punches, elbows, knees, fingers, kicks at each other on a regular basis. With control. With great control. Tempted by anger and abilities to react to situations at hand - yet with sufficient control. Our bodies are part of us. Move with us. Always with us. We are responsible for our reactions and level of control with our readily available weapons in order not to hurt others.
Responsible gun usage doesn't negate the need for martial artists to have integrity and set good examples. Hard sweat, memorization, dealing with stresses and fears in oneself and others and working past them together, sparring, encouraging classmates - these are part of MA but not gun use.
Power that comes easy is not the same as voluntarily enduring hardships, overcoming physical barriers, not crippling others, and listening and acting on honest criticism (felt by contact) - for months or years. A gun bought in solitude, with a license, and with lessons is not the same. The only control for a gun, that others exert on the owner, spoke to the owner years before. The gun can't be improved. It can't create greater or lesser force and the magazine can't hold more rounds because a person cares. A gun is a fixed level of puchased power. Respect and revision of values from sweating with others in equal hardships will occur when, while shooting at targets? It won't happen. It really isn't the same kind of power, and additionally it does not provide the same benefits.
Guns can be destructive over extended distances, are a deterrent, and are a threat.
Martial arts can be destructive up close, are seldom a threat, and are predominantly constructive (better health, confidence, interaction with others, awareness, understanding personal limitations, respect the sexes, expanding one's capabilities, inspiring others).
____
Are we still seeking best practices for dojos in this thread, or did we take that as far as it could go?
____
Alan
Of course they teach gun safety. That's not morals, values, or ethics.
You argued that martial arts instructors should be required to teach those things because martial arts are more deadly than learning to play the violin or pitch a baseball. I countered that firearms instructors are not required to teach morals, ethics, or values, and guns are more dangerous than martial arts, so that kind of blows your argument out of the water.
You may think that there are 'McFirearm Instructors', but society doesn't. Never heard of one. I *have* heard of McDojos, though. And I'm still trying to pin down what it is that makes a dojo into a McDojo. Nobody seems to be able to answer the question, but there sure is a lot of dancing around the point going on.
I am beginning to think a dojo is a McDojo if they have a successful business model. How dare they.