Guns designed to kill?

[shanek]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Guns desi

I really do not see this a reaching at all. Just about anything is CAPABLE killing another person. There are thousands upon thousands of household objects with the CAPABILITY of ending someone's life, though they were not DESIGNED to do so. Would a burglar, rapist, mugger, etc.. be frightened by one of these various objects? Perhaps. Why then, can we be reasonable sure they would be a afraid of a gun? Allow me to venture a guess. Because it is DESIGNED to kill.

I have no idea what kind of logic is you're using here...You admit that these other objects, which aren't designed to kill but which are capable of killing, could be effective deterrents. You then leap to the reason that a gun is a deterrent is because it's DESIGNED to kill. Wha???

I maintain that the burglar doesn't care one whit whether or not it was DESIGNED to kill, only that it CAN kill him. And THAT'S why it's a deterrent.

 

[Santa666]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Guns desi

I have no idea what kind of logic is you're using here...You admit that these other objects, which aren't designed to kill but which are capable of killing, could be effective deterrents. You then leap to the reason that a gun is a deterrent is because it's DESIGNED to kill. Wha???

I maintain that the burglar doesn't care one whit whether or not it was DESIGNED to kill, only that it CAN kill him. And THAT'S why it's a deterrent.

I really hate to disagree here, but oh well, here goes...

Let's do a quick comparison between a gun and and everyday household item, both of which are CAPABLE of killing someone.

Gun v.s. heavy lamp/broom/swiss army knife/steel toed shoe/chair/etc..

I will not pretend to speak for every criminal out there, but I will use some logic on behalf of some of them.

Homeowner has gun pointed at me. The gun can kill me, I know this because that is what guns are DESIGNED to do. I need to quickly get away. (by the way, this is just a quick example)

Homeowner has lamp/broom/any of the above listed or other household item in hand threatening me. At this point, as a burglar, I obviously know any of those items COULD kill me, but I may just take my chances, perhaps disarming the homeowner or simply attacking him outright.

Why would I perhaps attack or try to disarm the homeowner in the second example? Because the weapons he is employing are not nearly as effective as a gun. Why aren't they as effective? Because they were DESIGNED for other purposes. Why is the gun so effective at what is does? Because everyone knows what it is DESIGNED to do, KILL.


Santa

 

[Bikewer]

I don't see it as any great revalation. When our European ancestors first obtained gunpowder, it did not take them long to figure out that a charge of same, placed in a tube, would propel a projectile with sufficient force to cause harm.

Even to armored knights...

It is also true that like all human inventions, firearms have become extremely diverse and specialized. The vast majority are, of course, intended as weapons, but not all.

Many highly-specialized firearms are designed and intended only for a specific sporting use, such as the Biathlon rifles used in the olympic competition, or "Free" pistols used similarly.

 

[Ed]

Originally posted by Earthborn
Yes, very clever. However, we can also turn that around and say that rubber bullets are designed not to kill when used in a deadly weapon.

If we want to know what "guns are designed for" we may have to ask ourselves what came first: guns shooting deadly bullets, or guns shooting rubber bullets.

What came first were guns that made noise and, by their novelty, scared the bejesus out of the opposing forces. Accuracy and lethality were not really the issue, it was the fact of their existance. They might be thought of as fireworks.

We can also ask ourselves how effective guns with rubber bullets are at not-killing. If guns are not 'designed to kill' and only the ammunition is, we can expect that when loaded with ammunition that is specifically designed not to kill, you'll end up with a combination that makes it very difficult to kill someone with.
However if guns are designed to kill, their killing power might still be pretty good, even if used with ammunition designed to minimise killing.

As I have pointed out, it is the system that is lethal.

 

[Tmy]

Of cousre they are designed to kill. Thats why cops n soilders carry them. Even a target pistol will kill if its fired at a person.

THink of it this way. If they werent designed to kill all the gun compainies would be out of business for creating such a dangerous product.

Sort of like the old Saturday Night Live skit with the 'Bag O Glass" toy.

 

[Ed]

The question was asked about guns designed to not be lethal.

There are a number of examples but anything chambered for a bb or cb cap is only for gallery use. I would also put many but not all air guns in this catagory.

As far as firearms designed expressly for killing, I can only think of two: the "Humane Killer" for which I cannot find a picture. Basically, it looks a bit like a single shot pistol with a plate instead of a barrel. The plate is positioned onn the head of the critter and the trigger pulled with predestined results. I find it hard to think of any other use for this thing.

The other is called a "power head". It is basically a 12 ga. shotgun shell mounted on the end of a shaft. When the end of the shell is pressed against something it goes off. This thing is used for protection against sharks.

 

[Tmy]

If they arent designed to kill what are they designed for?? I mean they do such a good job for somthing they aint ment to do!

Even if its a target gun, its still designed to "kill" the targets.

 

[Ranb]

.....Many highly-specialized firearms are designed and intended only for a specific sporting use, such as the Biathlon rifles used in the olympic competition, or "Free" pistols used similarly.

Good luck trying to get any gun control freaks to agree with this statement. I have used an electric free pistol (22lr)l at the range a few times. The trigger is an adjustable switch, and the grip is molded to the hand to reduce shaking. They are very accurate and not too bulky. In other words, they will kill very well. I know this does not make Olympic shooters potential murder suspects, but try to tell this to some of the people here on this forum.

Ranb

 

[Freakshow]

Good luck trying to get any gun control freaks to agree with this statement. I have used an electric free pistol (22lr)l at the range a few times. The trigger is an adjustable switch, and the grip is molded to the hand to reduce shaking. They are very accurate and not too bulky. In other words, they will kill very well. I know this does not make Olympic shooters potential murder suspects, but try to tell this to some of the people here on this forum.

Ranb

Some of the more extreme feminists claim that all men are potential rapists. Some of the more extreme gun control advocates claim that all gun owners are potential murderers.

Both arguments make the same amount of sense, which is none at all.

 

[epepke]

As far as firearms designed expressly for killing, I can only think of two: the "Humane Killer" for which I cannot find a picture. Basically, it looks a bit like a single shot pistol with a plate instead of a barrel. The plate is positioned onn the head of the critter and the trigger pulled with predestined results. I find it hard to think of any other use for this thing.

I actually examined a patented Humane Killer. It was on the end of a wooden pole. The action was only about 10 cm long transverse to the pole and ended in a radially serrated plate.

This was at an English pub called The Traveller's Friend. I had a conversation with the landlord, and he explained that a traveller's friend was a policemen. I told him that it put me in mind of the American Motorist's Friend, which is a condom-shaped device that fits over the penis with a tube running to a flask strapped to the leg. It is of similar antiquity. It was featured in a Burt Reynold's film that made fun of EST-holes.