arthwollipot
Limerick Purist
In the USA perhaps.
Why are guns made to kill?
- Thread starter Ranb
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gun control
Good point. Edited. In Australia it's the other way round.
Father Dagon
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2007
- Messages
- 1,193
No, in Sweden too. Getting a drivers license today is as hard as it was to get a taxi drivers license in the 80's.
And killing is always easier than subduing. Consider the trial of Slobodan Milošević. He was flanked by two security guards that looked more like Vin Diesel than Vin Diesel himself. Obviously, they have a lot of margins when dealing with troublesome people. Now, if Milošević had been flanked by two 50-year old grannies, then the margins would've been almost nil. The only resort for the grannies would literally have been bashing his head in. With a tomahawk.
Last edited:
Can we have a few examples of these guns that are not designed to kill humans?
My point of view is that most firearms types/models coming off of the assembly line are not intended to kill humans. Most of them are intended for use in sport shooting.
Ranb
You should be comparing buying a car and buying a gun, or driving a car on public roads and carrying a gun in a public place. There are different restrictions on each.
In various places it is hard to buy or own certain guns because they are banned, I'm not aware of any cars that are banned. I do not need a permit or license to buy a car, just to drive on public roads. But some states do not allow carrying firearms on public property at all.
Why not compare buying a car muffler and a gun muffler (silencer)?
Ranb
mhaze
Banned
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2007
- Messages
- 15,718
They are (made for things other than killing.)
1. Nail and brad guns used in construction (Arguable they are used for killing in horror movies).
2. Rail guns.
3. Guns that shoot ping pong balls.
4. Paint ball guns.
5. Cannons at the circus used to shoot humans out a ways, right?
6. Tank guns can fire small unfolding and flying UAVs
7. Some guns fire projectiles that are designed to penetrate armor, which isn't exactly the same as "killing".
8. There is somebody that drives around our neighborhoods here with some sort of machine gun that fires little rolled up advertisements to everybody's porches. (This one could be murder by boredom, though).
9. Cathode ray tube guns. Do kill by boredom when used in televisions.
10. Guns that shoot water for crowd control.
11. Guns that squirt water that kids play with.
12. Blank pistols used to signal at sporting events.
13. Flare pistols (also used to kill in movies).
14. Stun guns, kill only now and then...
15. High power laser gun, intended to shoot down incoming ICBMs.
Tricky
Briefly immortal
It's almost impossible to address this question without getting tangled up with the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
Obviously pop guns, flair guns, bb guns, taser guns, tranquilizer guns, paintball guns, potato guns, nail guns, and such are not in any sense designed to kill humans or really anything (well, maybe small game). Other guns designed for specific hunting needs, like elephant guns, harpoon guns, target guns etc. could be used to kill people, but that is obviously not their primary function.
But if you bring these forth, then those who make the claim that guns are designed to kill people will likely say, "But those are not real guns." So you can't win.
Suffice it to say though that the vast majority of familiar-looking guns (as opposed to staple guns or harpoon guns) are designed to have the capability of killing people, even if it is secondary (e.g. a shotgun is mostly designed for hunting, but it is designed to have the capability of bringing down a large animal, which would include a human). I don't have any statistics for this, but a pass through your local pawn shop should convince you.
Last edited:
Yes, but most martial arts were not formed primarily for that purpose.fuelair said:
Yes, essentially many (perhaps most) martial arts are specifically made to defend yourself against an attacker, rather than attacking someone. This includes those I practice. However, my point was that I may not use these even if put in a situation where they might be used for their original purpose, since I strongly prefer to solve conflicts (including those initiated by others) by less violent means, even if it may prove more dangerous to myself. Thus, my original point was that I practice something without intending to use it for its original purpose, while not denying its original purpose. So I fail to see why Ranb feels the need to prove that guns are not made to kill people, since all he would need to justify his own interest would be that he does not use guns to kill people.
I was not planning to get involved in this debate, since I'm among the people you mention who know nothing about firearms and have no interest in them (if I got hold of one I would probably want to see it destroyed and nothing else). However, there is a big difference between "are" and "should be". The martial arts you mention are specifically made to defend yourself against an attacker. Nothing about a gun is specifically made to defend yourself against an attacker. It may be that this is due to my abysmal lack of knowledge about firearms, but I fail to see how the use of guns for self-defense rather than murder are anywhere but in the mind and morals of the user.
Mastering the use of your body or tools, I see no harm in. Aquiring tools which may be used for harm is another matter entirely. Of course, since I fequently carry a knife for its tool uses, I'm not one to condemn every person who does so.
Ron_Tomkins
Satan's Helper
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2007
- Messages
- 44,024
Yes well, see you're actually going much deeper. The question isn't about guns anymore. It's more of a how-did-we-get-here in the first place type of question? Well, that's a very complex question and it involves a deep study of human behaviour and why are humans agressive and self defense and other aspects that have already been discussed here.
Why isn't it possible to realize that guns are indeed used for tons of other things besides killing?
Last edited:
Evidence? Seems to me that your point of view is likely wrong, unless the US military has started designating Iraqi insurgents as 'sport'.
No I shouldn't, because one needs to be driving a car to have an accident/incident, while one only needs to own a gun to be involved in an accident/incident. Driving a car and buying a gun are reasonable actions to compare.
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38,527
Because they stink at pruning the weeds in my garden. I'd rather take my rifle to them, but it simply doesn't work, so I have to use the garden tools.
DR
If you take a look at the firearms (small arms not tanks and aircraft) available in the USA, the number made for the civilian market and used for recreational shooting far outnumber the ones made for the military. While some firearms made for civilians are designed for shooting people (1911 pistols, AR-15's) others such as single shot rifles and pistols or those made for the biathlon are clearly intended for uses other than killing people.
So if I own a gun and it is locked safely in a secure area, how is it going to be involved in any sort of incident? I still own it, but it is not a threat to anyone. Driving a car is more aptly compared to using a gun.
Ranb
Last edited:
Rolfe
Adult human female
You know, in Britain you absolutely can own a gun if it is locked safely in a secure area. The only thing is, that secure area will not be in your house. It will be at your gun club. You still own it, and it is not a threat to anyone.
You have a problem with that idea?
Rolfe.
You have a problem with that idea?
Rolfe.
It sounds ok. But can I bring them home for cleaning, repairs, upgrades? Are you Brits allowed to keep the ammo at home? Do the clubs have a good record for safekeeping the firearms? In the USA I would not even trust the FBI to keep mine safe, they lose a lot more of theirs than I do mine.
I am not liking anything about this thread. I started it with a poorly worded original post and some of my replies have not been well thought out either. I think I will let it die here. Thanks for all the replies guys/gals.
Ranb
I am not liking anything about this thread. I started it with a poorly worded original post and some of my replies have not been well thought out either. I think I will let it die here. Thanks for all the replies guys/gals.
Ranb
Skeptical Greg
Agave Wine Connoisseur
I wonder how ' gun ' would fare in a word association test ..
I bet the overwhelming majority of people would say ' kill ', with maybe ' Clint Eastwood ' coming in second ( just kidding ) ..
I think very few people would say ' hunting ' ..
If we don't want ' gun ' to be associated with killing, we really need to come up with a new word for the device commonly referred to as a ' gun '...
I bet the overwhelming majority of people would say ' kill ', with maybe ' Clint Eastwood ' coming in second ( just kidding ) ..
I think very few people would say ' hunting ' ..
If we don't want ' gun ' to be associated with killing, we really need to come up with a new word for the device commonly referred to as a ' gun '...
Last edited:
Autolite
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2007
- Messages
- 1,812
Actually, I own a Crosman 1377C pellet pistol that here in Canada is considered a "real gun". By law, I had to register it as a "restricted handgun" which puts in in the same legal classification as a Desert Eagle .50 cal. Admittedly you could kill someone with it if you used it to beat them about the face and head for several hours...
Tricky
Briefly immortal
...but you might put your eye out.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Sounds a bit like the "permissible weapons" rule at many science fiction conventions. "If I can hold this to your face and pull the trigger, then you can keep it. Otherwise, no."
Rolfe.
Rolfe
Adult human female
NoNoNoNoNoNoNo!!!! Why do you want the gun at home??? Guns at home is precisely what this law is intended to prevent! You do all the cleaning and repairs and so on at the gun club. And since you have no gun at home, why would you want ammunition at home? No, you can't.
Yes. When that law was brought in, there were concerns that the gun clubs would be a magnet for robberies. But it has not happened.
Rolfe.