Originally posted by AgergKnives are one of man's oldest tools, and as such, they were used from earliest inception as both tool and weapon (which is really just a specific sub-set of tools). Firearms come in many varieties, with a wide variety of different uses, from self-defense to subsistence hunting, sport, competition and recreation. In the case of self-defense, the firearm is a tool purpose-designed to stop an assailant from harming you or other innocent people. The only case in which firearms are used that are specifically designed for killing or wounding would be the sanctioned Military and certain Police applications (such as a sniper rifle).
[b]Wrong, and wrong.
Explain
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910[/b]
5 edits
Originally posted by shilohI disagree with your argument...only a very small subset guns presently are designed with hunting in mind,...the likes of pistols, submachine guns, assault rifles are designed primarily for killing humans (and self defence is just a subset of reasons a user might wish to kill someone with these things). Morever, the motivation for the inventing the gun, in general, was for killing humans on the battle field (as I believe, in an attempt to outperform those equipped with longbows or crossbows). The reason they kill more often than they wound is not just a bullet sized hole they make, but also the catastrophic shockwave damage to the victims organs, left in a bullet's wake (and this is a feature of their design).
Knives are one of man's oldest tools, and as such, they were used from earliest inception as both tool and weapon (which is really just a specific sub-set of tools). Firearms come in many varieties, with a wide variety of different uses, from self-defense to subsistence hunting, sport, competition and recreation. In the case of self-defense, the firearm is a ...[text shortened]... ding would be the sanctioned Military and certain Police applications (such as a sniper rifle).
The motivation for inventing the knife (as opposed to pointy sticks) was to magnify the amount of force that could be applied to a small area, allowing early humans to cut *things*, not specifically human. (yes, people use them to kill humans - but humans are a subset of things)
Originally posted by shilohTrue many guns are designed for specific use as you describe here.
Knives are one of man's oldest tools, and as such, they were used from earliest inception as both tool and weapon (which is really just a specific sub-set of tools). Firearms come in many varieties, with a wide variety of different uses, from self-defense to subsistence hunting, sport, competition and recreation. In the case of self-defense, the firearm is a ...[text shortened]... ding would be the sanctioned Military and certain Police applications (such as a sniper rifle).
BUT they can be used for other reasons and that is the problem. When in the hands of a killer they are no longer being used for a specific reason they were designed for.
Originally posted by checkbaiterSadly you are probaly right. If the good people gave up their guns, it might sart something that could be even worse.
Guns were banned in Australia...watch what happens...
http://lewrockwell.com/slavo/slavo112.html
But is it better now? Do we do nothing and just let this crazyness continue as it is now that can affect every single one of us?
Can the government do anything or has it gone to far and past the point of no return?
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by galveston75he's not right. austrailia had 59 gun related murders this year. hardly an epidemic brought on by strict gun laws is it.
Sadly you are probaly right. If the good people gave up their guns, it might sart something that could be even worse.
But is it better now? Do we do nothing and just let this crazyness continue as it is now that can affect every single one of us?
Can the government do anything or has it gone to far and past the point of no return?
Originally posted by AgergWrong, in so many ways. A tremendous portion of the firearms currently on the market are designed for sporting purposes. As to "pistols, submachine guns and assault weapons," pistols are the one class of small arms most clearly designed for defensive, rather than offensive purposes. Submachine guns do not concern us here, as they have been illegal for quite some time and are not commonly encountered. Ditto for true assault rifles, which by definition are fully automatic. "Assault weapons" is a latter day made up term with no clear referrent.
I disagree with your argument...only a very small subset guns presently are designed with hunting in mind,...the likes of pistols, submachine guns, assault rifles are designed primarily for killing humans (and self defence is just a subset of reasons a user might wish to kill someone with these things). Morever, the motivation for the inventing the gun, in gen ...[text shortened]... t specifically human. (yes, people use them to kill humans - but humans are a subset of things)
Originally posted by shilohWhether they are on the market legally or illegally or for hunting or for defense, would you not agree that ALL of them can be used to kill a human? Have not every types of guns been used to kill a human and will continue to kill humans?
Wrong, in so many ways. A tremendous portion of the firearms currently on the market are designed for sporting purposes. As to "pistols, submachine guns and assault weapons," pistols are the one class of small arms most clearly designed for defensive, rather than offensive purposes. Submachine guns do not concern us here, as they have been illegal for quite s ...[text shortened]... are fully automatic. "Assault weapons" is a latter day made up term with no clear referrent.
Originally posted by AgergThere is a difference between killing and murder. How many guns are designed for murder? Many things can be used as an instrument of murder that were not designed for that purpose. Just because guns are more efficient at that task does not mean they were designed for murder, so there is no justification for banning guns because they can be used to commit murder.
I disagree with your argument...only a very small subset guns presently are designed with hunting in mind,...the likes of pistols, submachine guns, assault rifles are designed primarily for killing humans (and self defence is just a subset of reasons a user might wish to kill someone with these things). Morever, the motivation for the inventing the gun, in gen ...[text shortened]... t specifically human. (yes, people use them to kill humans - but humans are a subset of things)
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsIt doesn't matter if they were not designed for murder. You are missing the obvious point here completely.
There is a difference between killing and murder. How many guns are designed for murder? Many things can be used as an instrument of murder that were not designed for that purpose. Just because guns are more efficient at that task does not mean they were designed for murder, so there is no justification for banning guns because they can be used to commit murder.
They are being used for murder even to the point of killing young children.
Even your president says things have to change or would you prefer for them to stay the same?
How about you take a little trip up to NH right now and explain your views on guns to the parents who are starting to bury their children today?
Originally posted by galveston75It depends on what the President means by things have to change. Certain people should be banned, not guns. 😏
It doesn't matter if they were not designed for murder. You are missing the obvious point here completely.
They are being used for murder even to the point of killing young children.
Even your president says things have to change or would you prefer for them to stay the same?
How about you take a little trip up to NH right now and explain your views on guns to the parents who are starting to bury their children today?