Weapon or Firearm-Is it just semantics?


PDA






Grandpa Shooter
October 18, 2007, 06:03 PM
I was just reading the debate about open VS concealed and one of the members referred to a firearm as a weapon. I stopped using "weapon" a long time ago to attempt to curb the fear associated with the use of the term. As a long time shooter, trainer, range officer, ex military man, I have consistently advised others to not fuel the fire by using "weapon" when referring to a firearm.

Is it just semantics or is there indeed a perceptual shift when we continue to call something a "weapon" which we hope to Heaven we never have to use that way?

If you enjoyed reading about "Weapon or Firearm-Is it just semantics?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Owen
October 18, 2007, 06:17 PM
if you're carrying it concealed, for self-defense it is definitely a weapon.

On the other hand target guns usually aren't weapons unless they are pressed into service as such.

cnorman18
October 18, 2007, 06:23 PM
I would think the difference between the two terms is that "weapon' can denote many things--gun, knife, tire iron, whatever. If we're talking about firearms in the context of self-defense (as opposed to target shooting or other sports), they ARE weapons. I don't see a need to avoid the term. Hoplophobes aren't going to be any happier with "firearms", anyway.

Chrome
October 18, 2007, 06:23 PM
Agreed Owen.

My pocket knife is not a weapon. It's a tool. My weapon is clipped to my pocket or back pack depending on where I'm at.

My 22/45 is not a weapon. My P99 is.

An axe is not a weapon until it used as such. Until then it is just a tool.

Later,
Chrome...

ilbob
October 18, 2007, 06:24 PM
the NRA discourages the use of the word weapon in any of its gun safety classes.

this is stressed repeatedly in the instructor classes.

Brad Johnson
October 18, 2007, 06:24 PM
In strictly linguistic terms weapon would be any of an entire class of objects - anything that is used in inflict harm, either offensive or defensive. Firearm is a class of weapon.

i.e. "His weapon of choice was not a rock or a gun, it was a firearm."

Though they have distintly different connotations the terms tend to be used interchangeably.

Brad

Red Dragon
October 18, 2007, 06:27 PM
Weapon is just a general term encompassing every object used in combat, defense, etc.

Firearm is just a catagory of objects that can be used as a weapon.

It all depends on the use. (a knife can be a weapon or just something to cut your steak.)

That's my 2 cents anyway.

Bazooka Joe71
October 18, 2007, 06:35 PM
I'd say its a firearm(tool) until you have to use it for something other than recreation...Then it becomes a weapon.

Officers'Wife
October 18, 2007, 06:35 PM
Hi Grandpa,

Truthfully I believe it's a matter of education more than semantics. Consider: The bow and arrows my uncle forced me to make when I was 12 is definitely a weapon as the deer I had to kill with it (them) is proof of. The sword my Dad's uncle made him when he got his officers commission is also a weapon even though (to my knowledge) never used as a weapon. About an hour ago five Apache helicopters flew over our house here. Trust me on this-- one look and you KNOW they are weapons. At least to the uneducated...

Through many hours it was explained to me that my bow is only a tool, no different than the drawknives and sandpaper I used to make or the flat stone I used to hone the bone arrowheads to sharpness with.

Dad's sword is a simply a symbol from bygone times.

And the helicopters... to the brave men that fly the things they are simply tools of their trade.

We as a nation have allowed ourselves to being duped out of our morality to the place where the only thing that is evil are the tools needed to protect what is good and moral. My Gramps always said that men will become wiser and weaker. When we condemn the tools that make us equal in the status quo by making the word weapon a negative we fulfill my Gramps prediction. Perhaps instead of risking the wrath of the ignorant you should simply look then in the eye and ask them what the frack their problem is.

Selena

Zundfolge
October 18, 2007, 06:38 PM
A firearm is a weapon, but not all weapons are firearms.


In addition, some states have Concealed Weapons Licenses, others have Concealed Handgun Licenses ... so there is a legal distinction between a weapon, firearm and handgun.

CTPistol
October 18, 2007, 06:39 PM
A weapon is something made strictly for harming someone

A firearm is an instrument or tool made for many purposes..collecting, investing, recreation, self defense...etc

Im with the NRA on this one.."firearm"

I cringe when I hear mall ninjas at the range adding "tactical" and "weapon" to every sentence.

:barf:

Nolo
October 18, 2007, 06:49 PM
I would say to always call a firearm a weapon. Why? Because it is one. Antis will often claim that a firearm's sole purpose is to kill people. That is incorrect. It's primary purpose is to kill people. Target shooting is practice for killing people, even if it has evolved into a sport in its own right. Hunting is not killing people, but it is killing. It is important for new shooters to understand and respect that. You should not be afraid of a gun, you should respect a gun. That's part of good range discipline. Now if only we did the same for automobiles...

ClickClickD'oh
October 18, 2007, 06:57 PM
Do to being born in the wrong year, I had to take the Texas Hunter Safety course once upon a time.

The instructor attempted to chastise me for referring to my rifle with the term "weapon". He gave me the line about referring to it as a firearm to not offend people who might over hear me. Then he went off on the tangent about "harvesting" deer. Okay, full stop. You use a weapon to kill a deer. You harvest wheat with a thresher.

The "firearm" and "harvesting" stuff is just poor PC appeasement for people with an abysmal understanding of US history and a very low tolerance for being offended. They need to get over it, not us adapt to them.

Blackbeard
October 18, 2007, 07:06 PM
I have to say that all firearms are weapons.

Sure, you can collect them. People collect all sorts of things -- it doesn't change the nature of what they collect. If a guy collects paper clips, do they cease to be designed to hold paper together? Sure, you can compete with them. People race cars around tracks, but that doesn't mean the cars aren't transportation.

Blackbeard
October 18, 2007, 07:09 PM
A weapon is something made strictly for harming someone

So what would be a weapon? Hmm? What is made ONLY for harming someone and not for collecting or admiring, or self-defense?

Pat McCoy
October 18, 2007, 08:03 PM
A firearm, like most any other tool, has the potential to be a weapon, but is not a weapon until it is used as such. My walking stick is just that until after I use it to defend myself, then it will be referred to as a "weapon" in the resulting reports and adjudications.

My Colt is a pistol, possibly even a self-defense pistol, until I use it as a weapon

Many things not designed as weapons can become weapons by their usage: screwdivers, hammers, baseball bats, plate galss windows.

jungleroy
October 18, 2007, 08:08 PM
A firearm is a tool, and weapon may be what you chose to use it for.

Juna
October 18, 2007, 08:10 PM
A weapon is only a weapon when it is used as one. A gun is a firearm, until it's used to shoot or threaten someone, at which point it becomes a weapon.

The term "weapon" carries with it a connotation of violence and negativity. We don't need any more negative connotations associated with firearms. Your gun is merely a tool or an inanimate object until you're forced to use it as a weapon.

The same is true of the term "assault rifle," IMO. Assault is a human action, not a trait of an inanimate object. Such terms should not be assigned to inanimate objects, IMO. One could use a 30-06 hunting rifle to assault someone, but would that make it an "assault rifle?" If not, why is a select fire rifle used for target shooting an "assault rifle?" I think it's a junk term used to assign criminal and violent connotations to inanimate objects as a back door method of brainwashing people into believing guns are violent.

Just my $.02.

Sistema1927
October 18, 2007, 08:19 PM
Political Correctness :banghead:

Neo-Luddite
October 18, 2007, 08:21 PM
Weapon is a fine generic term that can be applied equally to all firearms regardless of type. Specific terms of catagory are fine as well (rifle, pistol, sidearm, shotgun, etc.). I don't like to sugar coat, that road leads to dead end puff words like assault weapon and saturday night special that are meaningless catagories.

Most of all, unless it is a cannon, mortar, heavy machinegun, or (OK-I can bend) shotgun---I don't call it a gun either.

I get your point, but I don't feel we serve our cause by making people feel better about emmotionally charged words to descibe firearms (soft or sharp).
I like 'weapon' especially when indocrinating people new to gun safety, especially kids. My little Benjamin Air Pistol is as sure a weapon in my eyes as any of my firearms. Just my take.

MarshallDodge
October 18, 2007, 08:25 PM
The dictionary's definition of a weapon is "any instrument or device for use in attack or defense in combat, fighting, or war, as a sword, rifle, or cannon" and " something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy" (Merriam-Webster)

Weapon has a negative connotation in my opinion. I have a good friend who is in the military and when he uses the term weapon when referring to a firearm it makes me cringe.

I have never used any of my firearms in combat or self defense to injure, defeat, or destroy. To me firearms are a tool, a tool that I enjoy using for target shooting and protection. I hope I never have to use it as a weapon but I will not rule it out.

JesseL
October 18, 2007, 08:27 PM
As far as I'm concerned "arm" and "weapon" are synonymous.

The only reason I carry this pistol around all the time is to shoot someone, if the need should arise. It is without question a weapon. Obfuscative word games tire me.

If you want to argue that one of my Remington 37s (single shot 20lb 22lr) isn't a weapon, I won't disagree.

mugsie
October 18, 2007, 08:29 PM
This is my weapon,
this is my gun.
This is for killing,
and this is for fun!

Call it what ya want, but a firearm is a weapon. It is used to kill (spare me the target shooting etc. which is a derivative of hunting) for food, protection or the preservation of our freedoms.

Alexfubar
October 18, 2007, 09:04 PM
Ummm , is " weapon " a BAD word ? Simply having this debate means the PC influences have gotten too deep a hold on our minds.

I carry a concealed weapon. In case I decide it is a good idea to shoot holes through someone who needs them.

The fact that I have never done it , and primarily shoot paper and steel targets resulting in fun for me and those like me is just a side effect of wanting to aquire more proficiency at shooting People who may require getting shot.

I am a free citizen of the USA , a former (NG) MP , a black belt , and I cultivte self defense abilities. The fact that I legally carry a weapon and it makes people who are afraid of free men being armed is not my problem.

But if they can display good manners I will share my experience and time with them , otherwise - I vote against their leaders , I donate to those whop promise to protect my rights , and I ignore the ostrich people who bury their heads in the sand hoping that the scary people will just go away.

twodawgs
October 18, 2007, 09:13 PM
Well, all my guns are guns. Have been since I learned to talk and will likely be such until I can't talk. My rifles and shotGUNs are guns and my revolvers and pistols are guns and I have GUN safes and a GUN rack and my bows are not guns and my ax is not a gun and my knives are not guns..

And when we talk about our opponents and the issue of guns we talk about GUN control and GUN grabbers.

YMMV

CB900F
October 18, 2007, 09:20 PM
Fella's;

Yup, this is PC at it's insidious worst, affecting people who should know better.

In actuality, regardless of the dictionary definition, the only weapon is between your ears, everything else is a tool.

900F

TheLastBoyScout
October 18, 2007, 09:24 PM
My rifles and pistols are weapons. They are all in proven combat calibers, and could all be used to apply lethal force in defense of my home or country.

My pocketknife is a tool.

My grampa's .22 is a rifle... cause its 2 syllables and accurately descriptive, as opposed to firearm which is longer and vaguer... or weapon, because a scoped HBAR 10-22 wouldn't be anywhere near the top of the list to grab in case of trouble.

My Kabar kind of blurs the line between tool and weapon--so far its only been used for whatever practical use I have for a really sharp knife, but if that was all it was good for it wouldn't be worth the extra bulk/weight... so rather than tool or weapon its "my Kbar"...

RecoilRob
October 18, 2007, 09:39 PM
The word 'weapon' implies intent.

I prefer to describe the impliments I use by as close to correct nomenclature as possible. My revolver. The rifle. This hammer....ect...

If I happen to wish to do harm to someone with one of the above...then, and only then, does it become a weapon. At least that is the way I think about it in my own head.

76shuvlinoff
October 18, 2007, 09:51 PM
My pistol is a pistol as in Michigan I have a CPL Concealed Pistol License instead of a Concealed Weapons Permit or a Concealed Carry Permit or a Carry Concealed Weapon permit. Etc etc.

Although at times I refer to my pistols as weapons or "pieces" or sidearms and firearms, I totally agree with a statement above. The weapon is between your ears and everything else is a tool.

Officers'Wife
October 18, 2007, 10:00 PM
Hi Neo-Luddite

Most of all, unless it is a cannon, mortar, heavy machinegun, or (OK-I can bend) shotgun---I don't call it a gun either.

If you want to get into technicalities the only "gun" is a cannon. A mortar would be a rocket launcher. The crew operated automatic weapon is a gun only from the attitude held over from the 1800's that a Gatling was simply a cannon that fired grapeshot one ball at a time. Be glad it's me posting this and not my uncle who would go nuclear on the subject of names.

Of course he would always tell me to go away when he started his cannon/rocket launch stuff and I would ask if a cannon was firing RAP rounds (rocket assisted propellant) if it was a cannon or a rocket launcher.

Selena

230RN
October 18, 2007, 10:29 PM
There are gradations of usage and adjectives, and I use them all depending on my surroundings.

I agree that "weapon" is more negatively semantically loaded when talking to most people, and I will moderate my usage according to the folks around me.

Gradations going from least negative to most negative ( this list is not exhaustive, but only an example):

tool
rifle
pistol (don't go into revolver vs pistol --most folks don't know the difference)
sidearm
firearm
gun
weapon

target
recreational
plinking
sporting
hunting
defensive

Obviously, some combinations are ridiculous, like "hunting tool" or "target weapon," but one can moderate the effect by judicious combinations according to the situation.

In my work mileau, I usually use the term "defensive firearm" or preferably "defensive sidearm" when talking about concealed carry to moderate the semantic loadings.

(I am kind of a "Johnny Concealedcarryseed.")

I am not so stiffnecked as to think that "they" should automatically bow down to "our" usages.

In other circumstances, like yakking with other gunnies, I will call my gun a weapon.

I feel we are in a Public Relations War with the antis, and you don't win the hearts and minds of the fence-sitters by using negatively loaded words.

twodawgs
October 18, 2007, 10:37 PM
How about some American Heritage Dictionary Definitions?

gun (gn) KEY

NOUN:

A weapon consisting of a metal tube from which a projectile is fired at high velocity into a relatively flat trajectory.
A cannon with a long barrel and a relatively low angle of fire.
A portable firearm, such as a rifle or revolver.
A device resembling a firearm or cannon, as in its ability to project something, such as grease, under pressure or at great speed.

I don't think there's an end to this debate when we can drag it out like this.
And it always ends up the same way.

geekWithA.45
October 18, 2007, 10:37 PM
Preferred:

Sidearm,
arms
handgun, pistol, revolver
rifle


Deprecated:

gun
weapon
gatt, 9, or any slang term

Officers'Wife
October 18, 2007, 10:50 PM
Hi 230RN

I feel we are in a Public Relations War with the antis, and you don't win the hearts and minds of the fence-sitters by using negatively loaded words.

To quote a old Vietnam veteran "the trouble with winning hearts and minds is the other guy is scaring the <expletive deleted> out of them and fear is more effective than respect. "

In my humble opinion the more effective PR would be education of the drones that will negate the fear. Negate the fear and the only weapon the left has left is greed.

Selena

Selena

Grandpa Shooter
October 18, 2007, 11:41 PM
A weapon is only a weapon when it is used as one. A gun is a firearm, until it's used to shoot or threaten someone, at which point it becomes a weapon.

The term "weapon" carries with it a connotation of violence and negativity. We don't need any more negative connotations associated with firearms. Your gun is merely a tool or an inanimate object until you're forced to use it as a weapon.

The same is true of the term "assault rifle," IMO. Assault is a human action, not a trait of an inanimate object. Such terms should not be assigned to inanimate objects, IMO. One could use a 30-06 hunting rifle to assault someone, but would that make it an "assault rifle?" If not, why is a select fire rifle used for target shooting an "assault rifle?" I think it's a junk term used to assign criminal and violent connotations to inanimate objects as a back door method of brainwashing people into believing guns are violent.

Just my $.02.

My thoughts exactly. GJ

Sistema1927
October 19, 2007, 12:20 AM
The word 'weapon' implies intent.

Darned tooting!

I "intend" to defend my life, my family, and my property. Since when did we have to tap dance around the fact that the 2nd Amendment is all about self-defense? The use of the word "weapon" should be a reminder of this.

The fact that we are having this discussion is indicative of the fact that the enemy now defines the discussion. We need to go on the offensive (another non-PC term) and redefine the debate. Political correctness be damned.

strat81
October 19, 2007, 12:42 AM
I generally use the term weapon, but not exclusively. The moment you forget your 10/22, race gun, or 22A is not a weapon, an accident can happen.

I heard an interview piece from the USCCA involving a related matter about "why do you carry a gun?" People need to stop tip-toeing around the issue and say "I carry a gun to shoot people. I don't want to shoot anyone, but I will if they try to maim or kill me or my family."

I carry a gun to shoot people.
I collect guns because they are interesting historical items.
I shoot guns at the range for relaxation and skill building.

You may shoot guns to harvest game.
You may shoot guns to engage in competition.
You may shoot guns to spend time with your kids.

RKBABob
October 19, 2007, 12:47 AM
About an hour ago five Apache helicopters flew over our house here. Trust me on this-- one look and you KNOW they are weapons. At least to the uneducated...
I used to live under what was apparently an extablished training route. We'd get about five military helicopters pass over our house twice a year, they'd turn around about a mile out, and pass directly over again. Once one of the Apaches circled right over the back yard, waiting for the other four to make their turn and catch up. I actually made eye contact with the pilot, who immediately moved on.... perhaps because this expression :what: was on my face, and he figured I'd lose control of my bowels if he did just one more circle over me. Those things definately look EVIL!



The term "weapon" carries with it a connotation of violence and negativity.
That's exactly why I have never used (what I consider) the improper term 'weapon' to describe a firearm. Weapons are objects which facilitate violence... firearms are tools carried by gentlemen, and used to stop violence. How can we go about assuring people that our firearms are merely tools if we keep refering to them as weapons?

But then, I also can't stand magazines like Guns & Ammo, when they rant right on the cover about the latest tactical high-capacity combat pistol.:barf:

revjen45
October 19, 2007, 12:48 AM
A pencil is a weapon if you stab someone with it. In fact, in the DPRK a Bic pen is probably a dirk or dagger under the purvue of sect 12020.

crazed_ss
October 19, 2007, 12:59 AM
A gun is a weapon in the sense that a bow, crossbow, sword, dagger, or mace is a weapon. Sure you can collect guns, crossbows, swords, and maces.. you cant use them recreationally or compete with them for sport, but when it comes down to it, these were all created as implements of violence.

MarshallDodge
October 19, 2007, 01:37 AM
Funny how when the term "Assault Rifle" comes up in conversation most of you are quick to correct. :D

Neo-Luddite
October 19, 2007, 02:00 AM
"A mortar would be a rocket launcher."

Yes, Officers' Wife--a modern mortar would be, somewhat. But a traditional mortar is most surely a cannon.

I employ the terms, as you are aware, that the modern infantry still applies for reasons of tradition, to certain types of weapons. An 11C with refer to his mortar as a gun more often than not.

But anyway, my larger point was that I'm OK with all of the above being weapons.

230RN
October 19, 2007, 02:07 AM
Officer's Wife said:

In my humble opinion the more effective PR would be education of the drones that will negate the fear. Negate the fear and the only weapon the left has left is greed.

I agree, but education of the "drones" (your word) will not occur if you antagonize them first. And I'm negating fear (I think) by using less semantically-loaded terms and my modifying the less-negative nouns with less negative adjectives.

And while denotative definitons such as in one of the above posts make so many of those words look the same on paper, they are connotatively quite different in their semantic impact.

We should not ignore semantics in any PR battle.

Therefore I use "defensive sidearm" while talking to folks who are not firearms enthusiasts, and "weapon" while talking to right wing rednecked gun nuts.

There. Get the point? Semantics count for a lot.

Officers'Wife
October 19, 2007, 01:31 PM
Hi 230RN

I've been taught that the only way for one to overcome their fears is to face it down. For example- I have always called an axe, a weapon. If that antagonizes some I'll point out the destruction to generations of trees slaughtered by that particular killing instrument. By the time I'm finished the victim sees the term in a different way. When you pitty pat around semantics you don't change the perception of the term in the "hearts and minds." And changing perception is part and parcel to PR.

Selena

ClickClickD'oh
October 19, 2007, 01:44 PM
That's exactly why I have never used (what I consider) the improper term 'weapon' to describe a firearm. Weapons are objects which facilitate violence... And by extension violence is always a bad thing?

Violence is what it is, neither good nor bad. The purpose behind it is what is important.

Notch
October 19, 2007, 02:15 PM
A firearm is a firearm. It is a weapon when it is pointed at someone. A bat is a bat. It is a weapon when it is used to strike someone. Calling your bat a weapon will do nothing but cause trouble. Call it a bat.

ball3006
October 19, 2007, 04:57 PM
than I realized.......If you want a definition of weapon, look it up in the dictionary. If my guns are weapons, why aren't there stacks of bodies around them? They are just chunks of metal, wood or plastic that reside in the safe. I can probably kill you faster with a sharpened number 2 pencil than a gun. Does this make a pencil a weapon? If so, why are they allowed in school where weapons are prohibited. It is the use of not the object that makes something a weapon..........chris3

crazed_ss
October 19, 2007, 05:49 PM
I can probably kill you faster with a sharpened number 2 pencil than a gun.

Really? :rolleyes:
So do you carry a concealed pencil instead of a handgun?

Also.. I guess Jeff Cooper was a "PC Liberal"..

"The rifle is a weapon. Let there be no mistake about that. It is a tool of power, and thus dependent completely upon the moral stature of its user. It is equally useful in securing meat for the table, destroying group enemies on the battlefield, and resisting tyranny. In fact, it is the only means of resisting tyranny, since a citizenry armed with rifles simply cannot be tyrannized."

Weapons are not inherently evil. The use of violence, while regrettable, is not always a bad thing.

Cosmoline
October 19, 2007, 06:21 PM
Firearm is better, though I'm sure I've used both. I've used my firearms for many things that have bupkus to do with weaponry or self defense.

230RN
October 19, 2007, 06:37 PM
Officer's Wife said:

When you pitty pat around semantics you don't change the perception of the term in the "hearts and minds." And changing perception is part and parcel to PR.

OK. You use your methods and I'll use mine. OK?

Feanaro
October 19, 2007, 06:38 PM
Weapons are objects which facilitate violence... firearms are tools carried by gentlemen, and used to stop violence.

We obviously have very different ideas about how to employ our firearms. I can't quite wrap my head around stopping an attacker without using my firearm to facilitate violence, except to hope that he chickens out.

Officers'Wife
October 19, 2007, 08:19 PM
Hi 230,

OK. You use your methods and I'll use mine. OK?

Sounds like a plan to me, all roads lead to Rome after all. As long as you aren't asking me to agree to disagree. :cool:

Selena

Brad Johnson
October 19, 2007, 08:20 PM
As long as you aren't asking me to agree to disagree.

Now what fun would that be? :p

Brad

Grandpa Shooter
October 19, 2007, 08:38 PM
It is truly nice to see that some things don't ever change. Take five years off and all the arguments are the same, the logic behind them is intact.

This ladies and gentlemen is why we are losing ground IMO. They have one objective. To end the private ownership of firearms. We still can't agree on what to call them. They have a huge advantage.

Take care and good shooting!

RKBABob
October 19, 2007, 08:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RKBABob
Weapons are objects which facilitate violence... firearms are tools carried by gentlemen, and used to stop violence.
We obviously have very different ideas about how to employ our firearms. I can't quite wrap my head around stopping an attacker without using my firearm to facilitate violence, except to hope that he chickens out.

OK, let me put it another way. The word "weapon" connotes an intention that may or may not be present in its user. This is my reasoning:

Soldiers carry weapons when sent out into a battle, because it is assumed that they are sent with the intent to do violence to their nation's enemies.

Criminals carry weapons when out on a crime spree, since they have armed themselves with the intention of offering aggression and violence to their fellow citizen for money, power, or some other goal.

Gentlemen (and ladies;)) carry firearms. These are not weapons, since no true gentleman would ever intend to offer another person violence. Most gentlemen would hope to live an entire lifetime without ever having the need to unholster their firearm, and use it as a weapon, but have prudently prepared themselves for such a scenario, however unlikely.



Since I never intend to use a firearm as a weapon, why should I continually refer to it as a weapon? As other posters have pointed out, alot of inanimate objects can be used as devastating weapons. Many a victim was brutalized with a baseball bat. Yet we don't refer to bats as weapons, because that use is just a small exception to a baseball bats common use, ie: fun and recreation.

buck00
October 19, 2007, 10:18 PM
The instructor attempted to chastise me for referring to my rifle with the term "weapon". He gave me the line about referring to it as a firearm to not offend people who might over hear me. Then he went off on the tangent about "harvesting" deer. Okay, full stop. You use a weapon to kill a deer. You harvest wheat with a thresher.

This reflects the battle of semantics. I don't know if we should call rifles weapons as civilians.

* Our instructor said the same thing- he said "this is a rifle, not a weapon, don't call it a weapon. If you serve in Iraq and carry a rifle, you can call that a weapon- but don't call hunting rifles weapons." He was a Vietnam vet, not a politically correct type. So he had a point.

Blackbeard
October 19, 2007, 10:31 PM
Ok, here's the bottom line. You don't have the right to keep and bear tools, sporting goods, or anything else. You have the right to keep and bear ARMS. What are arms? WEAPONS!

arm n. 1. A weapon, especially a firearm.

There it is right in the word.....firearms, not firetools, not fire-collectables

Blackbeard
October 19, 2007, 10:37 PM
Gentlemen (and ladies) carry firearms. These are not weapons, since no true gentleman would ever intend to offer another person violence. Most gentlemen would hope to live an entire lifetime without ever having the need to unholster their firearm, and use it as a weapon, but have prudently prepared themselves for such a scenario, however unlikely.

Intent has nothing to do with the classification of the object. An unused weapon is still a weapon. A gentlemen may have no intent to do bodily harm with his weapon, but it's still a weapon.

We need to get past the PC BS and quit denying the nature of these little objects of our obsession.

UhKlem
October 19, 2007, 11:02 PM
If I use an ice ax to climb a glacier it's a tool. When I use it to part someone's scalp, then it becomes a weapon, unless I am performing emergency brain surgery with it. If the patient accidently dies, the ice ax still isn't a weapon, even though I may be charged with manslaughter or civilly sued for malpractice.

If I club someone to death with a Maglite, it is a weapon. Until then it is a flashlight.

Same with an ax, a baseball bat, or a driving iron.

Inspite of my intent, none of my sidearms, longarms, or "investments purchased for all lawful purposes" have, thank God ever been weapons. The capability of an object to perform well as a weapon is a neither a necessary nor sufficient aspect for something to actually BE a weapon.

Similarly someone with a penis isn't a rapist until they commit rape, inspite of the intrinsic capacity, indeed the design, to perform the deed.

To believe otherwise is to think with a level of precision that obscures the crux of what makes any inanimate object an actual weapon. Firearms are very useful as weapons, but so is petroleum distillates and detergent. In spite of the tons of napalm we dropped in jungles in southeast asia, no one ever accuses the gas station or the supermarket for dispensing weapons.

Guns get special fear-think treatment because the media and the state iconizes and glamorizes them. Gee, now I wonder why they do that?

Nolo
October 19, 2007, 11:08 PM
I have to disagree that it's in the use. Is a sword a weapon? Yes. Even when it's being used to cut grass? Ummm... yes? A weapon is something designed as a tool for killing. You could argue that your target rifles aren't weapons, but I'd disagree. They aren't designed for killing, but they are designed for practicing killing, which also classifies them as weapons. Unless it was designed for something like transportation (which I've only heard of in science fiction novels) or something like industry, then it's a weapon. I supposed you could find other uses for high speed mass-drivers, but I've yet to think of them. Guns are weapons, and should be respected as such. Do not let the antis get to you.
I'd also like to point out that there is a difference in what something is and what something is being used as. A flashlight is a tool, but you can use it as a weapon. Does this make it ever a weapon? No. It is only a weapon in the moment it is being used as such. A flashlight was designed as a tool, not a weapon (which is a subset of tools, I would observe). A firearm was designed as a weapon, which makes it also a tool, but it is still a weapon. That is why they are called firearms. "Arm" is a synonym for "weapon".

Officers'Wife
October 19, 2007, 11:32 PM
Hi Blackbeard,
Ok, here's the bottom line. You don't have the right to keep and bear tools, sporting goods, or anything else. You have the right to keep and bear ARMS. What are arms? WEAPONS!

While your dictionary needs a new editor the above quote is closer than any I've seen. Take a Pepsi out of petty cash, you've earned it.

Selena

UhKlem
October 20, 2007, 12:14 AM
>"A weapon is something designed as a tool for killing"

According to this (http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d011.htm) that isn't correct. The legal crux is in both the use and the intent of the user. Design intent is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for something to be a weapon.

I have firearms that were admittedly designed as weapons (very good for turning dollars into noise and flash (or optionally little noise and no flash)). Olympic grade target rifles can hardly be said to be designed as weapons.

What firearms are (hopefully) are precision projectile throwers. It's the target that makes them weapons.

Okinawan rice flails in the hands of a peasant are a farm tool. In the hands of a karate practioner it could be used as a weapon (nunchaku). Katana swords in Japan today are objects of art for most owners. For an Iaido practioner a sword could be a weapon. But for most of us having one is an accident waiting to happen.

Having a piano doesn't make one a musician. Having a power projecting tool doesn't make one armed. It's a popular saying around here, but it really is the software, not the hardware.

Nolo
October 20, 2007, 12:25 AM
According to this (http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d011.htm) that isn't correct. The legal crux is in both the use and the intent of the user. Design intent is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for something to be a weapon.

I have firearms that were admittedly designed as weapons (very good for turning dollars into noise and flash (or optionally little noise and no flash)). Olympic grade target rifles can hardly be said to be designed as weapons.

What firearms are (hopefully) are precision projectile throwers. It's the target that makes them weapons.

Okinawan rice flails in the hands of a peasant are a farm tool. In the hands of a karate practioner it could be used as a weapon (nunchaku). Katana swords in Japan today are objects of art for most owners. For an Iaido practioner a sword could be a weapon. But for most of us having one is an accident waiting to happen.

Having a piano doesn't make one a musician. Having a power projecting tool doesn't make one armed. It's a popular saying around here, but it really is the software, not the hardware.
And the law also defines a rifle with a short barrel and no stock as a pistol, but it's not. The law is not always (you could argue usually not) correct.
Olympic target rifles are weapons, and should be treated as such. They are training weapons for actual combat, whether that training has evolved into a sport or not.
What firearms are is arms. As in weapons.
Okinawan rice flails are tools. When they are used by a peasant to defend their home they become weapons in the instant that they are used as such, at no other time are they weapons. Nunchaku are weapons that were adapted from Okinawan rice flails, and they are weapons and solely so.
A sword is aways a weapon. It is highly specialized to be such. Just like firearms.

RioShooter
October 20, 2007, 11:18 AM
I've been thinking about this thread since yesterday, and there is one point I think should settle the argument, and it has already been stated:

A weapon is something designed as a tool for killing.

If you consider the history of firearms, they were invented to kill. That's it.
They exist for that reason. Over time they were collected. And humans being naturally competitive, target shooting was developed. But the argument still goes back to the origin of ALL firearms.

They are tools designed to kill. Therefore, in my mind, they are weapons.

Nolo
October 20, 2007, 01:35 PM
I honestly think that this debate can be settled with one word:
Firearms.
Firearms.
Not firetools.
Or firetrainers.
Firearms.
As in weapons.
Respect them as such. That's how I learned my muzzle discipline.

Blackbeard
October 20, 2007, 01:54 PM
This whole tool vs. weapon debate is rather silly. It's like one guy arguing that his Kawasaki is a motorcycle, not a conveyance. It's both. Arguing that a gun is not a weapon unless you use it to shoot someone is like arguing that a pizza is not food unless you eat it.

Guns are a subset of Weapons, which are a subset of Tools.

Nolo
October 20, 2007, 01:57 PM
Blackbeard's got it.
That's what I've been saying.
:uhoh::):confused::eek::barf::mad::what::rolleyes::neener::cool::evil::p:scrutiny:;):D:cuss::o:banghead::(
Random smileys ftw!

RKBABob
October 20, 2007, 02:28 PM
:neener: Well... Now that we got that settled, I'm going out to shoot my Colt Strifemaker :neener:

BADSBSNF81
October 20, 2007, 07:32 PM
Anything can be a "weapon". rolled up magazine, can of corn, pencil, automobile, rock, etc.. A firearm is just one of many weapons.

strambo
October 20, 2007, 09:15 PM
It's easy they're both. One weekend a month (and on 15 month deployments) they are weapons. When I teach an NRA course, they are firearms.:neener:

orionengnr
October 20, 2007, 09:37 PM
If I use an ice ax to climb a glacier it's a tool. When I use it to part someone's scalp, then it becomes a weapon, unless I am performing emergency brain surgery with it. If the patient accidently dies, the ice ax still isn't a weapon, even though I may be charged with manslaughter or civilly sued for malpractice[/I].

If I club someone to death with a Maglite, it is a weapon. Until then it is a flashlight.

This guy has it right.

Hey new guy, welcome to THR, and an exceptionally well-presented debut.

Havegunjoe
October 20, 2007, 10:13 PM
Weapon has a more sinister connotation than firearm. I use firearm. No need to antagonize the anti's any more than necessary.

The Lone Haranguer
October 20, 2007, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by Zundfolge:
A firearm is a weapon, but not all weapons are firearms.

Agreed.


Originally posted by CTPistol:
A weapon is something made strictly for harming someone

Disagree. For example, a baseball bat can be used as a weapon -- and with deadly effect -- but its purpose is to hit baseballs. ;) Whether any object is a weapon depends on the intent of the person wielding it. Further, a weapon can be used righteously -- e.g., for self defense or hunting -- or wrongly, although the end result (some sort of bodily harm) is the same.

Nolo
October 21, 2007, 12:54 AM
The Lone Haranguer's got it.
I love that comic. :D

10 Ring Tao
October 21, 2007, 03:31 AM
This has been one of my biggest pet peeves for some time.

For us, its just semantics. For the non-shooting public, it is a matter of political survival.

The ignorance I encounter when I bring this up astounds me. There are a lot of people in the gun owning community who are absolutely without a clue when it comes to the importance of public perception.

Facts don't matter. Perception is the only thing that matters. Perception is what elections are won and lost on. Perception is what makes passing bad laws possible.

The reason we are so far in the hole, legislation wise, is because we as gun owners suffer from a horrible image problem. Not because of what/who we are, but because of the perception of us.

We all need to do everything we can to improve the non-shooting public's perception of the shooting sports and shooters.

Changing our perception in the non-shooting public's eyes, centers around changing the idea that the very act of firing a gun is a violent act.

One of the simplest ways to do that, is to never refer to a gun as a weapon, unless it is indeed intended to be used to potentially harm another person.

We harp on the idea that guns don't kill people, people kill people. We say that it has everything to do with the intention of the person holding the gun. That means we need to continue that logic, and never refer to a gun as a weapon, unless the intention of the person holding the gun could be to harm another human being.

So, to summarize:

-We have a perception problem in the non-shooting public.
-That poor perception is because any firing of a gun is seen as a violent act.
-To change our poor perception, we need to avoid feeding it by being selective with our actions and words.
-To fail to do so will result in the eventual extinction of our sport and ability to carry.

SilentArmy
October 21, 2007, 03:50 AM
Semantics....
If you choose to be a victim of political correctness then follow your NRA instructors advice and don't use the word "Weapon"! If you believe in calling a spade a spade then call it what it is. Webster's defines Weapon as something used to injure, defeat, or destroy. I cannot cite a single "firearm", sporting or otherwise that does not fall under the definition of weapon. If you are worried about political correct terms then you are already a victim and may as well sell your "firearms" at the next gun buy so they can be destroyed and you can continue to Graze peacefully with your herd.

10 Ring Tao
October 21, 2007, 04:15 AM
If you believe in calling a spade a spade then call it what it is.

If you are worried about political correct terms then you are already a victim and may as well sell your "firearms" at the next gun buy so they can be destroyed and you can continue to Graze peacefully with your herd.

This is the ignorant attitude that prevents us from being more successful in washington and state capitals.

It doesn't matter what you think, or how you want to beat your chest in a macho display of spite, but it doesn't change the political realities of passing gun legislation. Victory in the legislative arena is what will keep the second amendment viable for future generations, not a belligerent attitude that only plays into and deepens a poor public perception of us.

The beauty and fortune of our current situation, is that we don't have to do anything different, we just have to communicate what we do differently to those who aren't a part of the shooting community. We have to show them that violent uses of guns are in the vast minority, and that the true face of the shooting community is one of safe, legal, fun recreational shooting. Just the opposite of what is shown every night on the evening news.

All we have to do is REMOVE the perception that a gun being fired is an inherently a violent act.

230RN
October 21, 2007, 06:36 AM
The ignorance I encounter when I bring this up astounds me. There are a lot of people in the gun owning community who are absolutely without a clue when it comes to the importance of public perception.

Facts don't matter. Perception is the only thing that matters. Perception is what elections are won and lost on. Perception is what makes passing bad laws possible.

The reason we are so far in the hole, legislation wise, is because we as gun owners suffer from a horrible image problem. Not because of what/who we are, but because of the perception of us.

Thank you, 10 Ring Tao.

Oh, and for your # 77 as well.

Quite a number of posts ago I mentioned that I am not as stiffnecked as some in respect to technical usages of the terms, prefering to soften my approach to folks who might wet their pants at the fact that I carry a weapon or a gun.

Rather than endangering their underwear, I have found that use of the term defensive firearm (or defensive sidearm) is preferred in approaching them with the idea that some folks want to protect themselvs. And I can demur by saying something like, "Well, maybe I read the papers too much, but it seems that it's hardly safe to walk the streets anymore, with all the assaults I read about."

This approach is fairly (not always) effective in establishing a rapport with them... they are usually just as aware of the street crime rate as I am.

Thus, opening avenues of communication.

As opposed to: "I carry a weapon so I can blow the top off some a-hole who wants to rob me."

There. See?

I must say I kind of resent the implications of a poster who inferred that we should join the sheeple simply because we are somewhat more sensitive to Public Relations and do not use semantic bludgeons to make our points.

Travis Lee
October 21, 2007, 07:46 AM
I got tired of repeating the same PC-acceptable rhetoric over and over to people who wanted to instigate argument.

It doesn't matter how much semantic double-talk you engage in; you won't convince ANYBODY that a gun is not a weapon,
Because THAT'S WHAT IT IS.

You will NEVER convince hard-core antis to change their thinking, but the dishonesty when you talk to fence-sitters, and ignorant people who only get their programming straight from TV and movies is obvious.

When you lie to them about the very nature of your firearms, why should they believe you when you assert that you only have it for the most benign, non-threatening reasons?

Our side got backed up, and on the defensive for DECADES, because we prevaricated on what firearms are, and why they are important to us. We got suckered into the "sporting use" ruse, and started to believe it, ourselves.

My take is that when you consistently lie to other people, you eventually muddy your own interpretation of reality.

You forget that little .22 can kill somebody dead. (because it's "just a plinker")

You hesitate when you encounter that mugger in the parking lot.


--Travis--

1911Tuner
October 21, 2007, 08:48 AM
Like a baseball bat...it's a firearm/gun/rifle, etc. until it's used AS a weapon to harm or attempt to harm something that's alive or to destroy something that doesn't belong to you. If a rifle is used for hunting, it's a weapon. If it's used to punch holes in paper...it's a target rifle. All firearms can be used as weapons, obviously...but not all firearms ARE weapons unless deployed in that role. Technically, if the arm's role is primarily or only that of a weapon, it can be correctly referred to in that context. i.e. 81mm mortars...thermonuclear devices, etc...but a "gun" is just a gun until you point it at somebody with malice in your heart.

Blackbeard
October 21, 2007, 12:52 PM
I think you lose ground to the grabbers if you don't call it a weapon. A weapon is protected by the 2nd amendment. If it's just a dangerous toy, well those can be banned. You lose all credibility if you try to say that a gun is not a weapon, and that is why we have an image problem. On the one hand we say we have the right to defend ourselves, and on the other we say guns are not weapons. They say, "fine, defend yourself with a baseball bat!"

1911Tuner
October 21, 2007, 01:03 PM
I think you lose ground to the grabbers if you don't call it a weapon.

2A states that we have the right to keep and bear arms. Arms is a fairly generic word that doesn't differentiate between guns and weapons...or any other "arm" for that matter. If you're carrying a knife or a lance or a sword...you're armed. If you're carrying a firearm...you're also armed. How you decide to use it determines its status as a weapon.

ClarkEMyers
October 21, 2007, 01:42 PM
In fact there are real eyeball differences between a firearm optimized for sports and a firearm optimized for killing game and then beyond that a firearm optimized for combat and stopping people.

FREX I shot trap with a Remington 3200 O/U trap gun which is a big strong action. The sliding top cover action was popular on the model 32 and later on a European version sold variously as a Savage 330, a Valmet 412 (the one I have) and later a Tikka etc. but my point is the same action patten was made larger and stronger for trap and lighter and handier for game - and there ought to be some recognition of purpose in the naming. Put the Remington 3200 next to a Valmet 412 and the differences are glaring. Then too there is the Lupera a weapon never to be confused with a Ljutic a sporting firearm. A Ljutic is reliable as all get out and the bare minimum for a gun fight.

Some of the Hammerli free pistols during the 1950's and 1960's were marvels of both mechanism and decoration and hardly weapons and some of the medieval wheel locks were marvels of mechanism (for their time) and decoration (for all time) and very much weapons.

The main idea is of course to have fun doing it. A friend who shot Skeet with a retro Model 97 refitted as a trench gun had fun and broke birds.

It may be my bad, but I am invariably inclined to consider as tactical wanta be's the people who call my Hammerli .177 gas gun a weapon.

For my money there is a valid and useful distinction between a sporting firearm and a weapon - one I certainly make when teaching hunter safety and also in weapons training.

Just the same people will fail hunter safety for lack of muzzle discipline with a sporting firearm and I have to remind myself from time to time that my single hole paper punches are deadly.

230RN
October 21, 2007, 01:43 PM
My take is that when you consistently lie to other people, you eventually muddy your own interpretation of reality.

You forget that little .22 can kill somebody dead. (because it's "just a plinker")

You hesitate when you encounter that mugger in the parking lot.

Those are interesting predictions...

...and an interesting use of the word "lie."

...Ah, but that's too subtle an observation.

10 Ring Tao
October 22, 2007, 01:46 AM
I think you lose ground to the grabbers if you don't call it a weapon.

Thats exactly the thing, they're NOT all weapons.

The only 'weapons' I own are a few carry pistols, a shotgun setup for taking care of bumps in the night, and a rifle in case crap really hits the fan. None of the many others (handguns, rifles, shotguns) will be fired with the purpose of harming another human being.

To insist on calling all guns weapons, means that all shooting is seen as an inherently violent act. This is obviously not true, unless you're Dillon Klebold, Eric Harris or Cho Seung-Hui.

Again, I question the motivations of anyone who purposely acts in such a way that demonstrably hurts our legislative efforts, and makes it more difficult to participate in our sport/hobby.

Brad Johnson
October 22, 2007, 03:06 PM
Thank goodness no one's mentioned pistol or revolver.

Brad

The Canuck
October 22, 2007, 08:39 PM
(Man four pages...)

Here in Canada we have a definition of "weapon". It is the intent. So if you plan on carrying the firearm in the interest of using it for self defence it would be classed as a weapon. If you plan on using it to punch holes in paper, it is a firearm.

Nolo
October 22, 2007, 08:45 PM
I was more worried about gun safety on the range, which warrants the use of the word "weapon" to me.
It does harm us in the legal sense, even if it is correct.

RockyMtnTactical
October 22, 2007, 08:52 PM
Who cares?

Erik
October 22, 2007, 08:56 PM
A weapon is any object intended as such.

Carrying concealed or exposed for the purposes of defense?

Then you are definitely carrying a weapon.

---

A side note: if most peopel acknowledge an object as a weapon, its a weapon. Hence, firearms are weapons. A debatable point for some, which I don't see as a bad thing in the scheme of things so long as they are comfortable with their political correctness.

crazed_ss
October 23, 2007, 08:49 AM
firearm
One entry found.

firearm



Main Entry: fire·arm
Pronunciation: \ˈfī(-ə)r-ˌärm\
Function: noun
Date: 1646
: a weapon from which a shot is discharged by gunpowder —usually used of small arms

http://m-w.com/dictionary/firearm

Neophyte1
October 23, 2007, 09:06 AM
Grandpa Shooter: semantics it is. Following along in this thread; knife, hidden gun, ball bat, brass knuckles; and what ever else; purely semantics. Women are taught using car keys, pencils, pens, fingernails, thumbs, knees; list is to long.

Field of Combat: Weapon? whatever you can pick up for protection.

Field of Shooting: Firearm? exactly what it is.
Field of Protection: Firearm? exactly what it is.
Field of Concealed: Firearm? exactly what it is.

Considerations disallows the obvious; "Grandpa Shooter" I agree.

Kimber1911_06238
October 23, 2007, 09:29 AM
I tend to say firearm....just to keep people from giving me a lecture about the word weapon. I realize what it means, but sometimes I say it. One thing that ticks me off is when you get a lesson about semantics...some people need to lighten up.

DMK
October 23, 2007, 10:35 AM
Legally a firearm is a deadly weapon. You might not like the term. Heck, some folks soil themselves at the mention of the word 'gun', but that's what it is, like it or not.

AndyC
October 23, 2007, 11:15 AM
I hate discussions based upon semantics, but here goes. My view - nothing is a weapon until it's used as such, be it a firearm, pen, knife, matchbook, etc.

Similar logic for the term "Assault rifle" - it hasn't assaulted anyone yet.

Edit: I could care less which term makes an anti wet their panties - I doubt they bother with semantics unless it favours them.

Officers'Wife
October 23, 2007, 07:06 PM
Hi SilentArmy,

Calling a spade a spade is all well and good. However be sure you are calling it a spade and not a fricking shovel. Personally I tend to be specific, sidearm, rifle, shotgun, air rifle etc. Dad will often call his .50 cal Barret a 'BFG' but only with people he knows are like minded. As one other posted pointed out using specific terms in some instances is simply unnecessary agitation.

Selena

ClarkEMyers
October 23, 2007, 07:16 PM
The only man I know who carried a Barret on his back seriously - 6 years - never intended or expected to shoot anybody with it - he did EOD work under odd circumstances and needed a way to deal with duds. Weapon?

1911Tuner
October 23, 2007, 07:22 PM
Clark wrote/pondered:

The only man I know who carried a Barret on his back seriously - 6 years - never intended or expected to shoot anybody with it - he did EOD work under odd circumstances and needed a way to deal with duds. Weapon?

Tool...

Brad Johnson
October 23, 2007, 07:37 PM
Someone please take their tool, or their weapon, or their whatever and shoot this thread with it.

Brad

CAPTAIN MIKE
October 23, 2007, 07:39 PM
I'd suggest using the word SIDEARM - especially in discussions with non-shooters. 'Sidearm' seems less threateneing and better lends itself to the idea of a firearm being a 'Tool' for self-defense. 'Sidearm', after all, is the same language used by law enforcement and the military.

When I've encountered any law enforcement over the years, and I inform them that I'm a CCW permit holder and that my 'Sidearm' is located on my hip, it comes across a lot better than if I say "Yes, I have GUN".

Words should be used to work in our favor. After all, like it or not, we are Ambassadors for the 2nd Amendment, and the more we do to reduce fears and concerns and reinforce the idea that we are 'Good Guys' the more accepted we are.

Nolo
October 23, 2007, 08:33 PM
Again... sidearm. Arm being weapon.

Thek9
October 23, 2007, 09:28 PM
Hmm,

weapon, noun, verb.
noun 1a. any object or instrument used in fighting. Swords, spears, arrows, clubs, guns, and shields are man-made weapons.
b. (Figurative.) any means of attack or defense.
Ex. to use truth as a weapon of freedom. Drugs are effective weapons against many diseases.

firearm, noun.
a gun, pistol, or similar weapon to shoot with. It is usually one that can be carried and used by a single person.

Call it what you want. Threaten me and or my family it may be the last thing you see. No bravado here, just the facts.

Sharps-shooter
October 23, 2007, 09:53 PM
Do we have to pick just one term?

I like guns, weapons, firearms, bang-sticks, pieces, gats, arms, shooters, hand cannons, walking artillery, powder-actuated power tools, and things that go bang in the night.

When referring to a specific object in serious conversation, my personal habit is to designate it by what class of firearm it is-- pistol (which I use to identify both revolvers and autoloaders), shotgun, rifle, or whatever. When I was a kid, the older generation of my family would always correct me if I referred to anything but a shotgun as a "gun". They'd say, "That's not a gun, that's a pistol," "that's not a gun, that's a rifle," which I found (and still find) perfectly silly.

I think both firearm and weapon are more formal terms than gun. If someone repeatedly uses them in a normal conversation (not a class that they're teaching or a news report, etc.), I'll probably get the impression that they're trying to put themselves above me by using fancy talk. Kind of like if someone keeps calling me "thou" and "thee" when they're not preaching a sermon.

Officers'Wife
October 23, 2007, 10:50 PM
Hi ClarkEMyers,

The furthest Dad has carried his Barret is the deck on the roof when he lived on the farm. And even then he didn't mean to kill "anybody" just coyote-dogs. In his case I suppose it would be a matter of perspective- to the cattleman it would be a tool and to the coyote-dog it would be a most effective weapon.

To my perspective an axe is a weapon not a tool. But only because I was given "punishment hours" that usually meant cutting trees out of fencerows with that weapon of tree destruction.

Whatever works for you jump right in.

Selena

If you enjoyed reading about "Weapon or Firearm-Is it just semantics?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!