rbernie
Contributing Member
That's a fact. And the best way for me to make sure that I stay on the correct side of one at all times is for me to have it in my hand.
"But guns were MADE for killing"
- Thread starter Drjones
- Start date
- Status
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Purpose
The gun was designed in order to extend the will of its wielder...whatever that will may be. The gun is a tool. To quote Massad Ayoob...A "remote control drill" that is used to make a hole in whatever needs a hole in it from a distance beyond contact range. The gun is like any other tool or machine...Unable to do anything at all without human intervention.
Man has been continually developing ways and means to make his actions more efficient since he first began to walk upright, and figured out that a rock or a stick made him a more efficient killer and a more difficult victim. Man is a toolmaker.
Man is also basically a predator. The canine teeth and the eyes mounted in the front of his head are testament to that fact. So, maybe a more accurate statement would be that Homo Sapien was designed to kill. The use of a tool to expedite the act is incidental.
The gun was designed in order to extend the will of its wielder...whatever that will may be. The gun is a tool. To quote Massad Ayoob...A "remote control drill" that is used to make a hole in whatever needs a hole in it from a distance beyond contact range. The gun is like any other tool or machine...Unable to do anything at all without human intervention.
Man has been continually developing ways and means to make his actions more efficient since he first began to walk upright, and figured out that a rock or a stick made him a more efficient killer and a more difficult victim. Man is a toolmaker.
Man is also basically a predator. The canine teeth and the eyes mounted in the front of his head are testament to that fact. So, maybe a more accurate statement would be that Homo Sapien was designed to kill. The use of a tool to expedite the act is incidental.
Sylvan-Forge
Member
Que,
First off, welcome to The High Road.
If you are referring to criminal homicide (not justifiable), in which the type of weapon is specified, in year 2005, firearms were used in 72.6% of the offenses. Per http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/murder_homicide.html
we would then see the rates for murder simply shift to other means such as blunts, edged, hand and foot.
New legislation would in fact be neccessary in order to over-ride or repeal the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The fact that the UN world body has used or encouraged direct arms control measures or embargos will not make for a logical or moral argument. Please see Rwanda, Srebrenica, Darfur, etc. for examples of "control", genocide and in some cases, the cowardly and malicious retreat or complete absence of UN forces. Some "protectors", eh?
Take note of what strict gun laws have done for Sudan.
If you are disarmed, you are at the mercy of the armed.
First off, welcome to The High Road.
False. Heart disease, cancer, stroke and other physical malady make up the bulk of deaths in the USA.
If you are referring to criminal homicide (not justifiable), in which the type of weapon is specified, in year 2005, firearms were used in 72.6% of the offenses. Per http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/offenses/expanded_information/murder_homicide.html
Were a ban somehow magically able to remove all firearms from the face of the earth and even greater magics employed to deny any future construction,
we would then see the rates for murder simply shift to other means such as blunts, edged, hand and foot.
This is a contradiction.
New legislation would in fact be neccessary in order to over-ride or repeal the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The fact that the UN world body has used or encouraged direct arms control measures or embargos will not make for a logical or moral argument. Please see Rwanda, Srebrenica, Darfur, etc. for examples of "control", genocide and in some cases, the cowardly and malicious retreat or complete absence of UN forces. Some "protectors", eh?
Take note of what strict gun laws have done for Sudan.
If you are disarmed, you are at the mercy of the armed.
Agreed.
Deanimator
Member
My usual replies to such mind-numbing stupidity:
1. What was my High Standard Citation made to "kill"?
2. Explain why an intended victim killing Ted Bundy would have been a BAD thing.
In my general experience, people who say the sort of things which you quoted have led sheltered, trivial lives in which social ostracism is the ultimate in negative consequences for ones actions, real or perceived. They actually think that a rapist or serial killer will stop their activities forthwith merely because you wag a disapproving finger in front of his face. It's never occurred to them (because very little of substance occurs to them in an intellectual context) that there are people who simply don't care about their "feelings" and who would skin them alive for the pure enjoyment of it.
They're too stupid to realize that when dealing with certain people, you have to bow to the inevitable, shoot them in the face and go on with life. That simple truism requires them to see the world as it really is and to take responsibility for their own existence. This makes them sad.
1. What was my High Standard Citation made to "kill"?
2. Explain why an intended victim killing Ted Bundy would have been a BAD thing.
In my general experience, people who say the sort of things which you quoted have led sheltered, trivial lives in which social ostracism is the ultimate in negative consequences for ones actions, real or perceived. They actually think that a rapist or serial killer will stop their activities forthwith merely because you wag a disapproving finger in front of his face. It's never occurred to them (because very little of substance occurs to them in an intellectual context) that there are people who simply don't care about their "feelings" and who would skin them alive for the pure enjoyment of it.
They're too stupid to realize that when dealing with certain people, you have to bow to the inevitable, shoot them in the face and go on with life. That simple truism requires them to see the world as it really is and to take responsibility for their own existence. This makes them sad.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Mercy
Quote:
>If you are disarmed, you are at the mercy of the armed.<
************
Yes. Those who beat their swords into plows usually wound up doing the plowing for those who didn't.
Que...Ya really need to get a clue.
Quote:
>If you are disarmed, you are at the mercy of the armed.<
************
Yes. Those who beat their swords into plows usually wound up doing the plowing for those who didn't.
Que...Ya really need to get a clue.
-terry
Member
C'mon, U.S., don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.
Titan6
member
My first day in the Military
Some Captain was briefing us about the military pay and benefits and somewhere towards the end he said 'all in all not bad pay for basically being a hired assassin...'. Poorer choice of words I have seldom heard in the years since.
Guns sure are a tool for killing. There is no way to dispute this. Anyone that can't handle that responsibility should not take it on. However there is no where on Earth that you will go and not find a gun or someone with the means to do somone else in. It is a problem as old as Cain and Able. All we can do is work towards making it easier for people to live with one another.
I noticed after the huge increase in the number of armed Americans after AWB I the murder rate and most crime rates did drop a little for the first time in 60 or so years. So maybe arming more peolple helps. Disarming them does not seem to.
Some Captain was briefing us about the military pay and benefits and somewhere towards the end he said 'all in all not bad pay for basically being a hired assassin...'. Poorer choice of words I have seldom heard in the years since.
Guns sure are a tool for killing. There is no way to dispute this. Anyone that can't handle that responsibility should not take it on. However there is no where on Earth that you will go and not find a gun or someone with the means to do somone else in. It is a problem as old as Cain and Able. All we can do is work towards making it easier for people to live with one another.
I noticed after the huge increase in the number of armed Americans after AWB I the murder rate and most crime rates did drop a little for the first time in 60 or so years. So maybe arming more peolple helps. Disarming them does not seem to.
Yes, guns are made for killing. Some killing, or the threat of killing, is justified. Get over it. If you don't like killing, become a Quaker and move out to the country and leave people alone instead of whining at them about the killing, and then they won't feel compelled to kill you or involve you in anything attached to killing.
The Grand Inquisitor
Member
I didn't look through all of the replies, but even though this arguement is initally compelling, it completely falls apart when closely looked at.
It's true that guns are desgined and built for mainly military purposes, but, like any other item, they can easily be re-purposed.
The public/private military industry (the famed "military industrial complex") in this country spends BILLIONS of dollars each year funding and subsidising public and private research (mainly through Universities like MIT, CalTech, Harvard, etc etc) and countless other endevours.
Just because the money is coming from the military does not mean that this money is going into guns and grenades---plenty of money is going into biotechnology, conceptual physics, nano-tech, psychology, and even Religous Studies (I know this specifically because I'm invovled in the academic community and there are plenty of Religious Studies departments that have strong Islamic scholars that are getting money shoved down their throats).
The military industrial complex has revolutionized the technology industry and generally what happens is that when something is being developed, the government and military sees what they can do with the technology, and if they decide it isn't for them, they kick it out to the private sector.
This is the case to some extent concerning the development of computers, the internet, and microchips.
All that said, just because something is funded and created by the military, that does not mean that that tool can not be repurposed for use within the private sector.
RADAR was created by the military to better help kill the enemy, but no one objects to the use of RADAR when they are flying.
PS- I'm not justifying the MIC, but it is a fact of life in this country, and for all of the bad it has done, it has also done some pretty good things too.
It's true that guns are desgined and built for mainly military purposes, but, like any other item, they can easily be re-purposed.
The public/private military industry (the famed "military industrial complex") in this country spends BILLIONS of dollars each year funding and subsidising public and private research (mainly through Universities like MIT, CalTech, Harvard, etc etc) and countless other endevours.
Just because the money is coming from the military does not mean that this money is going into guns and grenades---plenty of money is going into biotechnology, conceptual physics, nano-tech, psychology, and even Religous Studies (I know this specifically because I'm invovled in the academic community and there are plenty of Religious Studies departments that have strong Islamic scholars that are getting money shoved down their throats).
The military industrial complex has revolutionized the technology industry and generally what happens is that when something is being developed, the government and military sees what they can do with the technology, and if they decide it isn't for them, they kick it out to the private sector.
This is the case to some extent concerning the development of computers, the internet, and microchips.
All that said, just because something is funded and created by the military, that does not mean that that tool can not be repurposed for use within the private sector.
RADAR was created by the military to better help kill the enemy, but no one objects to the use of RADAR when they are flying.
PS- I'm not justifying the MIC, but it is a fact of life in this country, and for all of the bad it has done, it has also done some pretty good things too.
Que
Member
The 92% Statistic...
I have seen most of the comments and I have tried locating the page that I got the data from, and now, seeing all the data given, it is not surprising that I cannot locate the page. It appears that the data was indeed fake, and I retract it and apologise, however, I shall give a range of places with which you can see that gun crime is very high, and not as low as is tried to be made out.
As for repealing amendments, I do not reside in the USA, I do not know how law work there with regard to repeal and the passing of legislation. I just meant that I think there is enough worldwide legislation to take care of the issue without making it more complex by adding new legislation.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/factsheets/pdf/firearm_facts.pdf
http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html
http://www.doctorsagainsthandguninjury.org/pdf/gun_injury.pdf
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~zj5j-gttl/guns.htm
http://www.gunweek.com/2000/hs062000.html
http://www.nyccouncil.info/pdf_files/newswire/07_07_06_guns_report.pdf
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache...+deaths+in+new+york&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=31&gl=uk
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fidc9397.pdf
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/qa.html
http://www.vpc.org/studies/wherfvgn.htm
http://www.cha.state.md.us/olh/pdf/hip/InjuryandFirearms.pdf
http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/70ViolentDeath.cfm
http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm
http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html
http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/4.1/GunFacts4-1-Print.pdf
I try as far as I can to state fact, but like most people, I am guided only by the research I do. Unfortunately, not all statistics are available to the public.
Again, I apologise for that statistic, but it is one I definitly found, or I would not have quoted it.
EDIT: I do not think banning guns is a solution! I think it can cause problems, not solve them.
Guns were made to kill... that is fact. Just because a person shoots a piece of paper or a clay pigeon does not stop it being used for its original purpose!
Hunting with knives... bows and arrows were used with traps and poison... not knives. Do you honestly see a person hunting with a knife?
I have seen most of the comments and I have tried locating the page that I got the data from, and now, seeing all the data given, it is not surprising that I cannot locate the page. It appears that the data was indeed fake, and I retract it and apologise, however, I shall give a range of places with which you can see that gun crime is very high, and not as low as is tried to be made out.
As for repealing amendments, I do not reside in the USA, I do not know how law work there with regard to repeal and the passing of legislation. I just meant that I think there is enough worldwide legislation to take care of the issue without making it more complex by adding new legislation.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/factsheets/pdf/firearm_facts.pdf
http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html
http://www.doctorsagainsthandguninjury.org/pdf/gun_injury.pdf
http://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~zj5j-gttl/guns.htm
http://www.gunweek.com/2000/hs062000.html
http://www.nyccouncil.info/pdf_files/newswire/07_07_06_guns_report.pdf
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache...+deaths+in+new+york&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=31&gl=uk
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fidc9397.pdf
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/qa.html
http://www.vpc.org/studies/wherfvgn.htm
http://www.cha.state.md.us/olh/pdf/hip/InjuryandFirearms.pdf
http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/70ViolentDeath.cfm
http://www.tincher.to/deaths.htm
http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html
http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/4.1/GunFacts4-1-Print.pdf
I try as far as I can to state fact, but like most people, I am guided only by the research I do. Unfortunately, not all statistics are available to the public.
Again, I apologise for that statistic, but it is one I definitly found, or I would not have quoted it.
EDIT: I do not think banning guns is a solution! I think it can cause problems, not solve them.
Guns were made to kill... that is fact. Just because a person shoots a piece of paper or a clay pigeon does not stop it being used for its original purpose!
Hunting with knives... bows and arrows were used with traps and poison... not knives. Do you honestly see a person hunting with a knife?
Last edited:
Hokkmike
Member
It is the potential that guns have that makes them useful as tools for self defense even if they NEVER have to be used.
There are lots of things shooters fire at that don't die!
There are lots of things shooters fire at that don't die!
hankdatank1362
Member
That is possibly the most brilliant, succinctly stated description of antis, and liberal activists altogether, that I have ever had the pleasure of hearing.
Plus, it sounds so much more grown-up than when I shake my fist at them and yell "Damned Hippie!"
I'm 22 years old - that phrase most accurately depicts the majority of people in my so-called "peer group", unfortunately. I live in the south, so it's not all bad. I can only imagine what a northern college must be like.
Back on topic:
Of course guns were made for killing. I wouldn't own a gun that couldn't kill something. (Even a .22LR can kill, esp. small game) They might serve other, more entertaining purposes, but firearms in general were made to kill. Let's not give the anti's some feel-good rhetoric about "my gun is only for target shooting" so they can try to ban everything else. Just be man (or woman) enough in your convictions to look your accuser straight in the face and say "Yes. My guns were made to injure and kill. If someone has the misfortune to threaten me or my family, they will find out just how well my firearms do what they were made to do."
If they don't like it, tell 'em to go pound sand.
I'm reminded of the story about the old lady, noticing a cocked-and-locked 1911 on a Texas Ranger's hip, and she asked "Oh my! Isn't that dangerous?"
His response: "Why yes ma'am it is dangerous. I wouldn't carry the SOB if it weren't dangerous."
Titan6
member
92%
Maybe in some country is it... certainly not here. That would be about 600,000 fatal shootings a year in the US alone. Even in all the wars that we have fought the rate is not that high even in the middle of the combat zone. Before you post you might want to run the common sense detector over your postings.
Maybe in some country is it... certainly not here. That would be about 600,000 fatal shootings a year in the US alone. Even in all the wars that we have fought the rate is not that high even in the middle of the combat zone. Before you post you might want to run the common sense detector over your postings.
Que
Member
1911Tuner wake up - your coffee is cold
A clue about what exactly?
You lot are so blinkered by trying to justify firearms that you are blinded by everything else!
It is a well known that any person that tries to self-justify or to justify what they believe already shows that they are in the wrong, for if what they were doing was in the right - it would be justified in itself!
I do not need to justify myself to anyone... Everyone here that tries to justify a firearm's purpose as not being for killing are trying to justify owning one! Why no be honest and say you want one for wanting one?
I want a firearm because I want one! I dont need a specific reason.
Further, I never once said they should be banned, nor did I say that people should not have them. I think you need to re-read what I wrote and see what I was saying as a whole rather than to pick individual statements and take them out of the context of the whole.
By all means, own a firearm, I am not saying give it up or that they should be banned.
Get some comprehension on what I wrote!
A clue about what exactly?
You lot are so blinkered by trying to justify firearms that you are blinded by everything else!
It is a well known that any person that tries to self-justify or to justify what they believe already shows that they are in the wrong, for if what they were doing was in the right - it would be justified in itself!
I do not need to justify myself to anyone... Everyone here that tries to justify a firearm's purpose as not being for killing are trying to justify owning one! Why no be honest and say you want one for wanting one?
I want a firearm because I want one! I dont need a specific reason.
Further, I never once said they should be banned, nor did I say that people should not have them. I think you need to re-read what I wrote and see what I was saying as a whole rather than to pick individual statements and take them out of the context of the whole.
By all means, own a firearm, I am not saying give it up or that they should be banned.
Get some comprehension on what I wrote!
Que
Member
Titan..
The statistic was about deaths in the USA. If I could locate it I would post it! Simple as.
The statistic was about deaths in the USA. If I could locate it I would post it! Simple as.
hankdatank1362
Member
Que, you mean to say homicides, not deaths. And it's still less than 92%.
You are trying to make a valid point, but there are some language issues here.
I think I understand you, and I agree. Don't try to justify your logic for owning a firearm to anyone else... it's none of their business. I know that I am fully within the boundaries of the law in whatever I am doing... beyond that, I owe an explanation to nobody.
I'm glad that there's people that don't own guns in America. It gives the criminals someone else to rob and kill.
You are trying to make a valid point, but there are some language issues here.
I think I understand you, and I agree. Don't try to justify your logic for owning a firearm to anyone else... it's none of their business. I know that I am fully within the boundaries of the law in whatever I am doing... beyond that, I owe an explanation to nobody.
I'm glad that there's people that don't own guns in America. It gives the criminals someone else to rob and kill.
Que
Member
oo7
Thank you for the welcome.
That is not a contradiction at all... the USA inter alia other states, signed up to the UN resolution about firearms... but this is ineffective as its a voluntary thing and that not every country keeps a record of guns... it is also known that guns supplied by CIA in Vietnam that were missing turned up recently...
This does not hold well for gun control.
Thank you for the welcome.
That is not a contradiction at all... the USA inter alia other states, signed up to the UN resolution about firearms... but this is ineffective as its a voluntary thing and that not every country keeps a record of guns... it is also known that guns supplied by CIA in Vietnam that were missing turned up recently...
This does not hold well for gun control.
Que
Member
Owning a firearm...
Owning a firearm does not prevent you from being killed by a criminal.. I am sure that if a person, any person, wanted to harm you, they could do it from a kilometer away, and you would not be the wiser as to who was responsible.
Owning or not owning a firearm does not prevent you from being robbed... it just makes it easier for a person to shoot you with your own firearm.
Owning a firearm does not prevent you from being killed by a criminal.. I am sure that if a person, any person, wanted to harm you, they could do it from a kilometer away, and you would not be the wiser as to who was responsible.
Owning or not owning a firearm does not prevent you from being robbed... it just makes it easier for a person to shoot you with your own firearm.
Que
Member
I have a question to all...
What do you think the effect is of of national and international efforts to curb the illegal trade in weapons?
What do you think the effect is of of national and international efforts to curb the illegal trade in weapons?
Baba Louie
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,831
How's he going to do that if it's on my person? Take it away from me easily? Or should I fight back using it for self defense?
Couldn't he just as easily kill me with a rock in his hand? Or a Baseball bat? Or his hands and feet? Or any other tool at hand?
Baba Louie
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,831
Ineffective. I think disarming the law abiding only sets them up to be harmed by machete wielding bad guys or their own government
Que
Member
Baba
How many people are shot with their own weapons?
How many people are shot with their own weapons?
hankdatank1362
Member
You're seriously beginning to reek of troll.
And if someone wants to kill me with my own gun, they'll have to beat me to death with it, cause it'll damn sure be empty before they get their paws on it!
And if someone wants to kill me with my own gun, they'll have to beat me to death with it, cause it'll damn sure be empty before they get their paws on it!
- Status
