Firearms or Weapons!

[Eleven Mike]

An Arm is a Weapon, is an Arm is a Weapon

Arm is a synonym for weapon. A firearm is a weapon by definition. I will repeat this until some of you begin to think it through.

Merriam-Webster

Arm: a means (as a weapon) of offense or defense; especially : FIREARM
Etymology: Middle English armes (plural) weapons, from Anglo-French, from Latin arma

fire·arm : noun
: a weapon from which a shot is discharged by gunpowder

ARMS are WEAPONS. Any time you call something a FIREARM, you are calling it a WEAPON. What does one use to hunt deer or squirrel, or kill poisonous snakes, or slaughter beef cattle? A weapon. If your hunting rifle is not a weapon, you had better drop it and go get one, because that is what one uses to kill an animal. When you put out rat poison for its intended purpose, you are using a chemical weapon. An airgun can be a weapon, if you are using it as such. As has been stated, a baseball bat is the sort of thing that is not a weapon until it is stored, carried or used just for that purpose. The same applies to a screw-driver or a pot full of boiling water. Guns are tools, sure, but they're a class of tools that are usually also in the subset of tools that are weapons.

The only gun that could possibly not be considered a weapon are those so peculiarly crafted for target-shooting that they are obviously not meant for use in killing. Or we could count nail guns that use gunpowder propellant. Perhaps we could just define it this way; a weapon is a tool meant for hurting or killing a living thing.

 

[Eleven Mike]

The gun, the knife, the sword are all just tools

I AM THE WEAPON

Rubbish. That's like saying; "My computer is just a tool, I am the web browser." If you're using a weapon to kill someone or something, you are not the weapon. You are the killer.

 

[rchernandez]

For now, they remain:


Precision paper punching equipment.


...that's for now.

 

[RioShooter]

NRA Instructor Doesn't Like the Word Weapon

At a recent IDPA match, I was the RO and used to command "holster your weapon" as the IDPA rule book states. An NRA instructor who was competing began to give to me a lecture on why I should not use that term. I told him that my CCW is a weapon and that's what I'll continue to call it. I also told him that IDPA is not an NRA activity, and I would not follow their policies. He was of the opinion that NRA policies should take precedence over all others.

 

[yooper_sjd]

For now, they remain:


Precision paper punching equipment.


...that's for now.


well said rchernandez

 

[ambush]

This seems quite silly to me. Do we have an abundance of lawyers here?? Although it apparently matters to some, I personally do not care what you call my firearms, rifles, pistols, shotguns, weapons, etc...just don't call me late for dinner. I mean really, is this that much of a big deal? Can what you call a rifle make a difference in a big way?? Enlighten me. I come here to learn.

 

[GEM]

There was a recent article on how the Australian gun ban was successful in reducing crime, rampage killings and suicides. We were discussing it on another list (don't have the reference here).

In the article, it was clearly stated that Australians do not accept the premise that guns are to be allowed in the hands of citizens for self-defense. That is unacceptable to Australian society. Thus, the revulsion over a rampage killing led their society to accept the bans.

Thus, gun were instruments of sport - and thus - bye, bye to all but sporting arms.

That is what comes from not seeing guns as weapons but tools or playthings. It negates the fundamental reason for the RKBA as we see it in the USA.

 

[MBane666]

I spent 5 years running the NSSF Media Education Program, working very successfully with the largely antigun national media; I have also handled "crisis" communications for the industry, have appeared on numerous radio and television programs and in articles in the national media discussing and supporting RKBA issues. It is fair to say that I have been one of the top media strategist in our fight.

I agree with GEM...when we play word games like this, we play into the hands of our enemies. Our enemies are many things, but "stupid" and "ignorant" they are not. The division between "sporting use arms" and "self-defense arms" and "military/LEO arms" is DISASTEROUS for our cause, because it plays directly into our enemies' primary strategy, which can be described simply as, "Divide and conquer."

Our enemies have said that they are willing to "take what they can get" — the goal is the complete elimination of firearms in civilian hands in the United States, but if they can get a .50BMG ban here and an "assault weapon" ban there, that's fine for now. The important thing is NOT that certain weapons will be prohibited, but that the PROHIBITION of a type of weapon is allowed to stand. Then it's a matter of expanding which weapons fall into the PROHIBITED class.

We shouldn't be giving them a handy list to choose from!

Our enemies draw no distinction between a 4-H target .22 rifle or a .50 BMG Barrett or an STI .38 Super "racegun" or a WWII vintage Colt 1911A1...they will, if we let them, take them all.

This idea of swaying the "public at large" by saying we're just "playing golf with guns" — as I've heard numerous times — is dangerous nonsense, because it sets up a scenario allowing that same public to say, "Well, if it's only 'play,' we prefer you 'play' with something that won't kill my kid from 50 yards away!"

I have used exotic target guns to "get inside" the media's preconceived notions about guns, but in EVERY SINGLE CASE I and my instructors have made the point that regardless of a gun's purpose design, each and every one is a potentially lethal weapon and we treat it accordingly.

I believe we are far better served by being WHAT WE ARE, people who through training, philosophy and skill use, carry and sometimes compete with a very specialized tool; a tool that unlike other tools, is protected under our fundamental laws. You'll notice in SHOOTING GALLERY I draw no distinction between types of guns or uses of guns...that is by intent.

My $0.02 worth...

Michael B

 

[the pistolero]

when we play word games like this, we play into the hands of our enemies.

I think this is more true if we let our enemies define the terms of the debate. Take, for example, the term "handgun." We all have seen how media outlets from sea to shining sea have taken this term and given it a hugely negative connotation. How that could be reversed, I don't know...but, taking that example and running with it, if you replace the term "handgun" with "defensive sidearm," it takes away that negative connotation and replaces it with something a little more neutral, and even more positive. And for another example, does anyone remember the whole Dihydrogen Monoxide Scare?
In any event, I think if we're going to make any headway in the battle to retain our rights, the so-called word game is going to have to be a secondary or tertiary strategy. The primary strategy we're going to have to use goes more to the heart of the matter -- we need to get it through the heads of the public at large that there are just some out there who will only be stopped with lethal force -- and that using that force is right, just and moral and that not only is it our right, but our duty. And that's a much bigger mountain to climb...

 

[smince]

Funny thing is, some guy with only 12 posts got this whole thing started.

A quote, I don't remember where it came from:
"Some see the glass as half empty. Some see the glass as half full. I see the glass as a weapon that can be used in an emergency".

Anything can be a tool or a weapon, from the 1911 on your hip to a drinking glass, a hammer or a #2 lead pencil. It is attitude and mind-set. Even the Anshutz or the Remington 37 mentioned in earlier posts. Use it to shoot the BG and take his AK or handgun from him.

Sorry if I shocked any of you "liberal gun owners"

EDITED TO ADD: I'm a former NRA Personal Protection Instructor (early 90's) and I don't remember being told to not call it a weapon. Must be a new, PC thing?

 

[JesseL]

I'm going to start referring to all my guns as "soulless killing machines, brutal instruments of death and destruction" .

 

[wildburp]

Tools

Can be deployed as weapons or recreational machines. Punch paper targets, or make bad guys bleed and die, it really does not matter as long as one uses the tool correctly. And let nobody infringe upon our rights, or we will use our tools to discourage them.

wb

 

[Wes Janson]

Let me see if I remember this correctly (I'm forgetting most of it and this may be inaccurate).

In the state of Florida, there are deadly weapons and there are weapons. Certain objects are considered to be weapons, but not deadly weapons until and unless used specifically in the commision of a crime. IE, a Louisville Slugger might be a weapon, but it's not a deadly weapon unless you attempt sidewalk reconfigurative surgery on someone's skull with one.


I'd agree that virtually all firearms are weapons and should be referred to as such interchangeably. Even an Anschutz target pistol could be used offensively against a person, if it really came down to it. However, some are indeed deadlier weapons than others.



And I agree completely with El Tejon. The only interesting "sporting purposes" are the ones that offer applicability elsewhere.

 

[Eleven Mike]

Funny thing is, some guy with only 12 posts got this whole thing started.

And what's funny about it? ??? I'm glad the issue was aired, as it demonstrated a silly misunderstanding that needs clearing up. Now, how can we straighten out the NRA on this?

 

[Dr. Dickie]

And if you really want to get picky, ships have guns, you have rifles or pistols.
It's a new year, and somebody has to stir the pot

 

[Eleven Mike]

Military brain-washing strikes again. Gun = firearm.

 

[smince]

What about:
GAT?
Piece?
Roscoe?
Heater?
Shootin' iron?
Smoke Pole?
Hogleg?
Ol' Slabsides?

 

[U.S.SFC_RET]

You can call whatever rifle I have a rifle, that's fine if that's what you want to think. I am trained to use it as a weapon and as a weapon I will use it in a split second should I see fit to protect my family.

 

[carpettbaggerr]

The point that I do keep emphasizing - and this is going to be my last comment on it in this thread - is that suggesting "shooting two legged critters that deserve to be shot, such as JBT's and out-of-hand government officials" is out of place in any area of The High Road forums.

I'd have to disagree.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them." --Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

"What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." --Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff0300.htm

 

[Stachie]

Publicly, I refer to them as firearms, guns, or pistols/rifles/shotguns. Among close friends or family, I refer to them as "weapons." In the end, my firearms are designed to take the lives of others in order to preserve mine.

 

[Zoogster]

Ugh I hate PC terms that turn into twisted logic people believe is reality years later.
Firearms are weapons, thier protection in the constitution is as a weapon to be used to deter and kill. That they are wonderfuly versatile and great for hunting and enjoying recreationaly in target shooting that is done far more than any 'weapon' use is just a bonus. Because shooting is a sport they are also a tool used in the sport. Because fencing exists the sword does not cease to be a weapon.

Trying to appease the gun grabbers by pretending the purpose of the RKBA is not in use as a weapon by being PC for them is playing a losing game. This is exactly what gun owners in the UK and Australia did. Now they can store thier 'sports tool' at the range (or disassembled ) or other place to use in the sport. They also no longer need anything dangerous as the weakest .22 is perfectly capable of any target sport requiring a pistol to make holes in something. So they gradualy are reduced to less and less powerful paper punchers.

Guns are weapons. They are also a fun tool for use in hobbies that help to train people in safer use of them as weapons for both defense of self, family and even country if called to action (draft will happen if attacked by a formidable opponent) in the future.

The protection of gun rights cannot exclude thier use as weapons or tools in hobbies for a loss of rights in either eventualy leads to loss for the other. If all you do is shoot at the range and the 'weapon use' is banned then you will suddenly be limited to calibers unreliable as potential manstoppers, with serious capacity limitations and such legislation that the hobby would suddenly require so much legal navigation and paperwork that it would be less enjoyable if possible at all and then only with specific boring calibers and low capicty severely limiting your recreational options. While if the hobby use is limited or restricted you have people much less skillful in safe proper use of the arms with so little practice that thier firing in self defense/weapon use would pose greater risk to themselves and other unintended targets.

It is the Right to Keep (not just use, but to keep yourself in your own possession) and Bear (present and use) Arms (refering to the firearms equal to those employed by the military soldiers in order to successfuly resist tyranny if necessary in case of improper use of the military against the civilians for the purpose of carrying out the tyranny of a dictator or tyranical government body or defending them from overthrow by the citizens.)
This was well thought out, infers both legal right to protect oneself and the firearms purpose in use as a weapon which is legal to own and posses unhindered for the purpose of killing those that pose a threat to safety or our freedom as citizens.

Trying to seperate the legal protection and main design purpose of firearms in use as weapons from thier use in sports to be more appealing to a wider audience is foolishness that will only lead to an eventual argument of why many types of firearms/ calibers/ accessories are needed for 'sporting purposes' as they exceed the needs of the sport and are only necessary for helping one kill things. Yet killing things is what they are protected by the
2nd to do.

 

[mike101]

I have an idea. How about we just call 'em guns?

 

[DnPRK]

"Firearm" is what it is. "Weapon" can be one of it's uses, if you choose to use it as such.

 

[Deanimator]

I say "firearm" because that's what I was taught in the NRA instructor's course, and that's what's required to teach their material. Otherwise, I don't care.

 

[Eleven Mike]

"Firearm" is what it is. "Weapon" can be one of it's uses,

Again, when you call something a firearm, you are calling it a weapon. "Arm" means weapon in that context.