Need to stop using the word weapon. What's more appropriate?

[mike.h]

This has already be said but in the service it was called a weapon . Now it's a 10/22, or a gas pipe, or a '06, or a 1911. The non enthusiast has no need to know what I'm talking about. This week end my neighbor and I are taking out his barret and I'll be bringing vera, my new colt CPR.

 

[beatledog7]

Trent,

I'll concede that animals have "weapons" evolved to use against one another. I'll even add that if you use a firearm to defend yourself against a non-human attacker with teeth, claws, hooves, etc., then that firearm is serving a self defense role and therefore a "weapon" role.

However, browsers, grazers, and animals classified as varmints don't usually attack humans. When they do, it's because they're diseased (rabid) or because they feel threatened by that human, in which case they are simply defending themselves.

The first definition in Post 40 clearly means "by humans" and implies against humans as it includes a list of implements. Very few animals use implements, and those that do have generally not weaponized them.

 

[Old Dog]

No, we do not need to stop using the word "weapon." Guns are weapons, always have been, always will be.

Is there really a need to continue to kneel at the altar of political correctness because we are worried about the connotation of our terminology? I'd submit that most of the citizenry understands that firearms are weapons and don't give a second thought to this term used to describe them -- unless it's liberal politicians and the news media decrying the evil "assault rifles."

It's my belief that a thread is in serious danger of irrelevance when people start pasting dictionary definitions of common words.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Coincidentally, the definition of "firearm" also contains the word weapon as part of it's definition;

Mirriam-Websters
Definition of FIREARM

: a weapon from which a shot is discharged by gunpowder —usually used of small arms

Dictionary.com:
fire·arm [fahyuh r-ahrm]
noun
a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.


To convince myself this wasn't some modern revisionist magic, I also dusted off a 1953 Websters from my library:

Whilst we're dusting off dictionaries and looking for revisionist magic, let us leap back a couple hundred and fifty-seven years and observe the definition of the word "Arms" back when the Constitution and it's second added article of amendment were crafted:

From Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language: 1755

ARMS

1. Weapons of offence, or armour of defence.

Those arms which Mars before had giv'n the vanquish'd, now the victor bore. Pope's Iliad.​

2. A state of hostility.

Sir Edward Courtney, and the haughty prelate, With many more confed'rates, are in arms. Shakes. R. III​

3. War in general.

Arms and the man I sing. Dryd. Virgil.

Him Paris follow'd to the dire alarms. Both breathing slaughter, both resolv'd in arms. Pope's Iliad.​

4. Action; the act of taking arms.

Up rose the victor angels, and to arms The matin trumpet sung. Milton's Paradise Lost, b. Vi.​

5. The ensigns armorial of a family.​

There you have it, along with the sense of how each definition applied. At the time the Second Amendment and the Constitution were written, nouns were capitalized, therefore, we know that we are dealing with a noun version of arms; context tells us it's "weapons of offence or armour of defence".

Stick with 'Arms' and what it meant when the Constitution was written and you can't go wrong.

Woody

 

[General Geoff]

It's my belief that a thread is in serious danger of irrelevance when people start pasting dictionary definitions of common words.

It is necessary for any meaningful discussion to have postulates, and is indeed very pertinent to re-examine the definitions of words when discussing appropriate nomenclature, for political reasons or otherwise.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

There was a big debate a little while ago about this. Do a search.

I think weapon is an appropriate term myself. That's all I have to say this go around.

Calling a car a transportation mechanism doesn't change what it is. It's still a car. Calling a bunch of socialists the democratic party doesn't chan....... ummm, never mind.

 

[Old Dog]

Ah, how we have devolved on the internet ... where we worry about the nomenclature (thanks, Gen Geoff, for the big word, it sounds so much more educated than "names") of our chosen tools.

So, should I take from this pointless discussion that some here object to the word "weapon" because it offends others, misleads some or otherwise damages the cause for RKBA? Really?

 

[General Geoff]

So, should I take from this pointless discussion that some here object to the word "weapon" because it offends others, misleads some or otherwise damages the cause for RKBA? Really?

I'm glad you said this.

If we're worried about calling guns "weapons," for fear of offending those who would take away out 2nd amendment rights, then we've already lost. The 2A is NOT there to protect sportsmen, target shooters, or collectors. It is there to protect the right to keep and bear weapons.

Weapon is just a newer word for arm.

 

[Skribs]

So, should I take from this pointless discussion that some here object to the word "weapon" because it offends others, misleads some or otherwise damages the cause for RKBA? Really?

Actually, now I think of it, I called them weapons when I first got into guns so that I would take them seriously, and treat them as a deadly thing, instead of calling them "toys". While I call them toys now, and they can be fun, there is no denying the fact that guns are deadly, and a certain amount of respect must be had for them.

 

[r1derbike]

I now call my handgun a sidearm, and my Colt 6920 a modern sporting rifle, in the presence of others. Sufficiently benign to not scare the ignorant.

Call yours what you will, but these are my belongings, and they are named what I wish, in my possession.

Arguments about what they are or what they aren't seem irrelevant, when ignorant, uninformed people hear terms that they deem abhorrent.

 

[oneounceload]

Now, if you're a wingshooter or something, don't come after me, I know you don't call your fancy shotgun a "weapon".

Nope, we call them "SHOTGUNS", but then anything else is called a "rifle"

Look at H&H or other fine gun makers - they call themselves "gun and rifle makers"

Maybe the term firearm would suffice for what you are going for

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language: 1755 defines "weapon" as:

instrument of offense; Something with which one is armed to hurt another.[/i]​

My Websters Universal Dictionary and Thesaurus: 1993 defines "weapon" as:

any instrument used in fighting.​

(It has no synonyms for "weapon".)

Ergo, using the word "arm", which covers both offensive and defensive implements(instruments), would require whomever wishes to disparage firearms or weapons in general would of necessity be required to be more specific in their use of the word "weapon" and how the "weapon" itself is used, when discussing our right to them. The Second Amendment covers implements which can be both used offensively or defensively. An implement that can be used to hurt someone can also be used to prevent being hurt.

So, it's not so much what the weapon(arm, (instrument)) is, or the word chosen to identify it is, it's about how it or its name is used. It's all about context. A rose, by any other name, will smell as sweet; a turd, by any other name, will not have a clean end you can pick it up by.

Woody

 

[breakingcontact]

I haven't called for us all to masquerade as pheasant hunters cherishing blued steel and walnut stocks.

But this aggressive tacticool mentality has affected the language in our sub culture.

If you like black guns. Awesome. If you want to zip line down the range firing your twin glock 40s at zombie targets...terrific.

But when you're at the gun shop or sporting goods gun counter or here on these forums, YouTube or elsewhere on the ultranet...you're in public. While in public best not to offend/confuse/anger polite society. Not saying hide away your secret gun hobby. But why would you want to portray yourself as hostile? Weapon this. Tactical system that. I was in the military. Where we are trained to commit overwhelmingly aggressive violence. Now im a civilian. Do i retain my right to perform violence if needed? Of course. In a DEFENSIVE role. I had to leave my combat mentality or at least the aggressor part there...along with my weapons. Portray yourself as a pro-2nd amendment target shooter/hunter/right to carry person? Sure!

I suppose my point transcends just the weapon terminology to our overall public image.

 

[friscolatchi]

I kinda like "truncated foweling piece" myself.

 

[jdh]

I got in this same discussion in the 70s with the battalion CSM over a Buck 112 folding knife when he called me into his office after lunch one day to measure the blade, having seen the scabbard on my belt in the chow hall, upon doing so he found it to be within regulations. As he handed it back to me he made the comment "It is beyond my comprehension why a soldier in my army finds it necessary to carry such a weapon!" Had he bothered to look at the days training schedule he would have seen the task for the day was the inspection and repair of camouflage netting for which certain tools were required which we were not issued. One of which was some sort of tool to cut ropes and twine needed to make the required repairs to the netting. The knife hanging on my belt that day.

A tool is a tool. Most any tool can be used to cause injury or damage. I do not hear tradesmen referring to their hammer as their weapon even though it can be used as one. Nor the farmer referring to his combine as his weapon which he uses in the harvesting of his wheat crop as the hunter uses his rifle to harvest game animals.

Where I come from the use of the word weapon implies intent to use the tool at hand to cause harm. The purpose of the hunt is to as quickly, cleanly, and humanely as possible harvest the animal for consumption. Sport killing was viewed as akin to homicide. Wounding and allowing the animal to suffer and die a lingering, painful death is harmful to to the animal and the spirit of the shooter. Even when protecting the hen house from predators one was expected to make a clean kill and disposed of the predator in a dignified manner.

Words mean things. That meaning may vary based on regional customs. Be aware that what you mean may not be what the other person hears.

I now return you to your regularly scheduled urinating contest.

 

[Flynt]

How about what Keith Richards calls his revolvers, "shooters"?

 

[Trent]

Whilst we're dusting off dictionaries and looking for revisionist magic, let us leap back a couple hundred and fifty-seven years and observe the definition of the word "Arms" back when the Constitution and it's second added article of amendment were crafted:

From Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language: 1755

Do you have that actual volume? If so my Library is very, very jealous of you right now. Those are quite a lot out of my price range...

Original Volumes

On the subject of weapon.

I suppose if you guys want to call your AR-15 or AK-47 a target rifle instead of a weapon that's cool. It can shoot targets too.

But.. I collect curios and relics of war. Not target rifles. When I call a DShK a weapon, I do indeed mean that it's a weapon. No one is going to "buy" that it's a target rifle. Even though that's all I have plans to ever use it for, it's original purpose was NOT to shoot targets. Neither was an AR-15. Or an AK-47. Or an SKS.

You might have re-purposed those items. Fine. Doesn't change what they are, what they were designed for, or what they were designed to DO.

I see no honor or purpose in changing the phrasing of something to appease another person - I don't live my life in such a fashion that I question or second guess myself when I make a statement.

 

[buck460XVR]

If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck and smells like a duck, it's a duck. Regardless of what you call it.



Just sayin'.

 

[303tom]

I always say FIREARMS................

 

[Lunie]

Putting on my satirical hat for a moment...

"We should call them 'Sea Kittens'. That worked so well before."

Seriously, and I think many here agree, "firearm" is a very useful and neutral term. "Defensive weapon" is probably an excellent term when used to describe defensive firearms. (Those which were designed as such, or those that are now held for the purpose of defense.)

There is power in words, and we would be foolish to simply ignore that. It isn't about being politically correct, it is about effective marketing. Firearms are tools, and it is beneficial to cast them in a positive (or at least neutral) light.

 

[bobbo]

Oxford Dictionary defines "weapon as ...
"a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage."

Hmm... my SMLE, my Mosin, heck even my 10/22 were designed to inflict bodily harm or physical damage. Target guns cause physical damage to targets. Deer guns inflict bodily harm on deer. An M16A1 is designed to inflict bodily harm on people.

Guess what? It's a weapon.

Don't call it something it's not. Antis will eat you alive with semantics with the line "Call it whatever you want, it's still made to kill things!"

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

Trent,

I have it on DVD (also available on CD) and installed it on my computer. Johnson's Dictionary, the 1755 first edition, can be had for $50.00 from Octavo Editions.

Get a copy and enjoy! It really makes the Constitution come alive!

Woody

 

[The-Reaver]

I use Firearm.

 

[fanchisimo]

I agree that we should not portray ourselves as "gun nuts" in our use of language/imagery, but we should not have to censor our use of reasonable words. Like I said we shouldn't called them Evil Killy Sticks or

bloodthirsty death machines

, but like several of us have said in various ways, it is what it is. As long as what you call it is reasonable, there shouldn't be a problem.

 

[45_auto]

Call yours what you will, but these are my belongings, and they are named what I wish, in my possession.

You can name them "fluffy soft kitty" all you want while they're in your possession.

Doesn't change what they are. Just makes you (and by association other gun owners) look like an idiot trying to hide something to the 99.99% of the rest of the people out there who know that they are weapons.