The Term "Weapon"

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bthr22

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2010
Messages
45
Location
Bowling Green, OH
Does anyone else feel that a gun shouldn't be considered a weapon in most cases? I've been stewing about this for a while, and I'd like to hear some opinions.
For me, the term weapon holds so much negative connotation in society. I don't use my firearms as a weapon, they are tools for target shooting, hunting, and self defense. Therefore, I don't call my firearms weapons. Of course, I could use them as such, if I was attacking instead of defending. Yet I could use a pencil, knife, scissors, or my hands as a weapon. That doesn't mean I commonly refer to them as weapons. It seems, the media especially, have put firearms in this general, negative light instead of where they should be.

Just some thoughts and opinions, what are yours?

Ryan
 
Firearms are as much weapons as automobiles are conveyance; Though they have diverged into many different forms of the original concept for varying purposes, they were intended for one purpose in the beginning, and are all capable of use in that capacity.

Don't dilude yourself with semantics; It is disingenuous to all of us.
 
I have never heard a track and field athlete refer to his javelin as a weapon, despite the fact that it was originally intended as one.
 
A firearm used for hunting or self-defense is being used as a weapon.

Whether you are attacking or defending does not alter the status of the weapon; it's a weapon either way. And when you are hunting, you are attacking.
 
Well it's not a Blow-Pop...

Seriously though, I don't see why we should "spin" what guns are.
 
There's nothing wrong with calling a gun a weapon. To my mind, anyway, it lends it a sort of dignity. Calling it a mere "tool" would be denigrating it.
 
For me, the term weapon holds so much negative connotation in society.
Click to expand...
We wouldn't want any of those would we, I think we just need to drop the PC crap. It doesn't matter if it's a gun or a javlin it is still a weapon at it's core, check Websters.
 
You think of the term weapon as having a negative connotation. You then defend your firearms and define them as non weapons because you use them for hunting and SD. If we follow this train of logic when defending our rights, the gun haters will come to the conclusion that you only then need the basic tools to hunt and protect your self with. All others are not necessary as they are only weapons eg. guns that look like military versions (AR15's) and the like.

Our 2nd amendment right allows us to bear arms to defend ourselves from... Don't limit the scope of our rights because it's easier to defend. Playing the semantic game will only lead to muddy waters and confusion.

I don't think it's a good strategy to play all our cards either. Call them firearms, weapons, guns etc. List your uses and apply the 2nd amendment to back them up. Some day it may come to tell the world what the 2nd amendment really means. It means that we are to have the very weapons the military has so that it will be a fair fight if the Government becomes oppressive. But again I say I don't think now is the right time and we also don't need to pull that card now.
I can't see a situation where I would use my weapons against the Government. It just doesn't fit with my world view. My world view doesn't change the 2nd amendment however, despite what those with other world views might think.

I like the idea of showing cars and other objects that can be used to cause harm or death as possible weapons. A teenager texting while driving is a dangerous thing.

Above all, educate. We can't do anything about willful ignorance, but we can help those that are truly looking for the truth.
 
Keep And Bear Arms

The Second Amendment does not enshrine and protect the right to "keep and bear tools."

It specifically addresses the right to "keep and bear arms."

You're not doing yourself -- or the rest of us -- any favors if you keep running around insisting that your rifle or pistol isn't arms.

Arms is weapons.

The Second Amendment is not about "doing fun things with tools that go bang."

The Second Amendment is about the security of a free state. It's about liberty and freedom.

Weapon? Sure enough.

Is that all it can be? Well, clearly not.

But the language that preserves your right to have it is predicated on the fact that it's a weapon. Or "arms" if you prefer.

I'm fine with "weapon."

I'm fine with "arms."

I have them because I understand what the Second Amendment is about.

It's a great bonus that they're also fun and useful for other stuff. Mine have all been used for the "fun and other stuff." I've never had to employ them explicitly as arms (or weapons), except when they're selected for carry or nightstand duty.


The media will do their best to ingratiate themselves to the halls of power, and, if you let them, help the power brokers and power grabbers wield that power over the population.

"Negative light?" That's their specialty.

Don't expect to "win the hearts and minds" of the media. Instead, go around them as you must, ridicule them when necessary, and eventually establish a culture that will supplant the stuff they're pushing.

Don't expect truth from them, and feel free to remind anyone who falls for that shtick about all the other times that the media has gotten it wrong.

For example:
So, what, the media gets everything wrong except this? The media can't get the facts right about stuff as simple as traffic accidents, but you're willing to buy their take on this?

Yeah. Smart.

That's like expecting the government, who screw up everything they touch with bureaucracy, with scandals being the norm rather than the exception, to "finally get it right" when it comes to gun control.

No thanks.

I won't be going to the media to get my truth.
Click to expand...


And in the meantime, keep in mind that a) the Bill of Rights isn't a "bill of needs" and b) the Second Amendment is about Arms and Liberty.

 
They're weapons, and they ought to be weapons. What's wrong with that?

Do we WANT the firearms to become like blunted javelins? I mean if they're not weapons, why do they even need to be shooting bullets?
 
Your mind is the weapon. The gun is just a tool in yout hands. Neither the gun or your hands that control the gun will act until your mind tells them to act. Things are not crimes. only ACTIONS are crimes and all actions are simply physical extentions of the mind.
 
Look at a baseball bat or a golf club. Are they tools or weapons? If you use them to hit a ball, they are tools. If you use them to bash somebody's skull, they are weapons.

If you use a large glass mug to consume an effervescent "adult beverage", it is a utensil. If you pummel somebody's face with it, it's a weapon.

An old-fashioned stick pen or a wooden pencil - tool or weapon? As with almost anything in life, usage determines definition.
 
As with almost anything in life, usage [strike]determines[/strike] can alter definition.
Click to expand...

There.

Baseball bats, golf clubs, mugs and pencils are not fundamentally weapons, and the word "weapon" is an adjective when they are used as such.

Firearms, swords, battle axes, pikes-these thing are weapons, whether used recreationally or for their intended purpose. With these and similar things, "weapon" is a noun.

We all know that nearly any object can become a weapon, but there is simply no denying that some things were designed and created as such.
 
Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon! Weapon!
 
Hmmm, all your responses do seem to put things in a different perspective. I learned to shoot, and do most of my shooting with my Venturing Crew. We were never allowed to refer to guns as weapons while our meetings were in session. This makes sense to me, since we are not using guns as weapons, so there's really no need to refer to them as such. So, I adopted the thinking that that's how I should go about it in almost all situations. The way everyone on here has put it makes perfect sense and seems completely reasonable to refer to a gun as a weapon.
 
Why not just call'em "Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun?" Everybody understands that they can be used as weapons, and often are. I see no need to classify firearms as "Weapons" or "Sporting Arms" and doing so tends to lend credence to the oft-repeated mantra: "No legitimate sporting purpose=bad gun/must be banned."
 
I think ArfinGreebly nailed this one absolutely, perfectly.

It bears repeating.

The Second Amendment does not enshrine and protect the right to "keep and bear tools."

It specifically addresses the right to "keep and bear arms."

You're not doing yourself -- or the rest of us -- any favors if you keep running around insisting that your rifle or pistol isn't arms.

Arms is weapons.

The Second Amendment is not about "doing fun things with tools that go bang."

The Second Amendment is about the security of a free state. It's about liberty and freedom.

Weapon? Sure enough.
Click to expand...

Amen.
 
I don't call guns "weapons" because it's not a clear description.

All guns are weapons but all weapons are not guns.


Anytime I hear someone calling a gun a weapon I usually think of them as trying to be too "cool".

The thing is a handgun (pistol or revolver), rifle or shotgun, call it what it is.
 
I'm with the rest that call them weapons. It seems to me that the original design and intent of a thing is what defines it as something in human society. True enough, it is the capacity in which it is used that gives it a positive or negative spin and can later define a new design. The derivation of the original design though remains the same.

Guns were originally designed to kill animals, humans, defend borders, or attack rivals. Personally, I'd want a weapon for any of those activities, not a tool, or a toy, or anything else pro gun people label their guns as.

I could choose to run over mimes with my pickup truck for fun. Is it a truck, or does it become a tactical solution to mime over population? I would say it is still a truck....... a vehicle at its core. I would be choosing to use it as a weapon, but it is still a vehicle ultimately.

A hammer is a tool for pounding in nails. I could try to pound them into something with a gun. Does the gun now become a tool because I'm using it in that capacity? I don't think so.

The same is true in reverse. Rockets were designed to deliver bombs over long distances, and later they took us to the moon. I wouldn't call a rocket a weapon though.

Arguing that we shouldn't call a weapon a weapon gives antigunners fuel. It makes us look like we are trying to hide something or distract the opposition, or make arguments about semantics that have no real bearing on the issues.

I'd feel kinda silly with a Concealed TOOL Permit in my wallet.
Click to expand...

LOL, that is a good point. Worse yet, as some people call their guns toys, we could all call be carrying a "Permit to Carry a Concealed TOY". I have a feeling everyone of us would be considered weird and would be required to stay at least 500 feet away from schools if we had permits like that.

My guns are weapons, but I use them for other things. Sometimes I walk in my shoes, and sometimes I run, but they are still shoes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Grandpa Shooter
  • Locked
Weapon or Firearm-Is it just semantics?
2 3 4 5
Replies
103
Views
3K
Officers'Wife
Officers'Wife
R
  • Locked
Weapon-system
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
fallout mike
fallout mike
J
  • Locked
"Pistol/Handgun/Firearm" vs "Weapon"
2 3
Replies
66
Views
3K
ChaoSS
C
G
  • Locked
Arsenal - not a negative term as some of you seem to make it
Replies
16
Views
1K
akodo
A
B
  • Locked
Need to stop using the word weapon. What's more appropriate?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
142
Views
4K
mortablunt
M
Back
Top