The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old November 27, 2012, 06:40 PM   #51
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,615
I don't understand that argument.

Imagine if you were to ask THOSE people if a gun is a weapon. How many of them would get "all esoteric" about it like we do?

None?

So what is the effect of changing the word? They still know you're talking about a gun, they know a gun is a weapon, you're not "fooling" anyone by using a different word.

I find it more likely that you would irritate them. It's almost like we think they're stupid. Like if we call a puppy a kitten they'll believe it's a kitten.

Besides, what would be the context where you're talking about guns in the presence of "anti-gun people" and you'd be using the word weapon where something like "platform" would be better. I don't know what that conversation would be.

Anti-gun people don't know our lingo (hence the esoteric nature of this discussion), they know the basics. The "thing" is a gun, weapon, pistol, Saturday Night Special, heck, every handgun might be an "AK" in their world, but they sure as hell know it's a "weapon". I surely can't see any benefit of trying to make like it isn't.

None of which particularly matters IMO, as I fall back to the concept that if a gun is not a weapon unless it's used as such then a car is not a vehicle unless it's moving. Neither of those arguments holds any water with me.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 07:06 PM   #52
nate45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 15, 2007
Location: Illinois
Posts: 3,746
Its The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, not the Right to Keep and Bear cute non-Threatening target thingys, that mean people could potentially use as weapons.

The Supreme Court ruled that the right to keep firearms in the home for defense was at the heart of the second amendment. Weapons are used for defense.

Firearms are deadly weapons, even skeet guns and target range .22s. Accept it, embrace it, quit trying to sugar coat it.

We even had at least one thread about firearms being dangerous. They're also dangerous, not just from accidents, or carelessness. Or dangerous as in faulty, etc. Weapons are supposed to be dangerous, designed to be dangerous, or else they wouldn't be worth a flip. Show me a non-dangerous, purpose built deadly weapon and I'll show you a design failure.
__________________
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."- Thomas Jefferson
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
(>_<)
nate45 is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 07:12 PM   #53
austinjunks
Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2012
Location: savannah, Ga
Posts: 22
I believe firearm is as pc as it gets without getting into the bending to suit your needs category.

Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using Tapatalk 2
austinjunks is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 07:30 PM   #54
spacecoast
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 14, 2009
Location: Sunshine and Keystone States
Posts: 4,083
"Dissuader"
spacecoast is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 07:38 PM   #55
CharlieDeltaJuliet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 25, 2012
Posts: 750
Brian, did I ever use the word "anti"? No. I said non firearm owners. These are family members and friends that do not own them. They have never expressed any irritation mainly because they don't take it personally. They understand that I no longer use a firearm to kill, and only for targets and training others. As I stated it is my OPINION, as your statement is yours. Neither are right or wrong, but only opinions. So please know I am not arguing with you nor trying to sway you, I simply answered the OP question with my opinion as asked. My point about the rifles are as I own a couple benchrest rifles, they are target rifles not hunting. So as to say when I assembled them, they were not created to do anything other than that. So IMO, they are not weapons. That was all I was saying. I am no more right or wrong about my statements than you about yours.
__________________
" The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to
keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect
themselves against tyranny in Government.
..." - Thomas Jefferson
CharlieDeltaJuliet is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:01 PM   #56
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 470
Quote:
Its The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, not the Right to Keep and Bear cute non-Threatening target thingys, that mean people could potentially use as weapons.

The Supreme Court ruled that the right to keep firearms in the home for defense was at the heart of the second amendment. Weapons are used for defense.

Firearms are deadly weapons, even skeet guns and target range .22s. Accept it, embrace it, quit trying to sugar coat it.

We even had at least one thread about firearms being dangerous. They're also dangerous, not just from accidents, or carelessness. Or dangerous as in faulty, etc. Weapons are supposed to be dangerous, designed to be dangerous, or else they wouldn't be worth a flip. Show me a non-dangerous, purpose built deadly weapon and I'll show you a design failure.
nate45 that is a clear and concise statement of how I feel. Thank you. With all due respect to the fine institution, if Boy Scouts can get merit badges for use of firearms without understanding the above, we have failed to tell them the whole story. I also do not understand the notion that accepting and even insisting that guns are weapons somehow makes me hostile. I am not. I understand that firearms are used for many different purposes. There is inherent danger in every one of them, and it does not change the nature of the firearm/weapon.

There are many things that make me cringe about how some of us portray firearms and the use of them. Owning, using and carrying weapons is a serious responsibility that requires maturity and training or we metaphorically (and sometimes literally) shoot ourselves in the foot. How we conduct ourselves as gun enthusiasts is important, but denying that guns are weapons helps no one IMO.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin

"If you let "need" be a requirement and Government be the arbiter of that "need", then Liberty is as dead as King Tut." Jimbob86
K_Mac is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:08 PM   #57
SPEMack618
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2010
Location: Central Georgia
Posts: 1,399
Does an 11 year old really need to be burdened with the thoughts of "when the boogey men come me and Old Blue will fight them off?" And if so, is it my job as a simple rifle instructor who interacts with them for, at most six hours over the course of a week to impart that on them?

It's the Rifle Merit Badge, not the Self Defense/Civil Rights Merit Badge.

I think I do far more for our cause by provididing a safe, fun learning enviroment where the kid can learn the safety basics, fling some lead down range, and go home with a patch. n
__________________
NRA Life Member
"Had King Kong showed up in Texas, Frank Hamer would have taken him down with his Model 8 in .35 Remington...well, he was kind of big, so maybe his BAR"
SPEMack618 is online now  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:17 PM   #58
Eppie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 7, 2010
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 795
Remember Steve Martin in the "Jerk"

I think I'll call it "Purpose". Definition: Intention, meaning , aim
__________________
"Socialized Medicine is the Keystone to the Arch of the Socialist State.” -Vladimir Lenin
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson (An early warning to Obama care)
Eppie is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:19 PM   #59
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 470
Quote:
I think I do far more for our cause by provididing a safe, fun learning enviroment where the kid can learn the safety basics, fling some lead down range, and go home with a patch. n
SPEMac618 doing the above is an honorable job, and I thank you for it. The 11 year old does not need to understand all the implications of gun use. He does need to understand that unless used properly every time the consequences can be deadly. Using a weapon is a serious business at any age.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin

"If you let "need" be a requirement and Government be the arbiter of that "need", then Liberty is as dead as King Tut." Jimbob86
K_Mac is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:27 PM   #60
t4terrific
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 22, 2009
Posts: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by breakingcontact View Post
I see the YouTube celebrities referring to every firearm as a weapon and it makes me cringe.

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

We need to control the language to put out a better public image.

What should we always call firearms? Call them just that "firearms", guns? Call it what it is, rifle/pistol/shotgun?

I like "defensive firearm". Think of it as the opposite of "assault rifle". The media pounded on the term assault rifle and altered the meaning and perception. They controlled the language.

Imagine if we always described a weapon...er...a firearm...in a language "positive" way. If we tie the word defense to the word gun or firearm, that would be golden.
Call it a "killer" instead. It's only being accurate. The word police can join the thought police on a trip to Hell.
t4terrific is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 08:59 PM   #61
buckhorn_cortez
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 30, 2010
Posts: 390
Why call it a "weapon" to begin with? A weapon is so nonspecific that it could refer to anything from a hydrogen bomb to a slingshot.

Part of my job is technical writing. The best writing is direct and to the point. In this case, rather than calling the gun something generic like "firearm" or "weapon" - just refer to it as exactly what it is: pistol, revolver, shotgun, or rifle.
buckhorn_cortez is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 09:06 PM   #62
SHNOMIDO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 23, 2011
Location: Illinois
Posts: 423
I use the word piece a lot. It makes it sound like a piece of art, or a collectable, like part of a hobby.

...exactly what it is.

However it can have a gangster ring to it, like yo check my piece. It can be a double edged sword.
SHNOMIDO is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 09:20 PM   #63
Edward429451
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
It is what it is. I don't think any attempt to palliate the term weapon should be made. Why? Are gun owners the new homosexuals which must go into the closet? Being secretive is one thing, but trying to pretend that weapons are not weapons in some sort of effort to placate the ninny's is...akin to ninnyism in and of itself.

It could also be dangerous if you were to palliate weapons in front of children. They may get the idea that there is less danger than there really is with guns.
Edward429451 is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 09:37 PM   #64
Chris9472
Member
 
Join Date: November 26, 2012
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 99
LEO's and some gun experts often refer to a gun as "a weapon" or "the weapon". Sorry, could you please be a little more specific? A lot of things could be used as "a weapon".

I also don't care much for the ubiquitous "Firearms". It makes me think of old flintlock muskets or something.

Last edited by Chris9472; November 27, 2012 at 10:47 PM.
Chris9472 is offline  
Old November 27, 2012, 10:38 PM   #65
bbqbob51
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 6, 2005
Posts: 729
The firearms training course I took to qualify for my CCL would not permit the word "weapon" to be used. One reason not to use that word was in case you ever shot someone in self defense and you had to make a statement to the police or defend yourself in court. The word weapon has more negative connotations than say firearm, gun, pistol, shotgun or revolver. If you end up in court a prosecuting attorney would latch onto everything you say to use against you and if you call a firearm a weapon it suggests aggressiveness on you part, even premeditation.
I think this philosophy originated with the NRA.
bbqbob51 is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 07:08 AM   #66
HiBC
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 13, 2006
Posts: 3,593
Last time I went to Canada and the Customs officer was checking out my pickup/boat.I had no firearms with me.I did have an empty CCI 22 Mini-mag plastic ammo box visible,the intent being to put small terminal fishing tackle in it.Customs agent's hand goes to sidearm.I very slowly,carefully showed her it was empty,I was recycling a plastic box that was useful.

Another agent comes over.After about the third"Do you have any weapons?"
I told them I had a machete in the truck but I considered it a tool rather than a weapon.

End of interview,they let me go on to my fishing trip.
HiBC is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 08:57 AM   #67
Willie D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 24, 2007
Posts: 1,116
Quote:
...if a gun is not a weapon unless it's used as such then a car is not a vehicle unless it's moving. Neither of those arguments holds any water with me.


I agree with this entirely.



In case anyone missed a point in an earlier post: The "arm" in firearm means "weapon".
Willie D is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 12:20 PM   #68
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
For some "guns" are weapons, for most they are not. My guns are rarely weapons.

Websters: something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy.

I'll add that this is generally against a person or persons. So my gun sitting on the table needing cleaned after a plinkin session is not a weapon, nor is the pen on my desk or my daughters softball bat on the porch. Only when I train, use or carry for SD a gun for the above definition does it become a weapon. I call a hammer a hammer, a bat a bat, a knife a knife, a bow a bow, a gun a gun. If I train or use any of those items for SD then yes they become weapons. Outside of that I'm not callin a steak knife or a softball bat a weapon and pity any fool who does. Same goes for guns.

Now being said, I own guns for a multitude of reasons with defense being down the list a good ways. A different person may only own guns for defensive and/or offensive reasons (sad sack that he would be) and thus their guns may be considered weapons all the time. But if said person uses their gun(s) for any other reason they can not call them a weapon all the time and they'd be a moron to generically use that term for their guns. Personally if I start to only consider my guns to be weapons and start using the term on a regular basis I'll check myself into the funny farm.

So when is it all right for you to call a gun a weapon? Let's say you decide to take a course on shotguns and HD. You grab your trusty bird or deer gun and head off. I have no problem with you then callin your shotgun a weapon on the way to the coarse, at the coarse, on the way home. But the minute you get home and put it away it's then nothing more than a gun. And I'd severely wonder about the guy that gets up the next morning to go hunting referring to his gun as a weapon.

Last edited by L_Killkenny; November 28, 2012 at 12:41 PM.
L_Killkenny is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 12:32 PM   #69
dahermit
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 28, 2006
Location: South Central Michigan...near Ohio, Indiana.
Posts: 3,505
You have to admit that "shooter", has a nice ring to it. It also fits in the event that the sport for which it is used, is a non-bloodsport (trap, skeet, etc.).
__________________
Sometimes you get what you pay for, sometimes you only pay more for what you get.
Three shots are not a "group"...they are a "few".

If the Bible is the literal, infallible, unerring word of God...where are all those witches I am supposed to kill?
dahermit is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 12:55 PM   #70
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
Websters: something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy.

I'll add that this is generally against a person or persons. So my gun sitting on the table needing cleaned after a plinkin session is not a weapon, nor is the pen on my desk or my daughters softball bat on the porch. Only when I train, use or carry for SD a gun for the above definition does it become a weapon. I call a hammer a hammer, a bat a bat, a knife a knife, a bow a bow, a gun a gun.
Rule #2: Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. It seems that if you follow the 4 rules a gun is always a weapon by the definition you've provided.

While I understand the argument people are trying to make about only calling it a weapon when it's being used as such, this does not get around the fact that guns are inherently weapons, unlike a piece of cake or a pie.

This doesn't mean that you have to go around calling firearms weapons all the time, and in all circumstances. However, this is not the idea that the OP was contending.

Quote:
We need to control the language to put out a better public image.

What should we always call firearms? Call them just that "firearms", guns? Call it what it is, rifle/pistol/shotgun?

I like "defensive firearm". Think of it as the opposite of "assault rifle". The media pounded on the term assault rifle and altered the meaning and perception. They controlled the language.

Imagine if we always described a weapon...er...a firearm...in a language "positive" way. If we tie the word defense to the word gun or firearm, that would be golden.
The OP is suggesting we as firearms/weapons/<insert subtype here> owners play the same game as the other side and add spin to the words we use. Trying to use smoke and mirrors does us no good for various reasons. In part , if we were to make a concerted effort as a community to disavow the idea that firearms are weapons by refusing to use that word to describe them, it hinders the idea of many 2A arguments that firearms are for self-defense and not only "sporting purposes".

It's one thing what you call them in everyday life, but playing political spin games and denying a core aspect of what firearms are is another.
sigcurious is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 01:01 PM   #71
OEF-Vet
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2011
Location: Backwoods, PA
Posts: 284
Shootin iron

After years of military service I use the term weapon. When one considers the design intent of guns it is a fitting term.

If you are pulled over by an LEO and you are asked "Do you have any weapons in the vehicle?" there is no exception for guns you only use to shoot paper, knives you only use to cut rope, and the list could go on indefinitely.

One could argue that someone could be suffocated with a teddy bear but I would not call that a weapon prior to such a use, but that is also not the design intent of a teddy bear.

I have always been fond of the term shootin iron though
__________________
Jim

"If a man does his best, what else is there?"
- General George S. Patton Jr
OEF-Vet is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 01:15 PM   #72
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
Quote:
the fact that guns are inherently weapons
No they are not. A gun is no more inherently a weapon than any other inanimate object. More guns are sold to and used by civilians for sporting reasons everyday than have ever been used by civialians for offensive or defensive reasons. That's not just in the last year, or the last decade, or the last century. It's since the inception of the gun itself. Do you think the cowboy's carried guns for SD or the Colonist had rifles and muskets for HD? No, they were tools and sometimes toys that on occasion HAD TO be used as a weapon. The military has used the term weapon for centuries but you'd never had seen any civilian in the past say grab your weapon, or I went hunting with my weapon, or I shot some targets with my weapon and so on. Civilians using the term wholesale is a fairly modern thing with many using it for dubious reasons.
L_Killkenny is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 01:23 PM   #73
K_Mac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 470
L_Killkenny my Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (copyright 1977) offers the following: Weapon 1: an instrument of offensive or defensive combat: something to fight with 2: a means of contending with another

Every one of my weapons/firearms is perfectly capable of doing the above, although I generally use them for sport and recreation. While I don't think someone who considers a firearm to be the equivalent of a steak knife or a softball bat to be moronic, foolish or worthy of my pity, I do think it shows a fundamental lack of understanding about the nature of these items. I will continue to refer to my guns as weapons, because at the end of the day that is exactly what they are.
__________________
"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Benjamin Franklin

"If you let "need" be a requirement and Government be the arbiter of that "need", then Liberty is as dead as King Tut." Jimbob86
K_Mac is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 01:42 PM   #74
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by L_Killkenny
No they are not. A gun is no more inherently a weapon than any other inanimate object.
This argument simply does not hold water for average people. Ordinary usage of the word indicates otherwise.

By that logic, NOTHING is ever ANYTHING except an "inanimate object" until you actually use it for something.

A hammer is not a tool until you hit nails with it.

A car is not a vehicle unless you're driving it.

A sneaker is not a shoe unless you're wearing it.

It's astonishing to me how desperately we try to make our firearms into something they're not, especially since we seem to be the only ones in the world who care and certainly the only ones who believe it.

This is like the firearms worlds version of Schrödinger's cat. It's not dead or alive until you open the box.

It's not a weapon until you use it.

Unbelievable silliness.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old November 28, 2012, 01:44 PM   #75
L_Killkenny
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 2, 2007
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,676
Go up and read your definition. You are correct that guns are capable of that but until they do it they are not a weapon. Again, you have to look at actual use and maybe intent. Not one of my guns was purchased with the use or intent of SD/HD a primary reason or concern. All could be used for it. Many, hell most "instruments" can be. You just can't make a blanket statements about guns and call them all weapons. Can't be done, doesn't fit. As for lack of understanding, touche. I can't see how anyone can differentiate between inanimate objects. Actual use or as I stated maybe intent are required to fit the definition. The actual object is irrelevant.
L_Killkenny is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14175 seconds with 9 queries