Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AB
Screwdrivers were invented and are designed for turning screws. The fact that some screwdrivers aren't used to turn screws doesn't change their genesis. The same is true for guns. Guns were invented to kill, and especially to kill people. The fact that the primary purpose of some firearms today isn't to kill people doesn't change the genesis of guns as a class of things.
|
Why do you attribute a motive to an inventor/designer that you don't attribute to yourself as a user?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AB
But the reason this discussion comes up is that anti-gun people generalize that "guns are for killing."
|
Adopting the error doesn't help to address the error. I think I know why they indulge the error, and it isn't innocent.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AB
If/when we attempt to counter that assertion with a finely-nuanced discussion of "Well, maybe some guns were designed for killing -- once upon a time -- but MY guns certainly weren't designed for killing," we don't win the argument, we just look like we're being evasive and ducking to issue. And we look that way because we are.
|
It can't duck an issue to address it. I don't recommend the beauty school philosophy of polemics. I don't recommend the argument you suggest about your guns not being designed for killing.
In most settings, few things are more persuasive that actually being correct. If one focuses on what is true first, and then marshals those true observations in support of his position, he is likely to occupy the better position.
I contend that "guns are designed for killing" accomplishes a deception by conflating a potential result with something that they falsely believe inheres in the object. It reflects sloppy reasoning
at best.
Why not just say "Guns can be lethal"? That certainly reflects one possible result of use, but it doesn't quite suggest an evil intent.
Why not say "Some modern firearms are optimized for stopping people immediately"? That seems to be the focus of defensive use literature, but "stopping people" doesn't sound all that bad.
Why not say "Firearms are often used to kill people"? That's true, but raises the question about how they are more often used by civilians and police for other purposes.
"Guns are designed to kill (people)" makes "guns" the subject rather than human behavior. "Designed" raises the concept of intent, and intent is central to criminal and moral culpability. "Kill(ing) people" is a problem noted in the prior century's greatest atrocities in which evil is present by the bucket load, and we've assigned both criminal and moral culpability.
The bumper sticker slogan is a shorthand that conveys that
guns are a designed evil. Who wants more designed evil?
If the phrase is literally false and substantially deceptive, I wouldn't be so quick to concede its validity.
Quote:
|
I respectfully submit that, since we can't come up with a simple way to absolutely refute that statement, we should not even attempt to refute it.
|
I once heard that "guns don't kill people..."