guns to have or not have

[ultimate157 5,000+ posts]

I am mostly trying to find out why the US has a culture of owning items whose primary purpose is to inflict damage.

You're missing the point. It has nothing to do with its capability to inflict damage. A pencil is a weapon if someone chooses to stab someone in the eye with it. A baseball bat is no longer a sporting item if a guy decides to beat someone to death with it; It is now a weapon.

So by what you are saying, you cannot understand why someone would collect automobiles since they are capable of such destruction? Have you looked at the statistics of automobile related deaths vs. legally owned firearms? And if you break it down even further, the percentage of legally owned firearms that are used in a crime is yet another fraction of that.

 

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

I am mostly trying to find out why the US has a culture of owning items whose primary purpose is to inflict damage.

Out of context "inflict damage" sounds great in your argument, or any anti-gun argument for that matter.

"Inflict damage" can mean murder, assault, or it can simply mean the possibility of inflicting damage if your family is in danger.

Compare the number of gun owners to the number of murderers who have used firearms and maybe you will see why "inflict damage" shouldn't be used and "protection" should be.

Next question is, why do you concern yourself with what others buy if it is within their rights and doesn't impact that of others?

 

[kaimana 10+ year member]

By the way, gentlemen, there is a huge difference between trolling and introspection. Give me some credit, please.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/peace.gif.2db28b618ed8d1964ebbe2f5021d2c39.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/toast.gif.bc0657bf54b9ee653b6438524461341e.gif//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/handclap.gif.0c301076f534e244f0460706894f19e0.gif

 

[its_bacon12 10+ year member]

So it's a race to the biggest stick, and you consider that normal.

Common behavior in humans..

Want the hottest girl for example, fastest/most powerful car, biggest house, most money, best audio system.. It follows the trend.

 

[alvitae 10+ year member]

Anything that could instantly kill another person should be feared, which is why I am apprehensive about the manner in which driver's licenses are handed out.
The question you have to ask yourself is why owning a gun to kill criminals is considered "normal" in your mind.

Like I said, come live up here with the evil socialists and your fear will evaporate.

Incorrect, Anything that could instantly kill someone should be respected.

You respect what they can do and act accordingly ie. Never point at anything you don't intend to shoot. Keep stored in a safe manner. Making sure all who have access to guns are fully knowledgeable in handling them. And when not to.

As to America's fascination with them i think it's because of the country's origins. A maverick group landed in a strange land had to fight to take it, Fight to keep it and been fighting ever since. My great grandfather was a hanging judge in colorado. He brought more than one criminal in slung over the back of a horse. My Grandfather was a sheriff in Seattle. It's passed on through the generations.

 

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

By the way, gentlemen, there is a huge difference between trolling and introspection. Give me some credit, please.

Agreed, just threw that out there since you avoiding some questions and seem to have a purposed lack of understanding on some levels. Seemed to have an agenda, hard to tell over the internets. And I try not to give Canadians too much credit //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

I am mostly trying to find out why the US has a culture of owning items whose primary purpose is to inflict damage.

I don't think the people who actually collect guns are considering the "inflict damage" part. People also collect antique weapons of the middle ages, which where used to inflict damage....they like it.

 

[ultimate157 5,000+ posts]

Incorrect, Anything that could instantly kill someone should be respected.

Amen to that.

 

[mcsoul 10+ year member]

Incorrect, Anything that could instantly kill someone should be respected.
You respect what they can do and act accordingly ie. Never point at anything you don't intend to shoot. Keep stored in a safe manner. Making sure all who have access to guns are fully knowledgeable in handling them. And when not to.

As to America's fascination with them i think it's because of the country's origins. A maverick group landed in a strange land had to fight to take it, Fight to keep it and been fighting ever since. My great grandfather was a hanging judge in colorado. He brought more than one criminal in slung over the back of a horse. My Grandfather was a sheriff in Seattle. It's passed on through the generations.

Ut oh now we are going to get DD started!

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

I don't think gun collectors are the ones shooting up the streets.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

You're missing the point. It has nothing to do with its capability to inflict damage. A pencil is a weapon if someone chooses to stab someone in the eye with it. A baseball bat is no longer a sporting item if a guy decides to beat someone to death with it; It is now a weapon.

The primary purpose of a pencil is to leave rub lead on materials. The primary purpose of a baseball bat is to hit a bat. As you identified, any item on the planet could be used for any number of secondary purposes, but I don't see anyone here talking about using the butt of their gun as a hammer.

Out of context "inflict damage" sounds great in your argument, or any anti-gun argument for that matter.
"Inflict damage" can mean murder, assault, or it can simply mean the possibility of inflicting damage if your family is in danger.

Compare the number of gun owners to the number of murderers who have used firearms and maybe you will see why "inflict damage" shouldn't be used and "protection" should be.

Next question is, why do you concern yourself with what others buy if it is within their rights and doesn't impact that of others?

I use the words inflict damage because that's what a bullet out of a gun does, regardless of what it is aimed at. I'm not talking about the target, because the target could be anything (safe or harmless). The protection you talk about is provided by inflicting damage...that is my point. And again, we have already moved past the protection argument posts ago.

I ask these questions for the same reason I ask every question. Knowledge for myself and for the posters. I'm sorry if you prefer to leave your brain turned off and not ask these questions.

 

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

maverick

I still laugh everytime I see that word now //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

Agreed, just threw that out there since you avoiding some questions and seem to have a purposed lack of understanding on some levels. Seemed to have an agenda, hard to tell over the internets. And I try not to give Canadians too much credit //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/tongue.gif.6130eb82179565f6db8d26d6001dcd24.gif

That's you all over. You're an ideologue (until pushed on it) and you only see others as the same, so when questions are asked, you believe it is to push some ulterior motive.

Evil socialist signing out....

 

[duece212 5,000+ posts]

I haven't hunted in years, I have target practiced and enjoy it. My guns could be used for home protection, do I really think that will ever come to be...doubt it.
I have a shotgun, an ak47, and plan to pick up a hand gun as well. If I enjoy going to the range or out in the country with some targets to play around with each firearm, does that make me wierd? Is it because I have 3 different firearms, which I have because they all are a different experience, or is it for some other reason?

I ask these questions for the same reason I ask every question. Knowledge for myself and for the posters. I'm sorry if you prefer to leave your brain turned off and not ask these questions.

That's you all over. You're an ideologue (until pushed on it) and you only see others as the same, so when questions are asked, you believe it is to push some ulterior motive.
Evil socialist signing out....

Brain turned on, see above, question has been asked.

And this forum is full of trolls, I might just know one or two...so its easy to go on the defensive. Very rare is a sirius debate had here //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Flipx99 5,000+ posts]

The primary purpose of a pencil is to leave rub lead on materials. The primary purpose of a baseball bat is to hit a bat. As you identified, any item on the planet could be used for any number of secondary purposes, but I don't see anyone here talking about using the butt of their gun as a hammer.

But you are dismissing the fact that the item could have secondary value outside of its intended purpose. While a gun may provide a certain value as a means of protection, perhaps it is possible that a gun could provide more value as an investment that someone else may pay a greater amount for in the future. Guns are amoral to their intended purpose.