Maybe. On the other hand, one who sees only black or white in a plain, or at best gray environment could be considered one-dimensional. Being human and possessed of free will, I don't feel so constrained.
As a Marine, was my rifle a "weapon"?.....You betch'a. No doubt about it.
For pretty much all other uses.....it's my decision. It's not a matter of semantics.
Mike
"Walking away seems to be a lost art form." N454casull
If I remember correctly it was the 68' Texas Penal Code that designated a motor vehicle a lethal weapon if used to intentionally injure someone.
It is hard to imagine my old VW Bug as a lethal weapon but it could be.
It is hard to imagine my Felxicut carving knife as a weapon but it could be.
It is hard to imagine my surgeons schapel as a weapon but it could be.
it is hard to imagine my tool box as a box of lethal weapons, but it could be.
It is hard to imagine my my chile as a weapon but my friends tell me it is.
If you want a stick to be a walking stick, it is a walking stick.
If you want a stick to be a spear, it is a spear.
If you want a stick to be a club, it is a club.
If you want a rifle to be a rifle, it is a rifle.
If you want a rifle to be a weapon, it is a weapon.
if I want to call my stick a walking stick, that does not mean I'm wrong cause you want to call it a spear or you are wrong because I want it to call it a walking stick.
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder.
I didn't answer the poll, because I don't really know the answer and there is a lot of political crap involved with whatever one calls them. I used to do a lot of archery reading from the late 19th, early 20th Centuries. The bow was the English longbow in most of the writings, and no white American bow hunted with them at that time. Longbows were called "weapons" back then, although there was no intent to use one to protect his life or even kill an animal. The use of the term was completely not self-conscious about meaning.
Weapon now is weighed down with a lot of negative baggage. It's not Politically Correct to call a firearm a weapon unless it's specifically designed as a weapon, and then there are those who feel everything from a Ma Deuce to a BB gun are weapons because they have the ability to harm. I don't buy into either of these definitions because the reasons for this are not in my mind valid.
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
I didn't answer the poll, because I don't really know the answer and there is a lot of political crap involved with whatever one calls them.
B.S. (no offense) aw, hell I don't care if you're offended or not... You know dang good and well whether you think of your guns as weapons or not. *Generally Speaking
You have the right to your own opinion, but you don't have the right to your own facts:guns:
No, I don't. I don't intend to assign words to ideas that aren't mine. Speak for yourself, Durwood. You may know about your guns, but don't assume I will defer to your opinions. I don't have a firearm that wouldn't be a weapon if needed. My guns are not tools, or at least I don't look at them as tools.
Assigning words with values, like "weapons" or "non-weapons" does not interest me. It's a P C game I won't play. Like "harvesting" game instead of "hunting".
Concealed carry is for protection, open carry is for attention.
Ok, I'm with you part of the way. And I agree you don't have to be penciled into a corner where you have to use my words. But, I submit to you that you CANNOT think (even to yourself) without assigning words... Even if you choose not to share them.
You have the right to your own opinion, but you don't have the right to your own facts:guns:
Anything can be a weapon and an object only becomes a weapon when it is wielded as an implement to do harm to another in offense or defense.
It's a tool, but only when it's wielded as an implement to perform a task to accomplish a non-combat goal like hunting.
It's sporting equipment when wielded as an implement used to participate in a recreational activity or event like sporting clays or bench rest shoots.
In the safe, it's just a firearm.
“There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” – Will Rogers
Weapons are designed to destroy. Not just people, what its projectile hits. A pick handle can be a weapon, but its primary purpose is to lend leverage to a tool head. A firearms primary purpose is to move a object at great speed, in a directed manner, to destroy something. Because you choose not to shoot a person does not mean that the firearm is not a weapon.
With all of the deer I have taken, I have destroyed what the bullet hit. I have never petted one to death with the barrel. Every paper target I have shot at and hit, where the bullet landed it was destroyed. If the paper target is not destroyed, why do they call what you use to recover the scoring rings, "repair centers". Every ground hog I have shot, where the bullet hit parts were destroyed. Sometimes in a spectacular fashion. Everything I have ever shot has had damage caused to it. Even if I missed, where ever the bullet landed, it caused damage.
To not recognize that they are weapons and play games with the language because you are scared of a word is just plain silly and dangerous. To dance around and pretend that they are not built to destroy goes against the basic saftey rules that everyone should know. The first thing I taught my kids is that a firearm is built to do damage. One rule of gun saftey. "Never point a firearm at anything you do not wish to destroy." I like Gunsite's better than the NRA rules because they are simply more direct and they leave no grey area. http://thefiringline.com/Misc/safetyrules.html
RULE II: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY
Conspicuously and continuously violated, especially with pistols, Rule II applies whether you are involved in range practice, daily carry, or examination. If the weapon is assembled and in someone's hands, it is capable of being discharged. A firearm holstered properly, lying on a table, or placed in a scabbard is of no danger to anyone. Only when handled is there a need for concern. This rule applies to fighting as well as to daily handling. If you are not willing to take a human life, do not cover a person with the muzzle. This rule also applies to your own person. Do not allow the muzzle to cover your extremities, e.g. using both hands to reholster the pistol. This practice is unsound, both procedurally and tactically. You may need a free hand for something important. Proper holster design should provide for one-handed holstering, so avoid holsters which collapse after withdrawing the pistol. (Note: It is dangerous to push the muzzle against the inside edge of the holster nearest the body to "open" it since this results in your pointing the pistol at your midsection.) Dry-practice in the home is a worthwhile habit and it will result in more deeply programmed reflexes. Most of the reflexes involved in the Modern Technique do not require that a shot be fired. Particular procedures for dry-firing in the home will be covered later. Let it suffice for now that you do not dry-fire using a "target" that you wish not to see destroyed. (Recall RULE I as well.)
Please not that no where in that statement does it say that it is only able to destroy if it is covering a person, it is ANYTHING.
Big Dan,
I did the NRA instructor thing (rifle, shotgun, and pistol) and was a MB counselor for the scouts. The NRA is about image and stress that they are not weapons now to not scare the public. Not that the weapons have changed, they are afraid of the word. The Scouts have dumbed down the Rifle MB to accomodate and done everything in their power less doing away with the MB to chickify the course and make it less useful for a Scout who will use the information for anything else but shooting at a scout approved range.
It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
I'm also a BSA instructor, and for the purposes of those times when I am instructing scouts, I refer to them as whatever they are,i.e., rifle, shotgun, handgun, revolver, pistol, etc. While I understand the reasons why the NRA prefers this, I personally see them as weapons, but it's not a big deal to me what they're called, so I don't take any extra precaution when considering my audience, with the aforementioned exception of scouts.
Knowledge is essential to living freely and fully; understanding gives knowledge purpose and strength; wisdom is combining the two and applying them appropriately in words and actions.
Replies
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, German writer and politician
Maybe. On the other hand, one who sees only black or white in a plain, or at best gray environment could be considered one-dimensional. Being human and possessed of free will, I don't feel so constrained.
As a Marine, was my rifle a "weapon"?.....You betch'a. No doubt about it.
For pretty much all other uses.....it's my decision. It's not a matter of semantics.
Mike
N454casull
It is hard to imagine my old VW Bug as a lethal weapon but it could be.
It is hard to imagine my Felxicut carving knife as a weapon but it could be.
It is hard to imagine my surgeons schapel as a weapon but it could be.
it is hard to imagine my tool box as a box of lethal weapons, but it could be.
It is hard to imagine my my chile as a weapon but my friends tell me it is.
If you want a stick to be a walking stick, it is a walking stick.
If you want a stick to be a spear, it is a spear.
If you want a stick to be a club, it is a club.
If you want a rifle to be a rifle, it is a rifle.
If you want a rifle to be a weapon, it is a weapon.
if I want to call my stick a walking stick, that does not mean I'm wrong cause you want to call it a spear or you are wrong because I want it to call it a walking stick.
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder.
Weapon now is weighed down with a lot of negative baggage. It's not Politically Correct to call a firearm a weapon unless it's specifically designed as a weapon, and then there are those who feel everything from a Ma Deuce to a BB gun are weapons because they have the ability to harm. I don't buy into either of these definitions because the reasons for this are not in my mind valid.
B.S. (no offense) aw, hell I don't care if you're offended or not... You know dang good and well whether you think of your guns as weapons or not. *Generally Speaking
Assigning words with values, like "weapons" or "non-weapons" does not interest me. It's a P C game I won't play. Like "harvesting" game instead of "hunting".
Anything can be a weapon and an object only becomes a weapon when it is wielded as an implement to do harm to another in offense or defense.
It's a tool, but only when it's wielded as an implement to perform a task to accomplish a non-combat goal like hunting.
It's sporting equipment when wielded as an implement used to participate in a recreational activity or event like sporting clays or bench rest shoots.
In the safe, it's just a firearm.
N454casull
Mike
N454casull
George Carlin
Well said:applause:
Weapons are designed to destroy. Not just people, what its projectile hits. A pick handle can be a weapon, but its primary purpose is to lend leverage to a tool head. A firearms primary purpose is to move a object at great speed, in a directed manner, to destroy something. Because you choose not to shoot a person does not mean that the firearm is not a weapon.
With all of the deer I have taken, I have destroyed what the bullet hit. I have never petted one to death with the barrel. Every paper target I have shot at and hit, where the bullet landed it was destroyed. If the paper target is not destroyed, why do they call what you use to recover the scoring rings, "repair centers". Every ground hog I have shot, where the bullet hit parts were destroyed. Sometimes in a spectacular fashion. Everything I have ever shot has had damage caused to it. Even if I missed, where ever the bullet landed, it caused damage.
To not recognize that they are weapons and play games with the language because you are scared of a word is just plain silly and dangerous. To dance around and pretend that they are not built to destroy goes against the basic saftey rules that everyone should know. The first thing I taught my kids is that a firearm is built to do damage. One rule of gun saftey. "Never point a firearm at anything you do not wish to destroy." I like Gunsite's better than the NRA rules because they are simply more direct and they leave no grey area. http://thefiringline.com/Misc/safetyrules.html Please not that no where in that statement does it say that it is only able to destroy if it is covering a person, it is ANYTHING.
Big Dan,
I did the NRA instructor thing (rifle, shotgun, and pistol) and was a MB counselor for the scouts. The NRA is about image and stress that they are not weapons now to not scare the public. Not that the weapons have changed, they are afraid of the word. The Scouts have dumbed down the Rifle MB to accomodate and done everything in their power less doing away with the MB to chickify the course and make it less useful for a Scout who will use the information for anything else but shooting at a scout approved range.