Like I was going to say: I think that my bow could really hurt someone, and to let my mother let us practice archery we had to prove ourselves very responsible and not treat it as a toy. A weapon is a weapon, and to express a distaste for learning to use one to cast aspersions on the other. Guns are more effective and more widely used in today's world, but bows and swords are still tools for putting holes in things, at the core of it.
Also: how do you feel about hunting rifles? Even Iceland and a lot of the Nordic countries allow civilians to have hunting licenses, although they are anti-handgun. What if I had a skeet shooting rifle? Would you not come over then?
Also equating bow sports with gun sports is a really poor and reckless comparison. How many accidental and purposeful bow deaths are there a year compared with how many caused by guns?
Have you seen hunting arrows??? Those things are major bad news!
Just a heads up, I will never sleep in a house that has a gun in it, so if you own the guns you utilize, I guess we won't be staying over.
What if I break them down and lock them up in a safe?
I would have loved for you to have been there when my friend got in my car and said, "I'm gonna put my Glock in the pouch behind your seat, cool?"
There are also surprisingly large numbers of knife and crossbow attacks in the UK, where guns are harder to come by.
In fact, most violent crimes are not committed with guns, And most of those that are fall under the categories of "Some rich nutter out in the country commits a crime of passion and grabbed the most efficient weapon to hand - his double barrel hunting shotgun - to kill his wife/lover/whatever" and Organized crime, because by the time you get to the level of criminal who can afford and has the connections to acquire illegal weaponry, that's what you're left with. And of course, with no guns, people of that sort of disposition turn to the cheapest, nearest, most available weapon - knives - and merrily proceed to stab the shit out of each other.
What if I break them down and lock them up in a safe?
A perfectly reasonable solution, in my view. I can understand about if it's a whole firearm, but when reduced to component parts, this is a good compromise. To maintain the same attitude at that point is being entirely and pointlessly unreasonable.
So why will you not sleep in a house with a gun in it? Do you have a phobia? I used to be scared of cleaning chemicals like Bleach and Denatured alcohol and would stay really far away from them in the garage. My mom finally reassured me that they could not hurt me unless I took action and interacted with them. It's a similar thing. A gun is an inanimate object, that would be put away, preferably in a locked box. Anyone wanting to do you harm in your sleep would have to purposefully go and get the gun and use it. It's not going to move and seek you out on it's own.
Anyone wanting to do you harm in your sleep would have to purposefully go and get the gun and use it. It's not going to move and seek you out on it's own.
Yeah. And if you're asleep, especially in REM sleep, and a person wants to kill you, you're pretty much fucked whether they use a gun to do it or not. A heavy pipe would do just as well.
Pillows can be used to kill people! Fire can be used to kill people! Lamps can be...well, you get the idea. We aren't going to shoot you with the flintlock pistol, anyhow, so keep coming to our house.
Pillows can be used to kill people! Fire can be used to kill people! Lamps can be...well, you get the idea. We aren't going to shoot you with the flintlock pistol, anyhow, so keep coming to our house.
All of those have a purpose other than killing or harming people. Can the same be said of a gun? Many tools and items we come in contact with on a daily basis could kill us or be used as a weapon, but their effectiveness as a weapon is usually less than that of a gun; moreover, those items have other uses and purposes thus rendering them necessary.
As for arrows being "bad ass" look at the number of deaths and practicalities of use, not the "potential damage". As for Rym pointing out that other countries behave differently, I do not disagree. Unfortunately, Americans do not. I would also point out that many other nations have gun restrictions and also have fewer issues with guns.
If you make your gun active, then I won't stay the night and I will never have my child over. Sorry, guys, my concern is not that you will purposefully shoot me, but that an accident or an issue with an intruder will happen. My issue is not a phobia, it is a principal. Guns have a singular purpose - to injur or kill. If you have one, I can only assume you intend to use it for these purposes.
If you make your gun active I am out of the house. Sorry, guys, my concern is not that you will purposefully shoot me, but that an accident or an issue with an intruder will happen. My issue is not a phobia, it is a principal. Guns have a singular purpose - to injur or kill. If you have one, I can only assume you intend to use it for these purposes.
What about a shotgun I purchase solely for use in clay shooting sports?
If you make your gun active I am out of the house. Sorry, guys, my concern is not that you will purposefully shoot me, but that an accident or an issue with an intruder will happen. My issue is not a phobia, it is a principal. Guns have a singular purpose - to injur or kill. If you have one, I can only assume you intend to use it for these purposes.
What about a shotgun I purchase solely for use in clay shooting sports?
That is a game with a deadly weapon used to train in being more deadly. You aren't easing my concerns here.
That is a game with a deadly weapon used to train in being more deadly.
So is Kung Fu. Nevermind Kendo, Fencing, Biathalon, Hokuto no Ken, The Javelin Throw, and so forth. Also Paintball, Nerf Wars, Laser Tag, and the like. How about paper wargames? They train military strategists to be better military strategists. How is that any different?
That is a game with a deadly weapon used to train in being more deadly.
So is Kung Fu. Nevermind Kendo, Fencing, Biathalon, Hokuto no Ken, The Javelin Throw, and so forth.
That really is besides the point. All of these are not individual weapons that even an untrained child can utilize and do major harm or kill someone at a reasonable distance. Your point does not address the gun issue at all. Again I address the number of deaths and major injuries caused by guns contrasted with your examples. I am sorry, but they are simply not in the same class.
I echo Rym. In martial arts, the key word is martial. These are activities traditionally used to make people more deadly in warfare. Do I care if I am more deadly in warfare? Not especially. I hope to never do warfare. I do care that I train my body to respond to my mind, that I have fast reflexes, and that I become a focused and highly physically skilled person. So many traditional sports developed from the practical necessity to fight. Does that mean we should not allow them?
edit: And to all of your things I answer KnifeKnifeKnife. A kid could hurt themselves on a knife, slip and cut themselves open really badly! Also, my bow can hurt people at a distance and tell me what on earth a bow or sai are used for other than killing weapons? If I train my eye to fire a projectile with a string, how is it different than if I train it with a projectile with a puff of powder? Besides, a burglar would either have his own gun or he wouldn't be able to get the pistol. And for crying out loud, what reasonable person leaves a gun when a child would get hold of it? It's not like we would strew them across the floor! Rational people do not just wave guns around, Kate.
All of those have a purpose other than killing or harming people.
A gun's only purpose is not killing or harming other people. Clay pigeon shooting and hunting are examples of perfectly legitimate reasons for gun ownership.
Here's a good tool for doing some research: WISQARS, the CDC database of injury-related data Check out the Fatal Injury Reports for 1999 forward. You can set many different search criteria and get whatever data you want.
There has been a significant decrease in the number of accidental firearm-related fatalities since 1999, despite the fact that gun ownership has increased in the US during that time.
All of these are not individual weapons that even an untrained child can utilize and do major harm or kill someone at a reasonable distance. Your point does not address the gun issue at all.
Crossbow meets those criteria trivially. Are you against those? Is your only argument that guns are easy to use? If that's the case, we should ban shotguns and legalize handguns: it's wicked hard to hit shit with a handgun at any distance.
All of these are not individual weapons that even an untrained child can utilize and do major harm or kill someone at a reasonable distance. Your point does not address the gun issue at all.
Crossbow meets those criteria trivially. Are you against those? Is your only argument that guns are easy to use? If that's the case, we should ban shotguns and legalize handguns: it's wicked hard to hit shit with a handgun at any distance.
Except that crossbows are much harder to load, harder to conceal, not as widely available, etc. Again, I am addressing guns. If you want to bring up statistics of gun deaths, feel free, but kung fu and crossbows are irrelevant to the discussion. And, no, snarky-pants, that wasn't my entire argument. I have discussed this multiple times and thus only said "Ugh." earlier to avoid hashing this out again.
As for arrows being "bad ass" look at the number of deaths and practicalities of use, not the "potential damage".
"Bad news." So the fact that hunting arrows have spring loaded razor blades the dig themselves into their target and then lodge it in there so it can't be removed without causing massive tissue damage and bleeding doesn't matter. Because not many people, but thousands of deer, are killed with them they're not dangerous. You also gloss over the massively greater number of automobile related deaths because they are useful and not exactly intended to be killing people.
If you make your gun active, then I won't stay the night and I will never have my child over. Sorry, guys, my concern is not that you will purposefully shoot me, but that an accident or an issue with an intruder will happen. My issue is not a phobia, it is a principal. Guns have a singular purpose - to injur or kill. If you have one, I can only assume you intend to use it for these purposes.
Did you know the number of unintentional firearm deaths in 2006 was 642? Well behind the number of fire related deaths that was at 2,704 for the same year. Or the number of pedestrian traffic deaths at 6,162.
@ Gedavids, I am not glossing over car deaths. Obviously cars are dangerous, but their sole use isn't weaponry. Also, I am not only discussing accidental firearm deaths. I am discussing all gun violence and death.
As I said, I am not afraid of guns. They are effective weapons that lead to a number of deaths every year. Woudl getting rid of guns, particularly automatic and semi-automatics end crime, violence and accidental death? Certainly not. That isn't the argument I am making. Gun control isn't a silver bullet. Effective gun control would only limit death and injury caused by guns.
There are other games one could play. A person's desire for fun with a gun, in my view, does not outweigh a single life lost to a legally owned gun.
The thing is, we may be discussing things other than guns, but we bring this up because you have yet to answer why you treat guns like a different category. Prove to me it is really different. It's not. This thinking is inconsistent and that is why we argue with it.
If you want to bring up statistics of gun deaths, feel free, but kung fu and crossbows are irrelevant to the discussion.
Um, no they're not. If you're singling out guns as being unsafe, we need to compare the statistics between guns and other potential sources of harm that are not regulated as tightly.
Cars kill more people than guns, but we still have them. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US, but McDonald's is allowed to continue operating. Unintentional firearm deaths are exaggerated.
EDIT: Intentional firearm violence has ALSO decreased dramatically over the past decade despite an increase in gun ownership. So how is gun ownership unsafe again?
The thing is, we may be discussing things other than guns, but we bring this up because you have yet to answer why you treat guns like a different category. Prove to me it is really different. It's not. This thinking is inconsistent and that is why we argue with it.
Guns are more effective, they can kill at a greater distance and there are more gun deaths than crossbow deaths. Of course they are different.
@ Gedavids, I am not glossing over car deaths. Obviously cars are dangerous, but their sole use isn't weaponry.
So the lives of 45,000 people a year killed because of motor vehicles are somehow less important than the 30,000 killed a year by firearms.
I never said that, so stop putting words in my mouth. You are discussing an unrelated issue. Guns do not give mobility to the world. Certainly cars, roads, and drivers should be as safe as is possible.
Also, I am not only discussing accidental firearm deaths. I am discussing all gun violence and death.
Did you know that in 2006, there were 4,000 more firearm suicides than homicides? About 16,000 to 12,000.
How is that an argument FOR guns?
This thinking is inconsistent and that is why we argue with it.
Inconsistent with what? The numbers and issues involved are unique. If you can't see that, then you obviously can't tell the difference between a martial artist and a gun.
Did you know more people fall to death than are killed in firearm homicides? 21,647 to 12,791.
Inconsistent with what? The numbers and issues involved are unique. If you can't see that, then you obviously can't tell the difference between a martial artist and a gun.
But guns kill less people than ladders, why can't you see that?
I never said that, so stop putting words in my mouth. You are discussing an unrelated issue. Guns do not give mobility to the world. Certainly cars, roads, and drivers should be as safe as is possible.
But you hate guns because they kill people, and cars kill more people, therefore hating cars more seems logical to me.
Inconsistent with what? The numbers and issues involved are unique. If you can't see that, then you obviously can't tell the difference between a martial artist and a gun.
But guns kill less people than ladders, why can't you see that?
I do see that. It still doesn't negate those killed by guns. Ladders are necessary. Guns aren't.
I also like to marvel at the engineering that goes into firearms. I'm a fan of intricate and well-designed technology. Antique firearms are also beautiful and decorative, and have a lot of history in them.
An acquaintance who was extremely anti-gun once asked me what I, as someone with a future in engineering, thought the most well-designed and incredible invention in human history was. I looked at him straight-faced, and responded, "Why, the AK-47, of course." The result was priceless.
A gun's only purpose is not killing or harming other people. Clay pigeon shooting and hunting are examples of perfectly legitimate reasons for gun ownership.
This.
If you make your gun active I am out of the house. Sorry, guys, my concern is not that you will purposefully shoot me, but that an accident or an issue with an intruder will happen. My issue is not a phobia, it is a principal. Guns have a singular purpose - to injur or kill. If you have one, I can only assume you intend to use it for these purposes.
What about a shotgun I purchase solely for use in clay shooting sports?
That is a game with a deadly weapon used to train in being more deadly. You aren't easing my concerns here.
Not so much. If you don't hunt, then it's just a hand-eye coordination game over an extremely long range.
All of these are not individual weapons that even an untrained child can utilize and do major harm or kill someone at a reasonable distance.
A chef's knife would easily maim someone if the untrained child had any interest.
If you make your gun active, then I won't stay the night and I will never have my child over.
Well, they *could* just field strip the weapon before your visit and remove the spring for your stay. Problem solved.
Comments
Also: how do you feel about hunting rifles? Even Iceland and a lot of the Nordic countries allow civilians to have hunting licenses, although they are anti-handgun. What if I had a skeet shooting rifle? Would you not come over then?
I would have loved for you to have been there when my friend got in my car and said, "I'm gonna put my Glock in the pouch behind your seat, cool?"
And of course, with no guns, people of that sort of disposition turn to the cheapest, nearest, most available weapon - knives - and merrily proceed to stab the shit out of each other. A perfectly reasonable solution, in my view. I can understand about if it's a whole firearm, but when reduced to component parts, this is a good compromise. To maintain the same attitude at that point is being entirely and pointlessly unreasonable.
As for arrows being "bad ass" look at the number of deaths and practicalities of use, not the "potential damage".
As for Rym pointing out that other countries behave differently, I do not disagree. Unfortunately, Americans do not. I would also point out that many other nations have gun restrictions and also have fewer issues with guns.
If you make your gun active, then I won't stay the night and I will never have my child over. Sorry, guys, my concern is not that you will purposefully shoot me, but that an accident or an issue with an intruder will happen. My issue is not a phobia, it is a principal. Guns have a singular purpose - to injur or kill. If you have one, I can only assume you intend to use it for these purposes.
Again I address the number of deaths and major injuries caused by guns contrasted with your examples. I am sorry, but they are simply not in the same class.
edit: And to all of your things I answer KnifeKnifeKnife. A kid could hurt themselves on a knife, slip and cut themselves open really badly!
Also, my bow can hurt people at a distance and tell me what on earth a bow or sai are used for other than killing weapons? If I train my eye to fire a projectile with a string, how is it different than if I train it with a projectile with a puff of powder?
Besides, a burglar would either have his own gun or he wouldn't be able to get the pistol.
And for crying out loud, what reasonable person leaves a gun when a child would get hold of it? It's not like we would strew them across the floor! Rational people do not just wave guns around, Kate.
Here's a good tool for doing some research: WISQARS, the CDC database of injury-related data
Check out the Fatal Injury Reports for 1999 forward. You can set many different search criteria and get whatever data you want.
There has been a significant decrease in the number of accidental firearm-related fatalities since 1999, despite the fact that gun ownership has increased in the US during that time.
And, no, snarky-pants, that wasn't my entire argument. I have discussed this multiple times and thus only said "Ugh." earlier to avoid hashing this out again.
I think your fears might be a little unfounded.
Also, I am not only discussing accidental firearm deaths. I am discussing all gun violence and death.
As I said, I am not afraid of guns. They are effective weapons that lead to a number of deaths every year. Woudl getting rid of guns, particularly automatic and semi-automatics end crime, violence and accidental death? Certainly not. That isn't the argument I am making. Gun control isn't a silver bullet. Effective gun control would only limit death and injury caused by guns.
There are other games one could play. A person's desire for fun with a gun, in my view, does not outweigh a single life lost to a legally owned gun.
Cars kill more people than guns, but we still have them. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US, but McDonald's is allowed to continue operating. Unintentional firearm deaths are exaggerated.
EDIT: Intentional firearm violence has ALSO decreased dramatically over the past decade despite an increase in gun ownership. So how is gun ownership unsafe again?
I'll repeat the link for anyone who missed it:
WISQARS Injury Mortality Report Request Form for 1999 - 2006
Have fun.