Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 11/30/12 08:50 PM, Tremulos wrote:

But that airplane was not DESIGNED to kill those people. It was designed to transport those people from one place to another, and each of those people paid money to get on that plane knowing full well the risks of flying. They all chose to take that flight. Obviously having trained pilots and crews on planes is extremely important, but you can't compare a plane to a gun just because both might have something to do with the deaths of people.

Yes you can. Regardless of what a gun is designed for, it is a PERSON that decides whether or not to shoot a target, or a person. Just as it is a person who decides whether a plane lands on a runway, or into a building.

Both planes and guns have potential to be incredibly deadly, and that's why you properly train and teach people of that potential. Just because something can potentially be dangerous, does not mean it should be banned.

Put a 5-year-old behind the wheel of a truck and I'll be surprised if he goes 20 feet without someone stopping him. If there are people around to be hurt, how did he get in the truck and start it in the first place? It would require so much more than thoughtlessness to allow a 5-year-old to kill someone with a truck. How does he even reach the gas pedal anyways?

Same way a 5 year old gets a hold of a gun I suppose.

At 11/30/12 08:50 PM, Tremulos wrote: Anyways, I'm done with this argument. If you can't see the essential differences between a weapon and a vehicle, you're just stuck in a defensive mindset.

The problem is the connotations you are applying to the term weapon, acting as if it is purely negative, and that deterrence, recreation, collecting, hunting, and target shooting are all illegitimate uses of something. Original design and intents change over time. As far as the comments about 17 shots killing 17 people requiring no skill, that only proves the massive amounts of ignorance being shown, and I do not mean that as an insult. Besides, anyone who can use wikipedia or knows a little about applied chemistry can make an ANFO, which is a LOT more deadly then firearms.

At 11/30/12 09:03 PM, RacistBassist wrote:

Original design and intents change over time.

That doesn't change that fact of reality that Guns are designed and engineered with the purpose of efficiently killing living biological entities. You can play with words all you want but guns are not toys they are designed to kill point blank and period that was the intended purpose and reason that the engineers that design guns had in mind unless it is one of them triathlon type sport guns but AK47 etc.. is a killing machine.

At 11/30/12 09:12 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 11/30/12 09:03 PM, RacistBassist wrote:

Original design and intents change over time.

That doesn't change that fact of reality that Guns are designed and engineered with the purpose of efficiently killing living biological entities. You can play with words all you want but guns are not toys they are designed to kill point blank and period that was the intended purpose and reason that the engineers that design guns had in mind unless it is one of them triathlon type sport guns but AK47 etc.. is a killing machine.

ak-47 this ak-47 that ak-47 do the thing.

blah blah ak-47 killing machine.

ak's changed to semi auto and intended for sporting... the intent has been changed on those models. When they build ak's and they don't build them as military hardware but as hunting rifles and target shooting rifles how are they still made for war as you are basically saying.

Wouldn't removing the main idea of modern military small arms (full auto fire) remove the idea that it is meant to be for killing people? Kalashnikovs made with the idea to be in war and kill/maim others are made to be full auto. The ones here in the u.s. aren't made as full auto.

At 11/30/12 10:37 PM, thegarbear14 wrote:

At 11/30/12 09:12 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 11/30/12 09:03 PM, RacistBassist wrote:

Original design and intents change over time.

That doesn't change that fact of reality that Guns are designed and engineered with the purpose of efficiently killing living biological entities. You can play with words all you want but guns are not toys they are designed to kill point blank and period that was the intended purpose and reason that the engineers that design guns had in mind unless it is one of them triathlon type sport guns but AK47 etc.. is a killing machine.

ak-47 this ak-47 that ak-47 do the thing.

blah blah ak-47 killing machine.

ak's changed to semi auto and intended for sporting...

Oh so going from full auto to semi renders the gun non lethal got it LOL.

the intent has been changed on those models. When they build ak's and they don't build them as military hardware but as hunting rifles and target shooting rifles how are they still made for war as you are basically saying.

What are you talking about ? AK47 is an Fully Automatic Assault Rifle employed by various Militarily's and murders around the world. Thats not to say that there are not some Gun nuts out there that like to collect and brandish the AK47 and shoot it at the shooting range.

Wouldn't removing the main idea of modern military small arms (full auto fire) remove the idea that it is meant to be for killing people? Kalashnikovs made with the idea to be in war and kill/maim others are made to be full auto. The ones here in the u.s. aren't made as full auto.

Semi auto is more accurate and save ammo. Where you under the impression that Semi Auto was any less lethal LOL.

leanlifter i have watched you argue the intent behind firearms and go through all this bullshit.

You're really just a troll if you're going to change your arguement from intent to lethality. Not that i didn't think you're a troll in the first place.

But my opinions are going to be bullshit anyway since soon you'll reveal to the world how i am a facist or some bs.

Also i own an ak and it does not have the ability to fire full auto.... the military versions fire full auto.

If you're arguing that we in the united states commonly own ak-47's and that should be illegal then you have no argument as without many steps and in many states it is illegal to own full automatic ak-47 pattern firearm or any full autos at all.

It takes lots of money and lots of paperwork to get a full auto ak-47. Most of the people who own fully automatic ak's don't live in places like ny, anywhere in new england, or california....which have denser populations than where it is possible to own such firearms with the proper paperwork and with the amount of money required (over upwards of $12k)

At 11/30/12 11:26 PM, thegarbear14 wrote: leanlifter i have watched you argue the intent behind firearms and go through all this bullshit.

Whats your point ? My standing is that firearms are designed for killing living entities but some people think they were built for there own personal amusement and collection.

You're really just a troll if you're going to change your arguement from intent to lethality.

So because I believe that guns are designed to Kill that makes me a troll ? It does not matter what ones intent is when they shoot a gun as the intended purpose of guns is to kill people and animals and practice makes perfect right.

Not that i didn't think you're a troll in the first place.
Seems like a personal issue which has no weight in proving guns are not designed for killing.

But my opinions are going to be bullshit anyway since soon you'll reveal to the world how i am a facist or some bs.

More personal BS.

Okay, the gun vs plane/car thing is ridiculous, so I'll clear that up now.

A gun is a tool. A rock, is a tool. Airplanes and Cars, are tools too.

Tools cannot do anything by themselves, neither can any other object which is inanimate.

However, the reason they are tools is because they have been constructed with an intent purpose in mind.

Take the rock, for example.

A rock is just a stone, but if sharpened and cut, can be turned into an arrow head.

Both the Rock and the arrow head are made of stone, so why was the arrow head made?
Because the purpose of the arrow head is to kill, and that is the reason it was invented; there was a need to increase the odds of killing, whether to hunt or defend, and so the stone became specialized. True, you can kill with a stone, but it is more effective as a hammer than as a killing item for, say, hunting. The arrowhead, on the other hand, is more effective for hunting than as a hammer. It was made with that purpose.

Just because something is made with a purpose however, does not mean it can't have other uses; that is why humans have survived; it is called creativity. That arrowhead could be attached to a stick and turned into a spear, and the spears could be used to make protective fences, and so on. However, the arrowhead will always be better for what it was made for - hunting - just like the spear will always be better at piercing than a protective fence (hence the reason barbed wire was invented).

Same with guns, cars, and airplanes.

Yes, and airplane can kill, but look at the practicality of it; once used as a "weapon", the user dies, not to mention that it costs millions to make, and finally that a missile, which is designed for the purpose of destroying, would be more effective at that task anyways. That is why airplanes are not commonly used to kill people.

Cars: The odds of killing many people with one car are low, and again, once used as a "weapon", can kill the user, and are also costly.

Guns: If you use it to kill, it will most likely do that. The user is left alive, and can keep killing, and its much more cost effective and efficient than many, many other items.
Hence, the purpose of a gun is to kill.
The purpose of airplanes and cars are to transport.

You equating that all airplanes/cars are weapons simply because they can kill is the same as me equating that all guns are hammers simply because I can use one to hammer in a nail in my bedroom.

Guns are killing tools, and tools were created to be used.

Its true you may not have the intention kill someone with a gun, but say you had your gun, and someone comes at you with a knife screaming "Ima KILL YOU!", would you;
A) Shoot him.
B) Get in a car and attempt to run him over on grass.
C) Get in an airplane (yes, you have an airplane in this scenario), warm up the engines, and crash into him?

At 12/1/12 02:26 PM, Revo357912 wrote: Okay, the gun vs plane/car thing is ridiculous, so I'll clear that up now.

Except it isn't. All three are incredibly dangerous things in the hands of the wrong person. In the hands of the right people, they are nothing to be feared.

At 12/1/12 06:35 PM, LemonCrush wrote:

At 12/1/12 02:26 PM, Revo357912 wrote: Okay, the gun vs plane/car thing is ridiculous, so I'll clear that up now.

Except it isn't. All three are incredibly dangerous things in the hands of the wrong person. In the hands of the right people, they are nothing to be feared.

Ah anything can be used as a weapon in the right hands the difference with the gun is that it is a highly efficient killing device in most anyone's hands.

At 12/1/12 07:09 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 12/1/12 06:35 PM, LemonCrush wrote:

At 12/1/12 02:26 PM, Revo357912 wrote: Okay, the gun vs plane/car thing is ridiculous, so I'll clear that up now.

Except it isn't. All three are incredibly dangerous things in the hands of the wrong person. In the hands of the right people, they are nothing to be feared.

Ah anything can be used as a weapon in the right hands the difference with the gun is that it is a highly efficient killing device in most anyone's hands.

And that difference is large enough to say that the gun vs plane/car thing IS ridiculous. Revo explained it well, now I think we should steer the discussion back towards his link in the OP and matters pertaining more specifically to it.

CAN I BE MOD NOW

At 12/1/12 07:21 PM, Tremulos wrote:

At 12/1/12 07:09 PM, leanlifter1 wrote:

At 12/1/12 06:35 PM, LemonCrush wrote:

At 12/1/12 02:26 PM, Revo357912 wrote: Okay, the gun vs plane/car thing is ridiculous, so I'll clear that up now.

Except it isn't. All three are incredibly dangerous things in the hands of the wrong person. In the hands of the right people, they are nothing to be feared.

Ah anything can be used as a weapon in the right hands the difference with the gun is that it is a highly efficient killing device in most anyone's hands.

And that difference is large enough to say that the gun vs plane/car thing IS ridiculous. Revo explained it well, now I think we should steer the discussion back towards his link in the OP and matters pertaining more specifically to it.

Get shot and you will most likely die if not instantly if you do not get to a hospital I got hit by a car going 60Km/h and walked away from it. A gun is a highly specialized killing device a car or airplane is not case closed.

At 12/1/12 07:21 PM, Tremulos wrote: And that difference is large enough to say that the gun vs plane/car thing IS ridiculous. Revo explained it well, now I think we should steer the discussion back towards his link in the OP and matters pertaining more specifically to it.

CAN I BE MOD NOW

Also there's a gun control thread, should probably use that in future.