How is a gun a 'tool'?

[Violet]

Edit: this is all under a *very liberal* understanding of the word 'tool' in order to respond to something that would otherwise be a strawman.

(which is vague and can apply to pretty much anything)

Nobody ever uses the term 'tool' to describe cars, or skyscrapers, or candy, or cigarettes, or books, or paintings or cat gifs, yet they all fit that description, too.

Cars are tools, candy is food and doesn't really fit with the intention of 'tool' (device, assists with the completion of X task) but you might use it as a tool to demonstrate your displeasure with someone (by throwing it at them, bonus points if it was a lollipop). Skyscrapers also wouldn't normally be considered tools, unless say you're flying an airplane into one to make a statement/kill peeps, they are much better defined as 'structures' (which are also manufactured, but do not provide anything more than shelter. Sure, you could loosely say it's a tool for assisting in the escapement of the elements, but it's sketchy and people often won't see it as a tool).

Cigarettes are a tool if your goal is to burn someone with them, or much more likely: get nicotine into your system... right now. Books are often written as tools, but used without a goal and therefore are generally not (if you use one to bludgeon someone on the other hand: tool). Paintings are not disimilar from books, but with far less bludgeoning power (unless book is paperback). Cat gifs are tools if there was a goal in using them.

The whole point of calling a gun a 'tool' is to make it sound like it has uses other than killing and maiming, hence why the pro-gun people compare guns to wrenches, hammers and so forth. You know, objects which everyone considers 'tools' without consulting the dictionary for extra meanings.

It is deliberate sidestepping.

Killing and maiming are both very valid concerns for humankind, especially where hunting and war are concerned. Hammers and wrenches are infact used to bludgeon people, but it's not their primary role. Slaying/maiming is the primary role of firearms.

You shouldn't need to consult a dictionary if you've already a strong grasp of how people use words. Unless you're searching for archaic/out of use words or definitions, that is. But yes, as some 'pro-gun' people use the argument... the argument was a tool to distract/justify their position to themselves. Very few people argue that guns are designed without purpose.

Can it be used? If yes, it has potential to be a tool the moment a goal is associated with that usage.

---

Lol didn't know it was possible to be offended by a mentally handicapped redneck. Good one.

It can happen if say... they spit on you

[Rev. Rye]

Well, according to this video (starting at 2:31), you can go out and hammer nails with a .38 all day, come back and it'll still shoot dead center on target every time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dBn3fW1ijU

Maybe that's what they're talking about.

[Tiberius]

I don't think I've ever heard a pro-gun person compare a gun to a hammer or a socket wrench. I think that comparison exists only in your mind.

Brilliant how the post straight after yours completely contradicts this.

Guessing you don't read any of A theist's posts then?

Wow.

So I'm supposed to have the ability to predict the future now? Nice use of logic there.

In any case, a nail gun is not the kind of gun we're talking about here. If we were, then Ryantology's initial complaint is even more absurd, given that nail guns are one of the things he would consider to be a "tool", since they can be used in both repair and construction.

[Napoléon]

Wow.

So I'm supposed to have the ability to predict the future now? Nice use of logic there.

You didn't take my post into context, forgetting to address the second sentence. I'm guessing you don't read any of his posts afterall, as he's posted the same thing before. Which is what I pointed out, guess it just went over your head.

In any case, a nail gun is not the kind of gun we're talking about here. If we were, then Ryantology's initial complaint is even more absurd, given that nail guns are one of the things he would consider to be a "tool", since they can be used in both repair and construction.

I think you're being pretty facetious. My understanding of Ryantology's OP was that he's pointing out the trivialisation that occurs when people compare firearms with other tools.

I think a comparison between the gun A Theist posted, and normal power tools, is a perfect example of this.

The point isn't really about what you define as a tool. The point is describing a gun as though it's on the same level as a drill is incredibly misleading.

[Violet]

OMG, Tiberious! What happened to your name!? It's not red anymore!

[Tiberius]

You didn't take my post into context, forgetting to address the second sentence. I'm guessing you don't read any of his posts afterall, as he's posted the same thing before. Which is what I pointed out, guess it just went over your head.

The context was established (in my view) in the sentence before, where you stated that his post completely contradicted mine. To then go on and accuse me of not reading his posts came across pretty clear to me.

If you didn't mean that, then you weren't exactly very clear about it, and if A Theist has described guns in the same way as hand tools before, I can honestly say I've never seen it. He posts a lot here; I don't claim to read all posts in all threads.

I think you're being pretty facetious. My understanding of Ryantology's OP was that he's pointing out the trivialisation that occurs when people compare firearms with other tools.

I think a comparison between the gun A Theist posted, and normal power tools, is a perfect example of this.

The point isn't really about what you define as a tool. The point is describing a gun as though it's on the same level as a drill is incredibly misleading.

Show me an actual example of someone comparing a firearm with other tools and I'll gladly evaluate it. However, it is not true that most pro-gun people do this, and if the occasional nut does it, it really doesn't change my opinion of guns anyway.

Again, I don't think A Theist's example is what Ryantology was talking about. There are some quite clear distinctions between actual guns, and nail guns (even if they are shaped like assault rifles). Guns are designed to kill; nail guns are designed for construction. Guns are designed to take bullets; nail guns are designed to take nails. Bullets are shaped to fly through the air pretty smoothly, which is why they are accurate and make good ammunition. Nails on the other hand, are not. It wouldn't surprise me if the nail gun A Theist pointed to was highly inaccurate at a distance. It looks more like a gimmick than anything else.

[Violet]

The point isn't really about what you define as a tool. The point is describing a gun as though it's on the same level as a drill is incredibly misleading.

A drill and a gun are on the same level of 'toolness'.

They are just designed for different things. And yes, it would be a mistake to consider them the 'same type' of tool. But they are both equally tools nonetheless

[A Theist]

Napoléon Wrote:

I think a comparison between the gun A Theist posted, and normal power tools, is a perfect example of this.

Oh lighten up, kid.....it was a joke....don't be such an overly sensitive little puss.

The point isn't really about what you define as a tool. The point is describing a gun as though it's on the same level as a drill is incredibly misleading.

...and where is anyone actually comparing a gun to a drill or to any other kind of power tools or hand tools used in construction?

[Napoléon]

The context was established (in my view) in the sentence before, where you stated that his post completely contradicted mine.

I guess the exact phrasing was wrong in my post, what I should of said was it rendered your point null considering he just posted exactly what you reckoned you'd never seen before.

To then go on and accuse me of not reading his posts came across pretty clear to me.

Well, considering he's posted the same thing before, you did miss it.

If you didn't mean that, then you weren't exactly very clear about it

I thought it was pretty clear provided you took into context the entirety of my post

and if A Theist has described guns in the same way as hand tools before, I can honestly say I've never seen it. He posts a lot here; I don't claim to read all posts in all threads.

So why is it then good logic to suggest that Ryantology was making an invalid claim and that, what was it again... "I think that comparison exists only in your mind."

Show me an actual example of someone comparing a firearm with other tools and I'll gladly evaluate it.

If you're going to be pedantic enough to miss the one in this thread then there's really no point discussing it.

However, it is not true that most pro-gun people do this, and if the occasional nut does it, it really doesn't change my opinion of guns anyway.

I think it's just as fair to say that some do. And whether it changes your opinion or not is irrelevant.

Again, I don't think A Theist's example is what Ryantology was talking about. There are some quite clear distinctions between actual guns, and nail guns (even if they are shaped like assault rifles). Guns are designed to kill; nail guns are designed for construction. Guns are designed to take bullets; nail guns are designed to take nails. Bullets are shaped to fly through the air pretty smoothly, which is why they are accurate and make good ammunition. Nails on the other hand, are not. It wouldn't surprise me if the nail gun A Theist pointed to was highly inaccurate at a distance. It looks more like a gimmick than anything else.

To me this is just completely missing the point. As I've said, the problem is not with how you define guns, but the attempt to mislead and trivialise what they can do.

---

But they are both equally tools nonetheless

I've not personally disputed that being the case.

But I think the OP is onto a point that people use the term 'tool' with guns in an attempt to put them on the same level as other kinds of tools.

[A Theist]

Show me an actual example of someone comparing a firearm with other tools and I'll gladly evaluate it.

If you're going to be pedantic enough to miss the one in this thread then there's really no point discussing it.

Nobody in this thread is actually comparing a firearm to any kind of tools like hammers, saws, drills, wrenches, prybars, etc. and etc! That's just an argument you're trying to fabricate....the picture I posted earlier was meant to be a joke....there's no such tool as an AR-15 nail rifle...it doesn't exist....it's not real...it's a gimmick, a fake!...It was not intended to be taken as a comparison to other tools....although, there are actual nail guns...but they look nothing like an assault rifle....