Nobody worships guns like America does

[Greg White]

This is one case where you might actually be able to name someone who was primaried over it. Which is still one out of seven examples. And even then, there hasn't been the same kind of radicalised response as for guns.

And finally, I'll just leave you with this, though it is from a comedian:

You seem to forget the main reason gun control is the only one that comes up in congressional politics: it's the only one Congress can effect in any major way. Almost everything else is handled by the Judicial branch through court rulings, well outside of the influence of most people.

Also, no, no one has been trying to impede the First Amendment. Threats against people, along with slander, libel, and fraud(see the Stolen Valor Act) have been illegal since long before the US existed.

 

[shootthebandit]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

As anti-gun as I am I can say that the one thing guns and cars have in common is that a lot of people arent properly trained or background checked for either. In the UK our test is probably one of the strictest (except scandanavia) and there are still a lot of people on the road who cant drive properly. The amount of old people who drive with poor eyesight and/or relflexs go completely unnoticed and remain driving.

From what I gather getting a gun in the US is just a criminal record check and a day or two training (correct me if im wrong)

 

[AntiChri5]

Yeah, ignorance and stupidity are universal. They ruin pretty much everything.

 

[yamy]

Yes, I know, guns don't kill people. When's the last time you heard of a crazed man with a machete massacre?

You would be surprised, I believe it's happened twice in Asia in the past 5 or so years.

I would love to go to America and see the touristy stuff, grand canyon, white house, all those monuments, times square ... weirdly, that building that always seems to be in spiderman (The Flatiron Building?). If America can do one thing it's landmarks! But I would NEVER go to America with it's current gun laws!

I know, the vast, vast majority of Americans are probably the nicest people you will ever meet but if 1% of Americans are crazy, that means 3,170,000 nut jobs are allowed to carry guns!

Personally, I think owning a snub nose revolver would be over kill (unless you live in certain locations, like a bear is a common sight) but a shotgun to defend yourself with? If you need a shotgun for self defense, try being less of a dick! Tazer, pepper spray or some self defense classes is a form of self defense, a gun is an offensive weapon.

Yeah, weapon! It's designed to kill and nothing else, yeah, you can use it for sport but come on ... the inventor wasn't like "this will be great for fucking up paper!" or "I wish I could shoot clay out the air" it was designed to supersede the bow and arrow, to be a more accurate and deadly way to kill somebody at range.

I think Americans get a bit scary around guns when the issue of restrictions comes up, like if somebody says "what do you think about limiting the capacity of rounds in magazine (lets not get into the whole technical jargon)?" and all the gun toting 'muricans would shout "SECOND AMENDMENT! SECOND AMENDMENT! SECOND AMENDMENT! LALA, CAN'T HEAR YOU OVER MY SECOND AMENDMENT!" ... take it down a notch guy!

Are you seriously telling me that in the span of 5 years there had only ever been 2 knives attacks in the entirety of the Asian continent??

Off the top of my head I can think of 3 and that's just in Japan.

 

[AgedGrunt]

More to the point, I agree with you. I understand someone's right to own a gun, whether that be for hunting or self defense, but the way a lot of Americans view firearms borders on fetishistic. I really just don't get it.

You navigate the Internet where groups of people view just about anything with literal fetish interests. Then there are the fandoms on and offline, with conventions and expos by them, for them throughout the year. I could spend pages describing the absolute obsession of geeks, nerds and hopelessly lost fanatics that build their homes around their favorite fiction, cosplay, write fanfic (esp. erotic) and wear the swag and talk about it everywhere.

As long as we're writing off gun enthusiasts (as if a firearm hobby means there's something wrong with you), car people really aren't all that different, either. They buy exotic, powerful machines, and many modify their cars with abandon, souping them up and making them loud, flashy and will frequently (illegally) race on the street.

Is all of this more bizarre "fetishistic" behavior you can't understand, or we are just supposed to be morally outraged because we can't see any other purpose for owning firearms than murdering living beings? I just want to know where the distinction lies in this oft seen derogatory opinion about gun hobbyists. Why is this illegitimate?

Edit, for inclusion:

/snip

This is roughly what I expected, more of this "existing safe behavior being misappropriated". In other words, that there gun was meant for killin', not havin' fun. So anything involving a gun (whether it's safe, fun, etc.) is predicated on the original purpose of violence.

It's basically bulletproof prejudice against something people don't understand rather than using common sense to know the difference between a good and bad person (it doesn't matter, because them guns are bad, so it's always bad).

 

[RiseUp]

More to the point, I agree with you. I understand someone's right to own a gun, whether that be for hunting or self defense, but the way a lot of Americans view firearms borders on fetishistic. I really just don't get it.

You navigate the Internet where groups of people view just about anything with literal fetish interests. Then there are the fandoms on and offline, with conventions and expos by them, for them throughout the year. I could spend pages describing the absolute obsession of geeks, nerds and hopelessly lost fanatics that build their homes around their favorite fiction, cosplay, write fanfic (esp. erotic) and wear the swag and talk about it everywhere.

As long as we're writing off gun enthusiasts (as if a firearm hobby means there's something wrong with you), car people really aren't all that different, either. They buy exotic, powerful machines, and many modify their cars with abandon, souping them up and making them loud, flashy and will frequently (illegally) race on the street.

Is all of this more bizarre "fetishistic" behavior you can't understand, or we are just supposed to be morally outraged because we can't see any other purpose for owning firearms than murdering living beings? I just want to know where the distinction lies in this oft seen derogatory opinion about gun hobbyists. Why is this illegitimate?

I get some of the internet's weirder obsessions, because a lot of them are rooted in fandom, artistic works (even if they're not particularly great ones) that people enjoy or relate to. I just don't understand the psychology of gun culture, or car culture for that matter, because they place a lot of value on things that are basically just dangerous tools, means to an end, that can't be used for their originally intended purpose unless one plans on breaking the law (an automatic weapon, or a car with a ridiculous top speed, for example). I also don't understand why gun culture is so widespread in the United States when compared to the rest of the world. I'm not suggesting that there's anything inherently wrong with being a gun enthusiast, I just don't understand it. Sorry, I should have explained myself better the first time.

 

[Ryotknife]

More to the point, I agree with you. I understand someone's right to own a gun, whether that be for hunting or self defense, but the way a lot of Americans view firearms borders on fetishistic. I really just don't get it.

You navigate the Internet where groups of people view just about anything with literal fetish interests. Then there are the fandoms on and offline, with conventions and expos by them, for them throughout the year. I could spend pages describing the absolute obsession of geeks, nerds and hopelessly lost fanatics that build their homes around their favorite fiction, cosplay, write fanfic (esp. erotic) and wear the swag and talk about it everywhere.

As long as we're writing off gun enthusiasts (as if a firearm hobby means there's something wrong with you), car people really aren't all that different, either. They buy exotic, powerful machines, and many modify their cars with abandon, souping them up and making them loud, flashy and will frequently (illegally) race on the street.

Is all of this more bizarre "fetishistic" behavior you can't understand, or we are just supposed to be morally outraged because we can't see any other purpose for owning firearms than murdering living beings? I just want to know where the distinction lies in this oft seen derogatory opinion about gun hobbyists. Why is this illegitimate?

I get some of the internet's weirder obsessions, because a lot of them are rooted in fandom, artistic works (even if they're not particularly great ones) that people enjoy or relate to. I just don't understand the psychology of gun culture, or car culture for that matter, because they place a lot of value on things that are basically just dangerous tools, means to an end, that can't be used for their originally intended purpose unless one plans on breaking the law (an automatic weapon, or a car with a ridiculous top speed, for example). I also don't understand why gun culture is so widespread in the United States when compared to the rest of the world. I'm not suggesting that there's anything inherently wrong with being a gun enthusiast, I just don't understand it. Sorry, I should have explained myself better the first time.

because we were a pioneer/colonial nation? We had to build our civilization from scratch (with outside help of course). As such for a very long time people had to be self sufficient because we were still building a government (let alone building the infrastructure needed for a government to be useful). So that is why it existed in the first place.

Also, we really don't HAVE a gun culture anymore (at least compared to what it used to be). Gun ownership has dropped by half in just a few generations. Now guns are merely a means to an end, rather than a symbol.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Now, I concede that in some situations, a small handgun is the best option for self-defense, maybe with a laser sight if you don't trust your accuracy. But for the love of god, why would you need an assault rifle? Or a shotgun? Or multiple quantities of each one? Have you pissed off any Terminators lately and need to be absolutely sure you're safe?

1. Shotguns are big, loud, and instantly intimidating. The cycling of a shell is enough to make a lot of crooks give up, and it packs a large punch to stop anyone who is to dumb/drunk/high to attack anyway. A pistol round might not stop a man, a load of buckshot almost certainly will.

2. While it is technically legal to own an "assault rifle" in the US, it is really, REALLY difficult to do so. Any fully automatic weapon that wasn't part of the civilian market before 1984 is illegal, barring certain exceptions. Even if you do want to shell out over 10 grand on the more common legal automatics, it still requires a lot of paper work with the FDA. NOt a single legally obtained private fully automatic weapon has been used in a crime since the thirties. What your thinking of us the "military style" rifles, such as civilian AR-15's. They are all semi-automatic, can't be converted to fully automatic without breaking a LOT of laws and most likely breaking the gun. They only look like military weapons, it's more of a personal preference to get a gun with the black coating over the same weapon mechanically with a wooden stock.

As for high capacity magazines, they are useful if you are ever unfortunate enough to find your self being attacked by multiple people. It is best not having to worrying about how many bullets are left.

Most crimes are committed with handguns anyway. Military style rifles make up only a TINY percentage of all gun crimes in the US.

As a side note, unlike what the movies have shown, automatic weapons are not death hoses that can kill without aiming. Most will run dry if you hold down the trigger for even 10 second. The military doesn't even use fully automatic mode for anything but covering fire.

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

The original intended use for gunpowder was to be part an elixir to extend life. After the Chinese discovered that it did the opposite, they used it for fireworks before they made it into a weapon. The original intent of an object really has no meaning, we should look to see how an object is actually USED. In the US, the VAST majority of gun owners have never used their firearms against other people. I am a gun owner and I haven't even fired my rifle.

 

[newfoundsky]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

Like I said, a gun is more than just your perception of it. You see it as a lethal weapon, I see it as one of the safest forms of expression and recreation. No one (who should be buying a rifle anyway, I am all for waiting periods, background checks, and sanity exams) says "I am buying this to efficiently kill people". Go to a gun club, and you will hear reasons from "just in case" to "sport" and "recreation".

I really want you to experience a gun club meeting. Even remotely talking about shooting a PERSON is taboo. In the hunting circles of those clubs, you will hear a lot of complaints that their rifles just aren't doing the job and how many prefer bow hunting because they don't scare the prey as bad if you miss, which happens all the time until you have developed enough skill. An efficient weapon would not take any skill to use efficiently.

On the subject of the original intent of guns, anyone using a rifle in a confined space like a school is MISUSING it, as is anyone using a gun against someone that does not have a weapon. The original intent of an object does not mean anything, what matters is how it is being used.

The point of a rock is to be on the ground, it only turns into a weapon when you use it as such. Guns are no different.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

So how do you feel about guns that are specifically designed for sport shooting, the design of which is designed to shoot at targets as efficiently as possible? Yes, those do exist, and are a lot more common than you might think.

 

[AntiChri5]

More to the point, I agree with you. I understand someone's right to own a gun, whether that be for hunting or self defense, but the way a lot of Americans view firearms borders on fetishistic. I really just don't get it.

You navigate the Internet where groups of people view just about anything with literal fetish interests. Then there are the fandoms on and offline, with conventions and expos by them, for them throughout the year. I could spend pages describing the absolute obsession of geeks, nerds and hopelessly lost fanatics that build their homes around their favorite fiction, cosplay, write fanfic (esp. erotic) and wear the swag and talk about it everywhere.

As long as we're writing off gun enthusiasts (as if a firearm hobby means there's something wrong with you), car people really aren't all that different, either. They buy exotic, powerful machines, and many modify their cars with abandon, souping them up and making them loud, flashy and will frequently (illegally) race on the street.

Is all of this more bizarre "fetishistic" behavior you can't understand, or we are just supposed to be morally outraged because we can't see any other purpose for owning firearms than murdering living beings? I just want to know where the distinction lies in this oft seen derogatory opinion about gun hobbyists. Why is this illegitimate?

Edit, for inclusion:

/snip

This is roughly what I expected, more of this "existing safe behavior being misappropriated". In other words, that there gun was meant for killin', not havin' fun. So anything involving a gun (whether it's safe, fun, etc.) is predicated on the original purpose of violence.

It's basically bulletproof prejudice against something people don't understand rather than using common sense to know the difference between a good and bad person (it doesn't matter, because them guns are bad, so it's always bad).

Nowhere have i said that guns are bad. I specifically said that guns being designed to kill does not make them evil. I don't attach morality to basic design functions.

It isn't prejudice to recognize the difference between a weapon and a vehicle.

There is nothing wrong with shooting for fun. There is everything wrong with forgetting that guns are designed to kill people with.

 

[AntiChri5]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

The original intended use for gunpowder was to be part an elixir to extend life. After the Chinese discovered that it did the opposite, they used it for fireworks before they made it into a weapon. The original intent of an object really has no meaning, we should look to see how an object is actually USED. In the US, the VAST majority of gun owners have never used their firearms against other people. I am a gun owner and I haven't even fired my rifle.

That doesn't really apply to what i have said. I am talking about complete guns, not one of their components that was accidentally discovered. Guns, as they are, are a technology that is the result of so many years of experimentation and refinement for the purpose of creating an incredibly effective and efficient killing tool.

Guns aren't bad or wrong or any such nonsense, but they are dangerous by design.

 

[AntiChri5]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

Like I said, a gun is more than just your perception of it. You see it as a lethal weapon, I see it as one of the safest forms of expression and recreation. No one (who should be buying a rifle anyway, I am all for waiting periods, background checks, and sanity exams) says "I am buying this to efficiently kill people". Go to a gun club, and you will hear reasons from "just in case" to "sport" and "recreation".

I really want you to experience a gun club meeting. Even remotely talking about shooting a PERSON is taboo. In the hunting circles of those clubs, you will hear a lot of complaints that their rifles just aren't doing the job and how many prefer bow hunting because they don't scare the prey as bad if you miss, which happens all the time until you have developed enough skill. An efficient weapon would not take any skill to use efficiently.

On the subject of the original intent of guns, anyone using a rifle in a confined space like a school is MISUSING it, as is anyone using a gun against someone that does not have a weapon. The original intent of an object does not mean anything, what matters is how it is being used.

The point of a rock is to be on the ground, it only turns into a weapon when you use it as such. Guns are no different.

I don't think gun collectors want to kill. I don't think people who like fire arms are inherently violent or deranged.

And there is a world of difference between a gun and a rock on the ground. A rock on the ground is not a man made device specifically designed for a purpose.

The design of a tool is very important. Guns are for killing, whether that's killing an animal for meat or someone trying to break into your home to rape your puppy. No one buys a hammer to write poetry. Hammers are for smacking shit (often nails). They were designed to do a job and people buy them to do that.

 

[AntiChri5]

So what if people shoot for sport? Guns are still designed to kill as efficiently as possible. Whether thats humans or animals. That people find it fun to shoot clay and paper is irrelevant.

Racing is just an extension of the original function of a car. It's a test of how fast a car can go. It's done on a track in front of an audience, but it's still the same. A harmless bit of fun that grew up around a necessary means of transportation.

Shooting targets is equally harmless. But that doesn't change what the gun is made for. That doesn't change what it is. It is still designed to kill. It is a weapon, a car is not.

People finding ways to have safe fun with tools is different then people finding ways to have safe fun with lethal weapons. One is, due to it's design and function, inherently more dangerous. There is nothing wrong with enjoying guns. They are damn cool. But people really shouldn't lose sight of what they are.

Guns aren't cars. They aren't even remotely similar. In any way.

So how do you feel about guns that are specifically designed for sport shooting, the design of which is designed to shoot at targets as efficiently as possible? Yes, those do exist, and are a lot more common than you might think.

Are they still as capable of killing people as normal guns? If they are a specialised variant that is different to that extent then yeah those change the argument. But if they are a variant that is merely optimised for sport shooting while still capable of traditional gun usage then it doesn't.

 

[AntiChri5]

The design of a tool is very important. Guns are for killing, whether that's killing an animal for meat or someone trying to break into your home to rape your puppy. No one buys a hammer to write poetry. Hammers are for smacking shit (often nails). They were designed to do a job and people buy them to do that.

It is more lethal and effective than knives or swords. That's why people buy them. If the shit hits the fan, they can defend themselves. If somebody sticks a knife in your face, boom, there goes the mugger's kneecap. If someone breaks into your home, boom goes the asshole's asshole. If somebody tries to rape you, boom goes the dick's dick.

Yeah, and i don't have any problem with that. It's people comparing guns to cars (or other things that aren't weapons) that really gets to me.

 

[Ryotknife]

More to the point, I agree with you. I understand someone's right to own a gun, whether that be for hunting or self defense, but the way a lot of Americans view firearms borders on fetishistic. I really just don't get it.

You navigate the Internet where groups of people view just about anything with literal fetish interests. Then there are the fandoms on and offline, with conventions and expos by them, for them throughout the year. I could spend pages describing the absolute obsession of geeks, nerds and hopelessly lost fanatics that build their homes around their favorite fiction, cosplay, write fanfic (esp. erotic) and wear the swag and talk about it everywhere.

As long as we're writing off gun enthusiasts (as if a firearm hobby means there's something wrong with you), car people really aren't all that different, either. They buy exotic, powerful machines, and many modify their cars with abandon, souping them up and making them loud, flashy and will frequently (illegally) race on the street.

Is all of this more bizarre "fetishistic" behavior you can't understand, or we are just supposed to be morally outraged because we can't see any other purpose for owning firearms than murdering living beings? I just want to know where the distinction lies in this oft seen derogatory opinion about gun hobbyists. Why is this illegitimate?

Edit, for inclusion:

/snip

This is roughly what I expected, more of this "existing safe behavior being misappropriated". In other words, that there gun was meant for killin', not havin' fun. So anything involving a gun (whether it's safe, fun, etc.) is predicated on the original purpose of violence.

It's basically bulletproof prejudice against something people don't understand rather than using common sense to know the difference between a good and bad person (it doesn't matter, because them guns are bad, so it's always bad).

Nowhere have i said that guns are bad. I specifically said that guns being designed to kill does not make them evil. I don't attach morality to basic design functions.

It isn't prejudice to recognize the difference between a weapon and a vehicle.

There is nothing wrong with shooting for fun. There is everything wrong with forgetting that guns are designed to kill people with.

Technically, the guns designed to kill people in the most efficient way possible are the ones used by the military, not civilians. Also, SOME guns are designed to kill people with, SOME guns are designed to kill certain animals with, and SOME guns are designed for neither.