Why fixate on the tool?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • clt46910

    Master
    Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 4, 2008
    1,633
    36
    Akron Indiana
    I was just thinking and wondered why we fixate on the tool instead of the person. Most knowledge people know a baseball bat if more dangerous then a gun at close range. At arms length a knife will do a lot more damage.
    A screwdriver or hammer will kill you faster then a bullet.

    More children are killed riding their bicyles then are by firearms each year. That is even with the gang killing that include anyone under 25.

    More kids are injured from stealing the family car keys then with firearms each year.

    These are all behaviors problems, not the tools that that cause the problems. Why are we blaming the tools?

    Just throwing it out there. I might be in the wrong place, please move it Mods if I am.
     

    Dogman

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 5, 2008
    4,100
    38
    Hamilton County
    I was just thinking and wondered why we fixate on the tool instead of the person. Most knowledge people know a baseball bat if more dangerous then a gun at close range. At arms length a knife will do a lot more damage.
    A screwdriver or hammer will kill you faster then a bullet.

    More children are killed riding their bicyles then are by firearms each year. That is even with the gang killing that include anyone under 25.

    More kids are injured from stealing the family car keys then with firearms each year.

    These are all behaviors problems, not the tools that that cause the problems. Why are we blaming the tools?

    Just throwing it out there. I might be in the wrong place, please move it Mods if I am.


    JMO, because liberals/antis have to have something to blame other than where the blame lies. It's easier to attack and blame an object than it is to expect people to be responsible and take the blame, people might fight back. It's just like when antis say all guns should be banned, but they have no answers for how to get the BG's to turn in their guns.
     

    antsi

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 6, 2008
    1,427
    38
    Part of it is the power of symbols. To a lot of people, a gun is not just an object but a symbol.

    You're right that the antis' behavior reflects this, but you also see this syndrome reflected among gun owners.

    For example, there are always newbies coming on here and other forums looking for advice on a first handgun for carry/defense. Experienced people will come on and point out, it is not just a matter of buying a gun - what you really need is a gun and the skills to use it. They therefore recommend going to get instruction first, and buying a gun second. Nobody ever does this: they want the gun. Now.

    How often do you see people at the range with several different guns and no clue how to shoot any of them?

    How many people do we see posting here with totally unrealistic expectations of handgun effectiveness - like saying "I only carry .45 because it will knock the bad guys down."

    How many gun owners have a tricked-out $5000 AR with all kinds of far-fetched accessories, along with 100 mags and ten thousand rounds of ammo for SHTF, but not a drop of emergency drinking water?

    For antis', guns are magical talismans of crime and evil.

    For many gun owners, guns are magical talismans of safety and self-reliance.

    Of course it is much better for us to see things realistically and look at guns as tools with a specific purpose, specific capabilities, and requiring skills to accomplish their intended tasks.

    Generally I think we as gun owners are somewhat more realistic than the antis, but a lot of us could use a reality check too.
     

    AGarbers

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Feb 4, 2009
    1,360
    48
    Martinsville
    Cars...Guns...Two tools used in crimes...

    I have to shake my head at the laws in Indy.

    If not requested by their law abiding owners, confiscated firearms are destroyed for fear they might be used in a crime again. They could be sold and provide more revenue for the city.

    On the other side, confiscated vehicles are sold...even though they might be used in committing a crime again.

    Both are inert hunks of steel. Both are tools. Both are objects controlled by a human. Both can kill. Both can be collected.

    When was the last time you heard of a walk-by shooting? When was the last time a cash machine/ATM was drug off by guys on a bicycle?

    I would guess that more cars are used in crimes than firearms, and yet there is no outcry to limit their speed or carrying capacity…yet.

    One last thought, if guns are like cars, wouldn’t Glocks be like Saturns? Last I heard both use plastic for their bodies.
     

    Plague421

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 21, 2009
    850
    18
    Portage
    I came up with this little... Quote I guess you could call it.

    "You cannot deny that a hunting rifle was designed to kill, however what it kills is determined by the user. The same thing can be said for a hammer, a hammer was designed to pound, what it pounds is determined by its user. Both can be equally deadly to a human if used in a violent manner. No matter how you look at it, the burden of said tool's use is determined only by the end user."

    This is something I though of while discussing firearm regulations with a friend of mine. I'm sure you can find similar ones but this one was my brainchild. :D


    I suppose that you could argue, "What about accidental gun related deaths?" well the way I see it chainsaws are just as dangerous, and with the invention of the new battery operated ones, children are just as likely to get a hold of and operate one.

    My :twocents:
     

    Wabatuckian

    Smith-Sights.com
    Site Supporter
    Industry Partner
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 9, 2008
    3,037
    83
    Wabash
    Well, here it goes. I might get booed or cheered for this, but here it is:

    After a whole lot of debate and research, I have come to believe that Freud was right: The fear of weapons is a sign of emotional and sexual retardation.

    But not just any weapons: The ones resembling phalluses.

    Let me expound on this:

    The weapons which do not shoot anything and are not longer than they are wide, in other words, something that does not put you in subconscious thought of a phallus, are largely ignored.

    The majority of people don't want to ban brass knuckles, for example.

    We live in a sex obsessed society, and that sex obsessed society is further obsessed with size.

    Most guys are concerned they're not big enough. This causes high school locker room anxiety and some of that follows into adulthood. Otherwise, why would we have all these "penis enlargement pills" and such?

    Most guys won't admit it, but it's an area in which many are insecure.

    Then you have the women. The phallus can be used as a weapon (ie rape) and is a mystery for much of the woman's life. It is therefore intimidating early one, and this follows many women into adulthood.

    By the way guys, women don't have penis envy. It's guys projecting their thoughts onto women. Plain truth.

    Now, though all of the above is true for most people, most people also learn to cope with it via different outlets: Sports and other competition for guys, and conquering for women. In fact, in some Native American tribes, there was no real word for sex, but rather "the woman conquered the man."

    Since I'm a guy, I'm going to concentrate mainly on the male development:

    1) Guy realizes something's down there.

    2) Guy realizes that it may be important.

    3) Is size important? How do I compare to those around me? (anxiety)

    4) I'm the captain of the football team (or I can outshoot everyone, or outfight everyone). I guess size doesn't really matter much (... or does it? the residual fear remains).

    In other words, the male must prove to himself that there are more important things, or he gets fixated in this fear.

    This, in turn, is projected onto other things which remind him of his anxieties, consciously or unconsciously.

    Witness: Those who are picked on most in school - how many do you know from your high school, the outcasts, who are now police officers and military? I'm not picking on either group - not by far - but there are a disproportionate amount of "high school rejects" in both professions.

    The are in positions of power, and the power is most displayed by a phallic symbol, the gun.

    Witness: Liberals. When raising their children, are they overprotective? In other words, do these people give their children the chance to prove their abilities to themselves? Or is football, martial arts, shooting guns, etc, too barbaric?

    The child grows up with the issue unresolved, to become maladjusted and scared of what he does not understand.

    Sometimes kids have to get broken bones to prove themselves. We don't want to see them hurt. So the cycle goes on.

    I blame this mainly on two factors: The Vietnam War and divorce.

    After the women's liberation movement, free love, and the turmoil of the '60s, divorce (or flat not knowing who the father was) started becoming commonplace. Who usually got custody? The women. And who are more interested in guns, women or men?

    So who was the predominant teacher in these things?

    Additionally, a lot of people were turned off by all the killing in Vietnam - graphic pictures and the like. I'm sure this was the beginning of the "black gun hate" - seeing all the M16 rifles in the photos - as well as the idea that "guns kill."

    Bombs probably did most of it, but guns were more widely publicized.

    And, bombs are not phallic symbols. In grade school, I was in a "gifted and talented" program. We had to build things. I was allowed to build a model bomb, but not a model gun. What's this tell you?

    To the women: I'm betting those of you who are comfortable with firearms, are very comfortable with your sexuality. I'll bet dollars to donuts that if we ran a side by side analysis of those scared of guns to those 100% comfortable with their place in sex, we'd find that almost 100% of those sure of their place in the bedroom either are pro-gun or don't give a damn one way or another.

    This doesn't mean Freud was right, but, as a people, we are sex-obsessed, and from the studies I've seen as well as observations I've made, those who are secure in themselves both, um, physically and mentally, are the ones carrying guns. Those who are not, do not.

    Josh <><
     

    Bill of Rights

    Cogito, ergo porto.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Apr 26, 2008
    18,096
    77
    Where's the bacon?
    In a novel I've directed people to online before, (Big Head Press - Thoughtful Stories, Graphic Novels Online And In Print - The Probability Broach: The Graphic Novel, by L. Neil Smith and Scott Bieser) there is a scene where a character accuses a whole society of "clinging hysterically to their phallic symbols", to which this answer is given:

    (Clarissa: )"...I've heard that phallic symbol argument before-- from ineffectual wretches, driven to make others as helpless as they are. But Freud said that fear of weapons is a symptom of sexual pathology. Anyway. Who's sicker, someone who thinks his gun is a sexual organ, or somebody who wants to take everybody's sexual organs away?" She goes on to say,
    "CIVILIZED FOLK GO ARMED TO SAY, I'M SELF-SUFFICIENT; I'LL NEVER BURDEN OTHERS -- IF YOU NEED MY HELP, I'M READY. YOU'RE GOOD AT TAKING CARE OF YOURSELF -- WHY CAN'T YOU ALLOW OTHERS THE SAME RIGHT?
    NO STATE CONTROLS THOSE WHO HAVE THE MACHINERY -- AND THE WILL -- TO RESIST. NO MOB CAN TAKE THEIR LIBERTY OR PROPERTY. THE 220-POUND THUG CAN THREATEN THE DIGNITY OF A 110-POUND WOMAN WITH TWO POUNDS OF IRON TO EVEN THINGS UP. IS THAT EVIL? IS IT WRONG?
    PEOPLE WHO OBJECT TO WEAPONS ARE BEGGING FOR RULE BY BRUTE FORCE, WHEN THE BIGGEST, STRONGEST ANIMALS AMONG MEN ARE ALWAYS RIGHT. GUNS ENDED THAT, AND SOCIAL DEMOCRACY IS A HOLLOW FARCE WITHOUT AN ARMED POPULACE TO MAKE IT WORK.
    WEAR A GUN TO SOMEONE'S HOUSE, YOU'RE SAYING I'LL DEFEND THIS HOME AS IF IT WERE MY OWN! WHEN YOUR GUESTS SEE YOU CARRY A WEAPON, YOU'RE SAYING, I'LL DEFEND YOU AS IF YOU WERE MY OWN FAMILY. ANYONE WHO OBJECTS LEVELS THE DEADLIEST INSULT POSSIBLE; I WON'T TRUST YOU UNTIL YOU RENDER YOURSELF HARMLESS.
    ANOTHER THING, WHENEVER PERSONAL ARMS FALL OUT OF FASHION, SOCIETY BECOMES SOMETHING NOT WORTH DEFENDING. INDIVIDUALS START TO ROT AWAY, TOO. DISDAINING TO LIFT A FINGER IN THEIR OWN DEFENSE BECAUSE IT'S BENEATH THEM. THEY'RE NO LONGER FIT TO LIVE AND SIMPLY PROVING THEY KNOW IT!
    IS IT WRONG TO BE HAPPY WITH A SYSTEM THAT WORKS? WHAT MORAL CRIPPLE, SICK AT HEART WITH HIMSELF, TAUGHT YOU THAT?..."

    (sorry for the all-caps. that's as copied from the page source)

    Clarissa has some really good points there, courtesy of L. Neil Smith, her author.

    Blessings,
    Bill
     

    cce1302

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 26, 2008
    3,397
    48
    Back down south
    Reps sprinkled liberally throughout this thread. You know if you got them.

    BOR-
    in your post, your source says:
    ANYONE WHO OBJECTS LEVELS THE DEADLIEST INSULT POSSIBLE; I WON'T TRUST YOU UNTIL YOU RENDER YOURSELF HARMLESS.

    That's a feeling that I've been unable to put into words, but it describes exactly why I hate to see "no guns" signs and why I feel insulted by people who expect me to disarm. Thank you for posting it. I'll find a way to add it to my signature line.
     

    Fergy35

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Jul 9, 2008
    572
    18
    NE Corner of our gre
    ANYONE WHO OBJECTS LEVELS THE DEADLIEST INSULT POSSIBLE; I WON'T TRUST YOU UNTIL YOU RENDER YOURSELF HARMLESS.

    That seems to speak volumes doesn't it. I really like that and I am sure that kind of thought, sub-concious or concious, does come into play.

    Several others have made the point of people always wanting to lay blame somewhere other than where it belongs. I think this is probably one of the biggest things. Nobody is responsible for their own actions. For example, look at the old lady that sued McDonalds for the coffee scalding her. Of course coffee is hot and if I spill it on myself that's my problem. It wasn't the evil coffee that got her it was sticking a cup of scalding hot liquid between her legs that did that. Heck, I would have been too embarrased to sue someone and point out how stupid I had been. But NOOOO, the jury figured it was the restaurants fault. Couldn't possibly be that poor lady's fault. I think, the same kind of thought process goes on in some of the anti's minds - "It's that evil gun that did it or that made them do it" - "If we could just get rid of guns then little Johnny would go back to being harmless and maybe even become a productive member of society". Fact is, if you could magically make all guns disappear, then little Johnny would pick up a knife or sharp stick or some other "tool" that gives him an advantage over his victim. It's Johnny that commits the crime not the tool, but the anti's don't see it that way. They'll keep focusing on the tool, not the one that puts it to some mis-guided use.

    Sorry, for the rambling rant. I just get so frustrated sometimes. I'll get off the soap box now and let someone else have it.
     
    Top Bottom