• Anomandaris@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Calling a gun a tool is intentionally misleading. A gun’s sole purpose is as a weapon, using it any other way is a misuse of that “tool”. Whereas knives have various practical purposes. Which was obviously the purpose of my initial reply.

    In some cases, yes, having a gun is entirely legitimate (assuming used safely) such as protection from dangerous wildlife. But the number of legitimate cases does not even come close to justifying the number of guns, or the gun culture, in America. Violence doesn’t happen in a vacuum, the presence of guns, the acceptance of gun culture, and the normalization of gun violence are things that contribute to the frequency of gun crime.

    The removal of guns, and restricting of them to legitimate use cases IS dealing with the underlying social issues. But it’s definitely only part of the solution, that alone is not enough, but nothing else will have a strong effect while so many guns are on the streets and easily accessible.

          • Anomandaris@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes, technically weapons are tools, that’s because the definition of a tool is so broad, just a device used to carry out a particular task.

            That’s why I never said he was wrong to call a gun a tool, I said it was misleading, which it is. When a reasonable person thinks of a tool they do not think of a gun, you think of a wrench or a screwdriver or a swiss army knife, or something like that.

              • Anomandaris@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, technically weapons are tools

                Again, I’m not arguing a gun isn’t a tool. In fact, in the very comment you’re replying to I said they are.

                But all of this is besides the actual point, you derailed the point of gun culture and availability driving gun violence with an ultimately meaningless conversation about semantics.

    • HelixDab@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’ve avoiding the question.

      Would you be open to solutions that do not involve removing guns, or is that the only solution you would accept?

      • Anomandaris@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But it’s definitely only part of the solution, that alone is not enough, but nothing else will have a strong effect while so many guns are on the streets and easily accessible.

        No I didn’t, I think I was pretty clear. We need to reduce the number of guns available, nothing else will be effective until we do. I do believe any solution that does not involve removing guns at some point is incomplete. But removing guns on its own is not enough.

        • HelixDab@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, you were quite clear; you aren’t actually interested in real solutions, you’re interested in gun control for the sake of gun control.