WEAPON

[Mike Brooks]

This term always amazes me . I see this term used on these forums all of the time. I personally don't use any of my muzzleloaders for weapons. I have a semi auto in .308 I use for a weapon.
The term "weapon" to me gives intent of use. If we're going to use the term "weapon" to describe a ML gun shouldn't we also have to use weapon to describe a base ball bat , or a kitchen knife, or a rock?
I certainly don't pick up my SXS flint gun and go pheasant hunting thinking I'm carry a "weapon". :shake:
That term to me gives evil intent to an honerable past time. Just plain don't like it...... :shake:

 

[2172]

I understand your concern, but keep in mind that many of us spent time in the service where a reference to one's "gun" brought all kinds of chastisement. I'm usually pretty specific and say 'rifle' if I mean rifle, "pistol' if I mean that and so on, but occasionally say "piece" or "weapon" as an all inclusive term. Frankly, given that our pieces can kill, "weapon" might be a useful reminder, even if we have no intent to use that way...Best, Hank

 

[taylorh]

I understand your feelings and the reasons behind them, but I think the term weapon is entirely appropriate. Bats are ment for baseball and occasionally are used to hurt someone. Knives are tools used in food prep that are occasionally used in selfdefence. Guns kill or destroy things. It is true that we use them mostly to punch holes in paper, but ultimately our practice is more than just enjoyment or game getting. It is an opportunity to fire the weapons of our forefathers. But because we do so for enjoyment we call it SPORT. Which is probably more appropriate for public consumption. However our sport is inheriently dangerous since we are using deadly WEAPONS.
Taylor in Texas

PS Read the thread about muzzle control. Bats rarely do this sort of thing.

 

[Mike Brooks]

Yes, but you're using just as potentially deadly weapon when ever you play base ball or sit down and cut up your steak.
When you watch a baseball game you should make a comment to the effect " Babe Ruth really knew how to swing a weapon". Babe Ruth didn't consider or call his bat a weapon, even tho it is used as a weapon every day.
In just the same way I don't consider or call my SXS flint gun a weapon because I don't use it as such. it's an item I use in sport, skeet specifically. If Babe Ruth doesn't have to call his bat a weapon because he uses it in sport and not with killing in mind, I think when using a gun in sport it should be called what it is, a sporting gun and not a weapon because there is no intent to kill.
Weapon denotes intent. I have never used a gun as a weapon, just as I've never used a ball bat as a weapon. Both can and are used as weapons everyday. Why is one called a weapon and the other not? Both can be equally as lethal.

 

[Mike Brooks]

Keep in mind, cars kill far more people than guns do. When we drive some where shouldn't we consider ourselves as operating a weapon and not a dodge? Statistics prove cars are far more danderous than guns, so which one is more of a weapon?

 

[Bearbait2]

Mr. Brooks,
When you say "...pick up my SXS flint gun and go pheasant hunting...", if you aren't going out to kill something, what are you doing? Using a "weapon" or not?
I do believe I understand your mind set and can appreciate wanting to put our best foot forward, to the general public especillly. In my opinion, that still doesn't change what we are doing. Sport or not, it is still killing from my point of view. Think we will have to disagree on this one. :v
Respectfully,
WW

 

[Gary]

I agree with you Mike and my muzzle loaders would not be among my first choice for self-defense. They are for enjoyment and I would happily avail myself to modern cartridge firearms. However, it would be tempting to do a bayonet charge against a knife armed assailant. :winking:

 

[Dave K]

I too know where Mike is coming from. When I go fishing I use a fishing pole. Though ultimately it is to kill fish, yet I don't call it a weapon, it is a fishing pole.

 

[noworries]

I suppose if you look at it in a purely basic form you could call it a tool but then that just doesn't seem to fit. Fact is it is a weapon, was designed as a weapon and has always been used as a weapon. If you pick up a baseball bat or a rock and assult an individual with it, it is now a weapon. With the ever increasing "assult" on our 2nd amendment rights by people that think we shouldn't be allowed to own a weapon because it looks mean or it has a flash suppressor maybe we could leave the politically correct BS out of our little refuge here and be glad we can still handle our tools in a safe manner and shoot them all day long...as long as we have the balls that is!

 

[jdixon]

Good discussion!

I am one of the guilty parties who uses the term weapon to describe firearms of all types. I have carried a gun / rifle / pistol / weapon / firearm whatever, of some sort with me to work everyday since 1977. In those environments, military and law enforcement, we call them weapons, at least the training that I have had did/does. As I remember, the first definition of the word weapon is any instrument used in combat - that being the case, I don't think the word weapon would be incorrect in describing any muzzleloading firearm whose design pre-dates 1900 since almost all of these in that time period were designed for combat, self defense or at the very least could and were used for those pursuits. Ironically, I believe there is a better case for not referring to in-line muzzleloaders as weapons than there is for the traditional styles. Guns are different than a car, a baseball bat or a table leg, all of which are not designed for combat use but, under certain circumstnaces can be turned into weapons. Firearms are by default weapons. Firearms in all their forms hold the distinction under most state laws of being described as "deadly weapons", no other category of machine is similarly described that I know of. True, I don't look at my flintlock in the same mental frame of mind that I see my Glock. I see your point Mike about the harsh sound of the word but, I don't believe it is actually an incorrect use of the term.

 

[Mike Brooks]

I too know where Mike is coming from. When I go fishing I use a fishing pole. Though ultimately it is to kill fish, yet I don't call it a weapon, it is a fishing pole.

BRAVO! I couldn't have made a better point if I tried the rest of my life. :hatsoff:

 

I agree with Mike, weapon implies MALICE and Offense in my way of viewing things. That being said, my brain could be a weapon, but since retiring, it seems to be out of ammo most of the time, and thus pretty much harmless. :rotf: I'm amazed at how many people start a battle of wits on this forum, but only come with half a load or nit of ammunition. :blah: Bill

 

My Momma could get pretty malicious with a pan or whatever else she had in her hand at the time. I don't think her intent was to kill me with it, but, I guess you could use any thing in the world as a weapon. Automobiles are definitiely a weapon of mass destruction in the wrong hands. Guns in the right hands save many lives everyday in America. It's all a matter of responsible behaviour in my book. Rifles and guns a weapon? It's all a matter of symantics to me. Of course, symantics are argued everyday and words are misused for pushing agendas every night on the news. Words are weapons! :shocked2:
Don

 

[pathfinderifh]

I've been an NRA and NMLRA instructer for a lot of years and have also put on demonstrations for the general public,and ALWAYS refer to my guns as firearms, never weapons. We need to put a positive spin on our sport. Even in this and other forums I have never used the word "weapon"and its kinda creepy to see that word used,even among freinds to describe our guns.

Ted Kennedy has killed more people with his car than I have with my guns, my car is still a vehicle

Pathfinder

 

[Deadeye]

I deal in guns of all sorts and never use the term "weapon" in regard to sporting firearms but in teaching firearms to law enforcement I often use it, however, my dictionary says this "any instrument used in fighting as a means of attack
or defence" so while I don't see it as wrong, it's not someting I like to hear when speaking of sporting arms , especially muzzleloaders.

 

[roundball]

WEBSTER SAYS:

Main Entry: 1weap·on
Pronunciation: 'we-p&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English wepen, from Old English w[AE]pen; akin to Old High German wAffan weapon, Old Norse vApn
1 : something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy
2 : a means of contending against another

 

[tg]

" I'm amazed at how many people start a battle of wits on this forum, but only come with half a load or nit of ammunition. Bill "

my lawdy, I done nearly soiled mahself on that one.... I think it is best to seperate the malice= weapon from our terminological definitions of ML guns, I do not need a weapon to
hunt deer, the term could be proper in battlefield scenarios but not required, I could take up arms as well as weapons when the enemy closes in.

 

[B.Habermehl]

I teach Hunter Trapper Education here in Pa. We are instructed by our reigional office to avoid the word weapon in class. Why? Because of the negative connotation it carries. We don't go to war against rabbits and deer. Thus we don't need to carry weapons. We do try to harvest or kill a few for dinner though. :v I personally agree with this policy. Although it is really tough for people with military or police training to break the habit. BJH

 

[Walks Alone]

... We need to put a positive spin on our sport...
Pathfinder

Well said Pathfinder, and really should be the bottom line for all of us regardless of all other personal differences of opinion.

(Ooops, guess I just offered an opinion too) :winking:

Walks Alone

 

[mikelange]

This is intended as a continuation of the line of discussion, and not as a reply to Walks Alone directly.

I feel a lot of this issue has to do with context. If, for instance, I'm writing about a gun being used in a primarily military sense, I'm liable to refer to it as a "weapon". When I'm teaching a kid to shoot, I stress that the gun he or she is handling is a weapon. The fact it's a muzzleloader doesn't diminish its capacity for being used to deliberately or accidentally kill a person, and I want that understood by my student. I try, however, to not generically refer to guns as weapons, for PR reasons, as others have already stated.

By the way, for what it's worth, I don't care for the term "harvest" in the context of killing an animal. I read an article by the late Max Vickery, some time back, in which he stated that an animal has no more awareness of its own existence than a blade of grass, making the killing of said animal the equivalent of reaping wheat or picking an apple. Everyone's entitled to his opinion, but I disagree. Hunters don't "harvest"; farmers do. Hunters hunt, and hopefully they kill, and if I had a problem with that understanding I'd find another sport that I didn't need to rationalize.

Bottom line, for me, getting back to topic -- guns are weapons, but unless they're being used (or are discussed being used) as such, I think it's best they're not called that.