In Case of Zombies

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 20, 2010, 04:23:24 AM

Quote from: AdmiralAckbar on August 19, 2010, 08:59:47 PM

Your one to talk lol, the person you quoted said nothing about target rifles, he mentioned how your either shooting paper or inanimate targets, thats what my post was based off of. Why base my post off of your incorrect assumption?

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 09:18:55 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 18, 2010, 01:01:40 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 18, 2010, 12:55:16 PM

Quote from: SupahLovah on August 17, 2010, 10:00:38 PM

Guns are made to hurt/kill things.

Guns, in general, are made hold a cartridge and then apply a force to a specific region of that cartridge. Possibly with the ability to cycle secondary cartridges into the position of the first once the force is applied.

That is all.

And the application of such a device?

99% of the time? To propel a lead/copper/steel item across distances and into a target.

I see no mention of him saying he uses "Target rifles" specifically

Quote from: AdmiralAckbar on August 19, 2010, 06:57:43 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 06:00:42 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 03:06:45 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 01:59:04 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 09:18:55 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 18, 2010, 01:01:40 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 18, 2010, 12:55:16 PM

Quote from: SupahLovah on August 17, 2010, 10:00:38 PM

Guns are made to hurt/kill things.

Guns, in general, are made hold a cartridge and then apply a force to a specific region of that cartridge. Possibly with the ability to cycle secondary cartridges into the position of the first once the force is applied.

That is all.

And the application of such a device?

99% of the time? To propel a lead/copper/steel item across distances and into a target.

A soft fleshy living target.

No, 99% of the time it is used to strike paper or other inanimate targets.

You seriously believe that 99% of guns in existence are target rifles?

You do know people who use guns to kill people have to train as well? Id fathom that theyd spend more ammo training at the range then they do in any firefight.

sooo

if every soldier spends at least 2/3 of his ammo in total in training add that to people who only shoot targets... You have the vast majority of people shooting targets...

We aren't talking about proportion of use, actually read what you quote. Unless these soldiers train with guns entirely unlike those they would use in combat and the people who only shoot targets never use a combat-oriented gun, of course. If that's the case then certainly, you're right.

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 07:19:18 PM

Quote from: AdmiralAckbar on August 19, 2010, 06:57:43 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 06:00:42 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 03:06:45 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 01:59:04 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 09:18:55 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 18, 2010, 01:01:40 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 18, 2010, 12:55:16 PM

Quote from: SupahLovah on August 17, 2010, 10:00:38 PM

Guns are made to hurt/kill things.

Guns, in general, are made hold a cartridge and then apply a force to a specific region of that cartridge. Possibly with the ability to cycle secondary cartridges into the position of the first once the force is applied.

That is all.

And the application of such a device?

99% of the time? To propel a lead/copper/steel item across distances and into a target.

A soft fleshy living target.

No, 99% of the time it is used to strike paper or other inanimate targets.

You seriously believe that 99% of guns in existence are target rifles?

You do know people who use guns to kill people have to train as well? Id fathom that theyd spend more ammo training at the range then they do in any firefight.

sooo

if every soldier spends at least 2/3 of his ammo in total in training add that to people who only shoot targets... You have the vast majority of people shooting targets...

We aren't talking about proportion of use, actually read what you quote. Unless these soldiers train with guns entirely unlike those they would use in combat and the people who only shoot targets never use a combat-oriented gun, of course. If that's the case then certainly, you're right.

What I claimed is that their application 99% of the time is to strike a target with a piece of lead/copper/steel. This is the main use of guns in the world.

As for them being a weapon, that is highly unlikely, most guns will never be used in combat, and of the ones that do, they will rarely be used in any sort of actual combat.

Quote from: Raist on August 20, 2010, 09:30:52 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 07:19:18 PM

Quote from: AdmiralAckbar on August 19, 2010, 06:57:43 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 06:00:42 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 03:06:45 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 01:59:04 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 09:18:55 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 18, 2010, 01:01:40 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 18, 2010, 12:55:16 PM

Quote from: SupahLovah on August 17, 2010, 10:00:38 PM

Guns are made to hurt/kill things.

Guns, in general, are made hold a cartridge and then apply a force to a specific region of that cartridge. Possibly with the ability to cycle secondary cartridges into the position of the first once the force is applied.

That is all.

And the application of such a device?

99% of the time? To propel a lead/copper/steel item across distances and into a target.

A soft fleshy living target.

No, 99% of the time it is used to strike paper or other inanimate targets.

You seriously believe that 99% of guns in existence are target rifles?

You do know people who use guns to kill people have to train as well? Id fathom that theyd spend more ammo training at the range then they do in any firefight.

sooo

if every soldier spends at least 2/3 of his ammo in total in training add that to people who only shoot targets... You have the vast majority of people shooting targets...

We aren't talking about proportion of use, actually read what you quote. Unless these soldiers train with guns entirely unlike those they would use in combat and the people who only shoot targets never use a combat-oriented gun, of course. If that's the case then certainly, you're right.

What I claimed is that their application 99% of the time is to strike a target with a piece of lead/copper/steel. This is the main use of guns in the world.

As for them being a weapon, that is highly unlikely, most guns will never be used in combat, and of the ones that do, they will rarely be used in any sort of actual combat.

You said that the application of 99% of guns is to shoot targets.

Most halberds go unused too, are they just an extremely complex and high-maintenance tool for chopping wood?

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 21, 2010, 03:57:29 AM

Quote from: Raist on August 20, 2010, 09:30:52 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 07:19:18 PM

Quote from: AdmiralAckbar on August 19, 2010, 06:57:43 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 06:00:42 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 03:06:45 PM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 19, 2010, 01:59:04 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 19, 2010, 09:18:55 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 18, 2010, 01:01:40 PM

Quote from: Raist on August 18, 2010, 12:55:16 PM

Quote from: SupahLovah on August 17, 2010, 10:00:38 PM

Guns are made to hurt/kill things.

Guns, in general, are made hold a cartridge and then apply a force to a specific region of that cartridge. Possibly with the ability to cycle secondary cartridges into the position of the first once the force is applied.

That is all.

And the application of such a device?

99% of the time? To propel a lead/copper/steel item across distances and into a target.

A soft fleshy living target.

No, 99% of the time it is used to strike paper or other inanimate targets.

You seriously believe that 99% of guns in existence are target rifles?

You do know people who use guns to kill people have to train as well? Id fathom that theyd spend more ammo training at the range then they do in any firefight.

sooo

if every soldier spends at least 2/3 of his ammo in total in training add that to people who only shoot targets... You have the vast majority of people shooting targets...

We aren't talking about proportion of use, actually read what you quote. Unless these soldiers train with guns entirely unlike those they would use in combat and the people who only shoot targets never use a combat-oriented gun, of course. If that's the case then certainly, you're right.

What I claimed is that their application 99% of the time is to strike a target with a piece of lead/copper/steel. This is the main use of guns in the world.

As for them being a weapon, that is highly unlikely, most guns will never be used in combat, and of the ones that do, they will rarely be used in any sort of actual combat.

You said that the application of 99% of guns is to shoot targets.

Most halberds go unused too, are they just an extremely complex and high-maintenance tool for chopping wood?

No, they are decorations. Who the hell chops wood?

And yes, 99% of guns are used to shoot targets. I never said 99% of guns are target rifles. See the difference?

99% of nukes are never used, they aren't weapons?

Quote from: Taters343 on August 21, 2010, 10:24:05 AM

99% of nukes are never used, they aren't weapons?

Not really. They're just boxes sitting in silos for decades at a time.

A weapon is defined by its use.

Quote from: Raist on August 21, 2010, 10:39:24 AM

Quote from: Taters343 on August 21, 2010, 10:24:05 AM

99% of nukes are never used, they aren't weapons?

Not really. They're just boxes sitting in silos for decades at a time.

A weapon is defined by its use.

I disagree. An item is defined by it's intended use.

Quote from: Taters343 on August 21, 2010, 10:24:05 AM

99% of nukes are never used, they aren't weapons?

Not really. They're just boxes sitting in silos for decades at a time.

A weapon is defined by its use.

That's just random meaningless nonsense. You and I both know that.

Guns were originally designed for hunting animals, killing people, injuring people, etc. Yes, there are guns designed specifically for target shooting, this argument was never about those guns, to me it was always about guns such as AK47s, etc.

At this point the argument is no longer about whether or not guns are weapons, it has become about what defines an item: use or purpose? That issue cannot be resolved through arguments because it is purely philosophical. Because of this I propose that this thread either ends or returns to a discussion about zombies.

Guns were originally designed for hunting animals, killing people, injuring people, etc. Yes, there are guns designed specifically for target shooting, this argument was never about those guns, to me it was always about guns such as AK47s, etc.

That's just random meaningless nonsense. You and I both know that.

Guns were originally designed for hunting animals, killing people, injuring people, etc. Yes, there are guns designed specifically for target shooting, this argument was never about those guns, to me it was always about guns such as AK47s, etc.

At this point the argument is no longer about whether or not guns are weapons, it has become about what defines an item: use or purpose? That issue cannot be resolved through arguments because it is purely philosophical. Because of this I propose that this thread either ends or returns to a discussion about zombies.

Quote from: Taters343 on August 21, 2010, 11:15:50 AM

That's just random meaningless nonsense. You and I both know that.

Guns were originally designed for hunting animals, killing people, injuring people, etc. Yes, there are guns designed specifically for target shooting, this argument was never about those guns, to me it was always about guns such as AK47s, etc.

At this point the argument is no longer about whether or not guns are weapons, it has become about what defines an item: use or purpose? That issue cannot be resolved through arguments because it is purely philosophical. Because of this I propose that this thread either ends or returns to a discussion about zombies.

Intent defines a weapon, that much I agree with, but it is the intent of the user and not that of the designer.

A tools use does not define it, it's intended purpose does. A chainsaw is designed to cut wood, not people, thus it is not a weapon, it only has the ability to become one. A gun is designed to kill or injure a person or animal, thus it is a weapon with the ability to become sporting equipment, etc. Much like a sword can be used in the martial arts; it is intended to be a weapon, people are trained to use it as a weapon, though most people do not end up using it to bring harm to others. It is still a weapon.

Once again, this is like me saying, that because I don't intend to blow anybody up, I should be allowed to keep a stack of military grade explosives in my house. Or that I am just intending to play pipe-ball, and should be allowed to throw my pipe bomb around the park with my friends.

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

I don't own weapons. I own firearms. Get the two straight.

When recognizable guns/cannons were developed by medieval gunsmiths, they weren't designed to punch holes in paper. They were designed to punch holes in walls or people. To claim that a firearm isn't a weapon is absurd. The clue is in the name, firearm.

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Actually, that's precisely what you said.

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Quote from: sokarul on August 15, 2010, 02:28:40 PM

I don't own weapons. I own firearms. Get the two straight.

That's pretty much what you said.

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 22, 2010, 02:45:14 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Actually, that's precisely what you said.

I have already asked for proof of this. 

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on August 22, 2010, 06:04:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Quote from: sokarul on August 15, 2010, 02:28:40 PM

I don't own weapons. I own firearms. Get the two straight.

That's pretty much what you said.

Yes.

Quote from: sokarul on August 23, 2010, 06:23:25 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 22, 2010, 02:45:14 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Actually, that's precisely what you said.

I have already asked for proof of this. 

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on August 22, 2010, 06:04:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Quote from: sokarul on August 15, 2010, 02:28:40 PM

I don't own weapons. I own firearms. Get the two straight.

That's pretty much what you said.

Yes.

So you own guns but not weapons, and you think guns are weapons?

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 23, 2010, 10:41:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 23, 2010, 06:23:25 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 22, 2010, 02:45:14 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Actually, that's precisely what you said.

I have already asked for proof of this. 

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on August 22, 2010, 06:04:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Quote from: sokarul on August 15, 2010, 02:28:40 PM

I don't own weapons. I own firearms. Get the two straight.

That's pretty much what you said.

Yes.

So you own guns but not weapons, and you think guns are weapons?

It's already been explained.  You are just to lazy to read the thread. 

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 23, 2010, 10:41:33 AM

Quote from: sokarul on August 23, 2010, 06:23:25 AM

Quote from: General Douchebag on August 22, 2010, 02:45:14 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Actually, that's precisely what you said.

I have already asked for proof of this. 

Quote from: EnglshGentleman on August 22, 2010, 06:04:18 PM

Quote from: sokarul on August 22, 2010, 01:28:38 PM

We are not saying guns aren't weapons.  We are saying some guns aren't weapons. 

Quote from: sokarul on August 15, 2010, 02:28:40 PM

I don't own weapons. I own firearms. Get the two straight.

That's pretty much what you said.

Yes.

So you own guns but not weapons, and you think guns are weapons?

It's already been explained.  You are just to lazy to read the thread. 

no gun is a weapon.