Absolutely. The fact is, firearms all trace back to those first used for military purposes by the ancient Chinese. In that respect, yes, guns were all derived from something designed to kill. I doubt that the Chinese couched the matter in terms such as "projecting force from a distance", they just pointed it at the enemy.
Many "sporting" firearms have their design roots in military weapons. The '98 Mauser inspired the Winchester 70. The M-16 morphed into an endless variety of sporting versions.
So what? It all depends on how *people* use those intimate objects.
From the article:
“The intention behind that force is up to the operator of the gun.”
The point is that the disarmists claim that there is only one purpose for guns, and that is to kill people. That is clearly false. Discrediting that claim is worthwhile for persuasive purposes.
To the uniformed, it is very hard to see why someone would keep a machine whose only purpose is to kill people, in their house. The article educates and shows that killing people with guns is rare but sometimes necessary, and that guns serve a multitude of purposes.