Guns Are Designed to Kill (And killing is legitimate in some circumstances)

Would-be gun controllers argue that guns are different from other dangerous commodities. Guns are uniquely are designed to kill, they say, and therefore lack the utility of other dangerous things. Take automobiles, for instance: automobiles kill more people than guns, but automobiles' primary use is peaceful, and automobiles are not designed to kill. Why, gun controllers ask, should we tolerate guns, which are dangerous and have no material utility other than killing?

So, I should be allowed to buy a bazooka or dynamites as long as I want to use them for fun and not to harm others? (I’ve heard that argument too).

So hypothetically, if you do own dynamite and don't use it to harm others, who but you will know? Does a tree falling in the forest...

If you wanted to harm others you don't need dynamite, you could stand on an expressway overpass and drop rocks on cars passing below, as children of the "inner city" do on occasion when they become bored.

Guns don't cause harm by themselves, they are inanimate objects, not posesed of a will of their own. If you decide to harm others you make the decision not the implement you use to carry out your will. In a fit of rage you could possibly beat someone to death with your bare hands. Do we preemptively cut off your hands, lest you sin?

Regards,
GtG

RE: So hypothetically, if you do own dynamite and don’t use it to harm others, who but you will know? Does a tree falling in the forest...

And that’s the point, I can use it as an excuse to practice blowing up hypothetical terrorists who attack this country (practicing the defense of America) and if laws allowed that, I should have freedom to do so, even if my REAL intent is to blow up innocents (How can anyone read my real intent? Aren’t we all supposed to be presume innocent until proven guilty?)

RE: If you wanted to harm others you don’t need dynamite, you could stand on an expressway overpass and drop rocks on cars passing below, as children of the “inner city” do on occasion when they become bored.

Yes, but if I want to do MORE harm to others, A Bazooka or Dynamite will do MORE damage. Why use the boring rock to harm only a few people when I can use the bazooka or dynamite to kill 10 or more in one shot?

Yes, I do make the decision to harm. Therefore by your reasoning, since bazookas and dynamites are in and of themselves harmful only if evil people use them, then by extension to this reasoning, since the vast majority of people are NOT evil and law abiding, they should legally be allowed to own them for whatever not harmful reason they might have, right?

The other fellow who responded to my question seem to have answered ‘YES’ to my question (see posts 18 and 20 above ).

Therefore by your reasoning, since bazookas and dynamites are in and of themselves harmful only if evil people use them, then by extension to this reasoning, since the vast majority of people are NOT evil and law abiding, they should legally be allowed to own them for whatever not harmful reason they might have, right?

First of all I did not say that weapons "are harmful only if evil people use them", I said that weapons are inanimate objects and do not possess free will. That's quite a reach you made of what I said. My original point was if you had a basement full of dynamite and didn't use it (being the nice guy that you no doubt are) no one would know but you, so who cares what you are sitting on?

Likewise if every person (good or evil) had a basement full of "assault weapons" and nobody talked about them, who cares. If however you suspected your slightly creepy neighbor had something dangerous and he had the same idea about you would have reached a sort of MAD which worked perfectly for scores of years and kept the peace in an unstable world. My position is that what I have in my basement is my business and none of yours. I couldn;t care less about what you have in yours...

Regards,
GtG

PS If you really want to cause a lot of damage to a lot of people just clog the storm drains of the underpass on a rainy night, you still don't need dynamite. You keep asking for outside help, if you put your mind to it you are capable of creating disasters of biblical proportions with nothing but a fertile imagination.

RE: First of all I did not say that weapons “are harmful only if evil people use them”, I said that weapons are inanimate objects and do not possess free will.

I see no contradiction between saying: “weapons are inanimate objects and do not possess free will.”, and saying: “Weapons are harmful only if evil people use them”. Inanimate objects cause harm ONLY when evil people use them.

In fact BOTH ARE STATEMENTS OF FACT. And oh, I did not say that you said it, I am only making a logical extension of the statement: “weapons are inanimate objects”.

RE: My original point was if you had a basement full of dynamite and didn’t use it (being the nice guy that you no doubt are) no one would know but you, so who cares what you are sitting on?

My main concern is POSSESSION and PURCHASE of dynamite.

Isn’t it a violation of the second amendment to restrict its possession and purchase? Isn’t it a form of “bearing arms”?

To be consistent, if we should be allowed to use semi-automatics because the second amendment guarantees us this, I see no reason why the second amendment should limit the idea of “bearing arms” ONLY to semi-autos and lower forms of weapons.

The term “arms” is a broad category and would include other forms of arms such as -— Bazookas, Automatics and Dynamites.

RE: If you really want to cause a lot of damage to a lot of people just clog the storm drains of the underpass on a rainy night, you still don’t need dynamite.

I agree, but why stop at clogging, why not make it spectacular and use dynamite? And more importantly, why is purchasing dynamite as a law abiding citizen heavily controlled ( dare I say illegal )?

The term “arms” is a broad category and would include other forms of arms such as -— Bazookas, Automatics and Dynamites.

You argue that arms such as "Bazookas, Automatics and Dynamites" should be allowed which implies that they are not "allowed". I'm not quite sure what you mean by "allowed" but such are available for civilian purchase and use. The process for purchase and use of NFA items (fully automatic weapons, short barreled rifles and shotguns, suppressors and destructive devices) involves filing an ATF Form 4 with a $200.00 check for the excise tax. There are more steps involved but if you have a clean record (you are not a raving lunatic) you will be able to complete your purchase.

As for explosives, you will need to apply for a blasting license which will allow you to purchase explosives and use them for legitimate purposes (clearing land, building demolition, quarrying, or mining).

ATF or more correctly BATFE, is charged with oversight of both of these areas of commerce. They will want to keep track of what you purchase, where you plan to use it, where you plan to store it before use. They will audit your inventory to assure that your purchase is not being diverted to illegal use. In essence, you can buy (and I have bought) items such as you describe. The BATFE exists to make sure that you don't run off the rails and use or allow others to use those items for illicit purpose.

If those restrictions are not to your liking you can always "go dark" and try your hand at converting semi-auto weapons to full auto. It's not as easy as the anti-gun crowd seems to think but it is possible. Just don't get caught as the fines and guaranteed prison term will ruin your day.

If you want to try your hand at chemistry and "home brew" some explosives "Under the radar". You are going to need concentrated sulfuric and nitric acids at a minimum. Since the Feds monitor "precursor" chemicals (war on drugs) you're going to need a a business to cover for the purchase, I'd suggest electroplating as acids are used in the process. There are books written specifically on the production of explosives. I suggest that you study the process before attempting to brew up a batch, as it is likely that you will blow yourself to itty bitty pieces because of poor temperature control. If chemistry is not your cup of tea you could try stealing explosives from a quarry or other place where they are used. I would point out that "powder magazines" are probably more secure than bank vaults because of BATFE oversight.

Patience grasshopper, all things are possible with time and money. You need a license to drive a car too, that doesn't mean you can't drive without one, it just means you shouldn't. All things are legal until you get caught.

Regards,
GtG

PS I bought a dozen sticks of dynamite, caps and fuse at a lumber yard in northern Wisconsin back in the '70s. The paperwork took about 5 minutes. I was clearing a road to my cabin. Times have changed (and not for the better!)

During my ccl course, the instructor told a tale of a old woman student who showed up with a inoperable .38 revolver. He fussed at her about having a broken firearm and how it doesn’t do any good. She answered that it did. Some obamabot tried to break in her house and she aimed it at him, rocked the hammer back and the guy left quickly.
She told him that the gun worked.

Way back in time, my great grandmother ran off some theives with a 1911. It was during the depression and two bums were trying to steal food from her. She shot 4 rounds at their feet then warned them that the next rounds would turn them into girls.

This sort of thing happens way more often that anyone knows.
I have pulled a handgun twice in the last 10 years which headed off very bad outcomes. Only had to show it.
Looking down the barrel of a .357 mag will get someone’s attention.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.