Gun Collecting: Is It Ever Innocent?

[9thIDdoc]

I've heard the -- bad -- argument that what a lot of people call "gun nuts" are just...collectors. Hobbyists. I have a lot of hobbies, none of them involving guns, so that got me thinking.

There are tools, and collector's items, and materials stored up to have options. Having too much yarn or spices or books is having lots of options. Collector's items are mostly historical in the case of guns or anything else, I think --- dueling pistols or flintlocks would be a reasonable collector's item even for guns. But modern functional assault rifles? Calling them collector's items is phoney.

Aren't guns really just tools? They have a function, and if you buy them for tools, you should want to use them for their purpose, but if you use an assault rifle for its purpose, you'll be arrested by a SWAT team. I garden a lot and thinking about this I realized I have ten shovels. I never "collected" them -- I just acquired them at need throughout the years. And I use all of them, every year, for their actual purpose: the go-to pointed shovel for regular digging, the light grain shovel for snow and straw-mixed light manure and black compost, the little Sears shovel as a sort of large trowel for big pots, and so on through the list.

We have guns and I view them as tools, and so I don't expect to use many!! There's the 22 for foxes and dogs in with the livestock and a shotgun and a pistol for home defense. I'm not expecting to stand off an army, who would need more?? Well, a hunter might need a more powerful rifle, but I don't hunt. I accept packages of venison shot on or near our land, and very pleased to have it, too.

My point is that if people have more guns than they can actually USE, there is something very, very weird and suspicious about that. One wonders about their motivation, and their anger level. And whether they are fantasizing arming the neighborhood when the riots or the revolution starts. It's not an innocent hobby, buying lots and lots of guns and high-capacity magazines and ammo: it's basically about wishing and hoping to kill people. Right? Is there any other motivation besides wishing for the chance to kill lots of people?

Your problem (and it is your problem) is being entirely closed minded on the subject. You have made up your mind and can't be bothered by silly things like facts. Guns are indeed tools as you have already noted. And-as you also have noted-some tools are better for some jobs than others. You don't expect a saw to do the same job as a hammer for example. The vast majority of firearms are never fired at a person and many are not fired at all.

"...it's basically about wishing and hoping to kill people."

What in the world do you think supports that kind of sick assumption?
You have guns. Do you sit around wishing to kill someone? Do you hope to get a chance to kill dogs and foxes or do you keep your .22 to protect your livestock if needed? Should the rest of us worry that you obcess about killing people because you have guns? Your guns are no more or less lethal than the so called "assault weapons" and there is no more reason to make assumptions about motives than there is for you and your's.

What makes you think you have the knowledge necessary to decide what someone else does/doesn't need? Would you be willing for some stanger to make those decisions for you?

 

[Circe]

Here's another example of "collections" that are immoral --

Viscious dogs.

Some people breed and keep pit bulls, Rottweilers, and Dobermans -- these are dogs that have been bred for a very long time to be dangerous attack animals, like assault rifles are manufactured to assault.

Then these dogs get loose and savage young children and pregnant women and kill and maim them.

"Oh, it's not my fault!" yells the owner of these dangerous animals, but of course it IS his fault, and nowadays a lot of these dog owners go to jail after their dogs make kills.

Same deal with the assault weapons -- they get loose by the gun-owner's schizophrenic teen stealing them and using them to kill everyone in his family, like that minister's kid did the other day, or someone else stealing them to shoot people. Seems to me if people have assault weapons somebody uses to shoot lots of people, he should be held criminally liable for having cool weapons designed to shoot lots of people because it tempted this teen to steal them so he could be a cool people-killer too.

 

[Missourian]

I've heard the -- bad -- argument that what a lot of people call "gun nuts" are just...collectors. Hobbyists. I have a lot of hobbies, none of them involving guns, so that got me thinking.

There are tools, and collector's items, and materials stored up to have options. Having too much yarn or spices or books is having lots of options. Collector's items are mostly historical in the case of guns or anything else, I think --- dueling pistols or flintlocks would be a reasonable collector's item even for guns. But modern functional assault rifles? Calling them collector's items is phoney.

Aren't guns really just tools? They have a function, and if you buy them for tools, you should want to use them for their purpose, but if you use an assault rifle for its purpose, you'll be arrested by a SWAT team. I garden a lot and thinking about this I realized I have ten shovels. I never "collected" them -- I just acquired them at need throughout the years. And I use all of them, every year, for their actual purpose: the go-to pointed shovel for regular digging, the light grain shovel for snow and straw-mixed light manure and black compost, the little Sears shovel as a sort of large trowel for big pots, and so on through the list.

We have guns and I view them as tools, and so I don't expect to use many!! There's the 22 for foxes and dogs in with the livestock and a shotgun and a pistol for home defense. I'm not expecting to stand off an army, who would need more?? Well, a hunter might need a more powerful rifle, but I don't hunt. I accept packages of venison shot on or near our land, and very pleased to have it, too.

My point is that if people have more guns than they can actually USE, there is something very, very weird and suspicious about that. One wonders about their motivation, and their anger level. And whether they are fantasizing arming the neighborhood when the riots or the revolution starts. It's not an innocent hobby, buying lots and lots of guns and high-capacity magazines and ammo: it's basically about wishing and hoping to kill people. Right? Is there any other motivation besides wishing for the chance to kill lots of people?

You don't know the first thing about guns, do you.

Let me help you out.

Grab your coal shovel and go dig a hole with it.

How did that work out for you?

Different guns just like different shovels are better suited for different purposes.

I hunt and target shoot with my AR 15, and my wife keeps it handy for home defense when I'm away ... The .223 has low recoil, and plenty of ammunition capacity. She has her own, mine has a target barrel and a free floated fore end that makes it heavy, but perfect for longer shots.

Read a little of Chuck Hawks web series on rifles, shotguns, ballistics, hunting, cartridge loads and you'll get the idea...you can't hunt squirrels with a 45-70 government and a bear will not be fazed by a .17 HMR.

 

[Missourian]

Cars kill more people than guns, you've just decided to ignore it.

This argument, on the other hand, is AWFUL. Cars are not intended as murder weapons, so they are "innocent." They may kill people by accident, but that is definitely not their intended purpose. It IS the intended purpose of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines.

You could, I suppose, bash somebody on the head with a large teapot and kill them; or strangle them with my best Japanese yarn. But that would not be what they are intended for and so the guilt would be purely yours, and no blame attaches to the collector of innocent objects.

But torture tools, S&M equipment, assault rifles and all that are intended to kill or hurt people: that's their natural function. So you can't just say, "Whoopie! I'm a collector, isn't it cool?" Because it's like collecting a lot of pit bulls or anything deliberately created to hurt people: it's wrong. It's immoral.

You are completely a slave to your bias.

There is nothing evil about guns.

Crime and criminals who use guns are evil.

Murderers who kill people with guns are evil.

Guns can be used for good things too, like hunting, target shooting, self defense and the protection of innocent people.

Police carry guns, are those guns "evil"?

Of course not.

Learn to keep your bias in check, and you won't look so foolish in the future.

 

[M14 Shooter]

. Seems to me if people have assault weapons somebody uses to shoot lots of people, he should be held criminally liable for having cool weapons designed to shoot lots of people because it tempted this teen to steal them so he could be a cool people-killer too.

More mindless, ignorant bigotry.
The good news is that most anti-gun people are very much like yourself, virtually guaranteeing that the legislation you want will never pass.

 

[Katzndogz]

Here's another example of a non-innocent collection that is a serious ethical issue.

The current New Yorker has one of their long articles on child pornography. They are asking, is it fair to charge people with a crime they haven't done yet?

So here's this movie star, he's got a lot of photos of little boys being raped on his computer. He was tracked from a Website for trading these photos. The police come in and take his computer, search his apartment, research his life, and find that he has never acted on this, he just ----------------------------- has a collection! Of photos of little boys being raped.

This is very like the moral dilemma of the assault rifles. Because he himself doesn't rape the little boys, he just...enjoys the photos. But SOMEBODY has to abuse the children so he gets his photos. No abuse, no photos. This is like people stealing your assault rifles to shoot up the school or movie theater or mall. You didn't do it, but you were the one indirectly guilty. Everybody in the country blames Adam Lanza's mother, after all.

If there were no assault rifles, all these AR-15 rampage mass murders wouldn't have happened. If there were no child pornography, all those children wouldn't have been raped.

So I'd say no, if the "collection" is not innocent, if it is involved inextricably with hurting and killing people, no one connected with it can be innocent. These are not the good guys who have pornography and assault rifle collections.

Is there some on-line website with videos devoted to people shooting others? Your whole argument falls apart because it lacks common sense. If you were to make sense, your argument would be, because some individuals have pictures of little boys being raped, no one should be allowed to have cameras. Now you make sense.

 

[Missourian]

Cars kill more people than guns, you've just decided to ignore it.

This argument, on the other hand, is AWFUL. Cars are not intended as murder weapons, so they are "innocent." They may kill people by accident, but that is definitely not their intended purpose. It IS the intended purpose of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines.

You could, I suppose, bash somebody on the head with a large teapot and kill them; or strangle them with my best Japanese yarn. But that would not be what they are intended for and so the guilt would be purely yours, and no blame attaches to the collector of innocent objects.

But torture tools, S&M equipment, assault rifles and all that are intended to kill or hurt people: that's their natural function. So you can't just say, "Whoopie! I'm a collector, isn't it cool?" Because it's like collecting a lot of pit bulls or anything deliberately created to hurt people: it's wrong. It's immoral.

It's not an awful argument, it's a perfect argument.

The government regulates the speed a vehicle may travel.

Sports cars are designed to double and triple that speed.

Speeding can kill.

Therefore, by your argument, law abiding citizens cannot be trusted with sports cars because they are designed for racing, not commuting.

 

[Intense]

I've heard the -- bad -- argument that what a lot of people call "gun nuts" are just...collectors. Hobbyists. I have a lot of hobbies, none of them involving guns, so that got me thinking.

There are tools, and collector's items, and materials stored up to have options. Having too much yarn or spices or books is having lots of options. Collector's items are mostly historical in the case of guns or anything else, I think --- dueling pistols or flintlocks would be a reasonable collector's item even for guns. But modern functional assault rifles? Calling them collector's items is phoney.

Aren't guns really just tools? They have a function, and if you buy them for tools, you should want to use them for their purpose, but if you use an assault rifle for its purpose, you'll be arrested by a SWAT team. I garden a lot and thinking about this I realized I have ten shovels. I never "collected" them -- I just acquired them at need throughout the years. And I use all of them, every year, for their actual purpose: the go-to pointed shovel for regular digging, the light grain shovel for snow and straw-mixed light manure and black compost, the little Sears shovel as a sort of large trowel for big pots, and so on through the list.

We have guns and I view them as tools, and so I don't expect to use many!! There's the 22 for foxes and dogs in with the livestock and a shotgun and a pistol for home defense. I'm not expecting to stand off an army, who would need more?? Well, a hunter might need a more powerful rifle, but I don't hunt. I accept packages of venison shot on or near our land, and very pleased to have it, too.

My point is that if people have more guns than they can actually USE, there is something very, very weird and suspicious about that. One wonders about their motivation, and their anger level. And whether they are fantasizing arming the neighborhood when the riots or the revolution starts. It's not an innocent hobby, buying lots and lots of guns and high-capacity magazines and ammo: it's basically about wishing and hoping to kill people. Right? Is there any other motivation besides wishing for the chance to kill lots of people?

Your point is based on a very limited perspective and false presumption. I'd be interested in knowing what your perspective is on Government Agencies currently stockpiling on massive amounts of ammunition? Try tying that in to an anticipated economic collapse.

 

[Intense]

Here's an example of how hobbies are not always innocent.

Suppose you had a hobby of collecting bondage S&M equipment? You got your whips and your rattan canes and you've got the leatherhead zipper-mouth mask and handcuffs and footcuffs and ...so on.

So a date finds all this stuff organized neatly in a bondage safe and she .....well, for some reason she seems suspicious! I can't THINK why. And she leaves, and later when there is a rape killing in the area, you are visited by police, who have somehow found out about your interesting collection, and though you tell them it's just your COLLECTION, see, somehow they don't seem to believe you.

No, of course they don't. Because those are tools, too, and if you've got them, people assume you want to use them and may well use them, just as when you've got AR-15 rifles and lots of high-capacity magazines people assume you want to mow down as many civilians as possible.

Because that IS what these tools are for.

That's a pretty bizarre comparison. One is Rooted in unalienable Right, the other is a perversion. How did this even get in your head? When you find yourself in real danger, and the cops show up, would you prefer they be armed, and capable of handling any threat, or they show up with a dildo and some K-Y jelly? In essence, that's your comparison. I just don't see the logic, unless you are just trying to paint gun ownership as a perversion. Is that your goal?

 

[Bigfoot]

I very much enjoy firing suppressed weapons, let's not go there as we might confuse the sock.

 

[Intense]

What is a AR with a 30 round clip for if not to inflict as much damage as possible?

Sure you can use it for targets and blast the shit out of whatever you like for fun. But he isn't wrong about their design.

The AR is designed to essentially be as close to the military equivalent as is possible within civilian law. Like it or not, those guns were designed to kill people.

Sure. That's obvious and why I said this "hobby" isn't innocent. These AR-15s are designed to kill as many people as possible, people They aren't for hunting, they aren't for target practice, they are only for killing large numbers of people in one rampage mass murder.

Some hobby.

Or defending against it.

 

[Intense]

Here's another example of a non-innocent collection that is a serious ethical issue.

The current New Yorker has one of their long articles on child pornography. They are asking, is it fair to charge people with a crime they haven't done yet?

So here's this movie star, he's got a lot of photos of little boys being raped on his computer. He was tracked from a Website for trading these photos. The police come in and take his computer, search his apartment, research his life, and find that he has never acted on this, he just ----------------------------- has a collection! Of photos of little boys being raped.

This is very like the moral dilemma of the assault rifles. Because he himself doesn't rape the little boys, he just...enjoys the photos. But SOMEBODY has to abuse the children so he gets his photos. No abuse, no photos. This is like people stealing your assault rifles to shoot up the school or movie theater or mall. You didn't do it, but you were the one indirectly guilty. Everybody in the country blames Adam Lanza's mother, after all.

If there were no assault rifles, all these AR-15 rampage mass murders wouldn't have happened. If there were no child pornography, all those children wouldn't have been raped.

So I'd say no, if the "collection" is not innocent, if it is involved inextricably with hurting and killing people, no one connected with it can be innocent. These are not the good guys who have pornography and assault rifle collections.

It is Not the same. Have you noticed that with each of your comparisons, the principle must first be blurred, then corrupted, for them to serve your interest. Is there anything not perverse, that you think you could compare gun ownership to?

 

[CMike]

Cars kill more people than guns, you've just decided to ignore it.

This argument, on the other hand, is AWFUL. Cars are not intended as murder weapons, so they are "innocent." They may kill people by accident, but that is definitely not their intended purpose. It IS the intended purpose of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines.

You could, I suppose, bash somebody on the head with a large teapot and kill them; or strangle them with my best Japanese yarn. But that would not be what they are intended for and so the guilt would be purely yours, and no blame attaches to the collector of innocent objects.

But torture tools, S&M equipment, assault rifles and all that are intended to kill or hurt people: that's their natural function. So you can't just say, "Whoopie! I'm a collector, isn't it cool?" Because it's like collecting a lot of pit bulls or anything deliberately created to hurt people: it's wrong. It's immoral.

Not necessarily. Tactical rifles are fun to shoot. That is my main purpose of shooting them. It's fun.

And putting holes in paper is not an evil act

Aside from the enjoyment of shooting and collecting it also is great for personal protection.

 

[CMike]

Here's another example of a non-innocent collection that is a serious ethical issue.

The current New Yorker has one of their long articles on child pornography. They are asking, is it fair to charge people with a crime they haven't done yet?

So here's this movie star, he's got a lot of photos of little boys being raped on his computer. He was tracked from a Website for trading these photos. The police come in and take his computer, search his apartment, research his life, and find that he has never acted on this, he just ----------------------------- has a collection! Of photos of little boys being raped.

This is very like the moral dilemma of the assault rifles. Because he himself doesn't rape the little boys, he just...enjoys the photos. But SOMEBODY has to abuse the children so he gets his photos. No abuse, no photos. This is like people stealing your assault rifles to shoot up the school or movie theater or mall. You didn't do it, but you were the one indirectly guilty. Everybody in the country blames Adam Lanza's mother, after all.

If there were no assault rifles, all these AR-15 rampage mass murders wouldn't have happened. If there were no child pornography, all those children wouldn't have been raped.

So I'd say no, if the "collection" is not innocent, if it is involved inextricably with hurting and killing people, no one connected with it can be innocent. These are not the good guys who have pornography and assault rifle collections.

Bad example as well.

Shooting a rifle is not unethical nor illegal.

People use a rifle to:
Target shoot
Hunt
Defense

None of these are crimes.

Now some people may use a rifle for criminal activities. Some people may use a car for criminal activities as well i.e. getting away from a robbery, DUI's, etc.

Some people may use a knife for criminal activities.

Possesion of child pornography is within itself a crime. It doesn't mean that if you have child pornography you will rape someone. However just that you have it is a crime.

Comparing it to possessing tactical rifles doesn't work.

 

[Ernie S.]

I've heard the -- bad -- argument that what a lot of people call "gun nuts" are just...collectors. Hobbyists. I have a lot of hobbies, none of them involving guns, so that got me thinking.

There are tools, and collector's items, and materials stored up to have options. Having too much yarn or spices or books is having lots of options. Collector's items are mostly historical in the case of guns or anything else, I think --- dueling pistols or flintlocks would be a reasonable collector's item even for guns. But modern functional assault rifles? Calling them collector's items is phoney.

Aren't guns really just tools? They have a function, and if you buy them for tools, you should want to use them for their purpose, but if you use an assault rifle for its purpose, you'll be arrested by a SWAT team. I garden a lot and thinking about this I realized I have ten shovels. I never "collected" them -- I just acquired them at need throughout the years. And I use all of them, every year, for their actual purpose: the go-to pointed shovel for regular digging, the light grain shovel for snow and straw-mixed light manure and black compost, the little Sears shovel as a sort of large trowel for big pots, and so on through the list.

We have guns and I view them as tools, and so I don't expect to use many!! There's the 22 for foxes and dogs in with the livestock and a shotgun and a pistol for home defense. I'm not expecting to stand off an army, who would need more?? Well, a hunter might need a more powerful rifle, but I don't hunt. I accept packages of venison shot on or near our land, and very pleased to have it, too.

My point is that if people have more guns than they can actually USE, there is something very, very weird and suspicious about that. One wonders about their motivation, and their anger level. And whether they are fantasizing arming the neighborhood when the riots or the revolution starts. It's not an innocent hobby, buying lots and lots of guns and high-capacity magazines and ammo: it's basically about wishing and hoping to kill people. Right? Is there any other motivation besides wishing for the chance to kill lots of people?

10 shovels? Really? Are you a professional? Do you have a legitimate need for all of them?
I have 10 or 11 guns here. Several are antiques that are still functional, but impractical for regular use due to ammunition cost or the pain they inflict on me when I fire them.
Others were my late father's. I see myself as their steward more than their owner. Still others are self defense weapons that are only fired to keep me sharp or hunting weapons for various game.
They are just guns. They are no more, nor no less moral than shovels or old coins, stamps or tea pots.

 

[Circe]

[
10 shovels? Really? Are you a professional? Do you have a legitimate need for all of them?
I have 10 or 11 guns here. Several are antiques that are still functional, but impractical for regular use due to ammunition cost or the pain they inflict on me when I fire them.
Others were my late father's. I see myself as their steward more than their owner. Still others are self defense weapons that are only fired to keep me sharp or hunting weapons for various game.
They are just guns. They are no more, nor no less moral than shovels or old coins, stamps or tea pots.

I admit your collection doesn't sound very dangerous, given the antiques.

However, I maintain that the whole point of collecting the assault rifles and high-capacity magazines is obvious: it's to kill people. Lots of people.

Because that is the known function of these weapons: that is exactly what they are designed for.

My shovels are designed to dig trenches, or shovel snow, or clear a stable, etc. My yarn has a well-known function: it's all for knitting sweaters and hats. My variety of tea from around the world all has an obvious function, which I utilize: I make and drink tea from this collection.

My hobbies are innocent because they are none of them intended to harm anyone. Harm is not the function of tea, shovels, or yarn.

Harm is very definitely the function and purpose of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, and that's what young madmen and elderly demented paranoids are using them for, more and more all the time. Since these weapons are FOR killing lots of people, collecting them cannot possibly be innocent. These are not good guys who collect these kinds of mass killer weapons! They are being collected to kill people: there it is.


You guys who collect assault rifles couldn't just ------ build your wife a greenhouse or some nice, useful hobby like that?

 

[M14 Shooter]

[
10 shovels? Really? Are you a professional? Do you have a legitimate need for all of them?
I have 10 or 11 guns here. Several are antiques that are still functional, but impractical for regular use due to ammunition cost or the pain they inflict on me when I fire them.
Others were my late father's. I see myself as their steward more than their owner. Still others are self defense weapons that are only fired to keep me sharp or hunting weapons for various game.
They are just guns. They are no more, nor no less moral than shovels or old coins, stamps or tea pots.

I admit your collection doesn't sound very dangerous, given the antiques.
However, I maintain that the whole point of collecting the assault rifles and high-capacity magazines is obvious: it's to kill people. Lots of people.

I love how you prattle on as if your position has not been debunked, over and over and over...

 

[Ernie S.]

[
10 shovels? Really? Are you a professional? Do you have a legitimate need for all of them?
I have 10 or 11 guns here. Several are antiques that are still functional, but impractical for regular use due to ammunition cost or the pain they inflict on me when I fire them.
Others were my late father's. I see myself as their steward more than their owner. Still others are self defense weapons that are only fired to keep me sharp or hunting weapons for various game.
They are just guns. They are no more, nor no less moral than shovels or old coins, stamps or tea pots.

I admit your collection doesn't sound very dangerous, given the antiques.

However, I maintain that the whole point of collecting the assault rifles and high-capacity magazines is obvious: it's to kill people. Lots of people.

You maintain?
All firearms are capable of killing people. Putting various size holes in people, animals and targets is the whole purpose of a firearm whether it is an 18th century flintlock or a Barret M107. A weapon is incapable of motive. It just lies there until someone chambers a round and takes aim. Pull the trigger and it does exactly what it was designed to do. I have a .308 caliber semiautomatic Winchester here. It was designed to operate with 5 round magazines. I have quite a few of them and I can drop an empty mag and insert the next in under 2 seconds.
Let's say I took that weapon with 10 clips into a school with no armed security. I could likely fire all 50 rounds in under 1 minute. An scary black military looking M14 in semi automatic mode and 30 round mags would save 4 mag swaps, so 8 seconds or so. Not a big deal when first responders are 5 minutes away.

Because that is the known function of these weapons: that is exactly what they are designed for.

My shovels are designed to dig trenches, or shovel snow, or clear a stable, etc. My yarn has a well-known function: it's all for knitting sweaters and hats. My variety of tea from around the world all has an obvious function, which I utilize: I make and drink tea from this collection.

My hobbies are innocent because they are none of them intended to harm anyone. Harm is not the function of tea, shovels, or yarn.

While my guns have the potential to harm a person, so does your shovel. It depends on the person wielding it. My neighbor is a farmer. He uses fertilizer for his crops and diesel fuel for his tractors. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer and diesel to take down the Murrah Building.

Harm is very definitely the function and purpose of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, and that's what young madmen and elderly demented paranoids are using them for, more and more all the time. Since these weapons are FOR killing lots of people, collecting them cannot possibly be innocent. These are not good guys who collect these kinds of mass killer weapons! They are being collected to kill people: there it is.


You guys who collect assault rifles couldn't just ------ build your wife a greenhouse or some nice, useful hobby like that?

I've built my wife a huge wrap around deck, a gazebo and a chicken coop in the last year and a half. I've also killed poisonous snakes and put some food in the freezer. My hobbies are my business. What I collect is my business. Please keep your nose out of it.

 

[Circe]

I've built my wife a huge wrap around deck, a gazebo and a chicken coop in the last year and a half. I've also killed poisonous snakes and put some food in the freezer. My hobbies are my business. What I collect is my business. Please keep your nose out of it.

Rude, rude, rude.

You know, if you don't want to discuss serious issues politely you could go use the obscenity insult parts of this forum. Why are you here? There is no need to reply rudely to me when that's against the rules here. I'm discussing issues in generalities and I don't care what you do or don't build. I wasn't talking to you at all.

There's no need either to neg rep me, which you did, given that's against the rules of this forum. Okay, I'm putting you on Ignore and reporting your post --- I take the rules of this forum seriously, unlike you.

 

[westwall]

[
10 shovels? Really? Are you a professional? Do you have a legitimate need for all of them?
I have 10 or 11 guns here. Several are antiques that are still functional, but impractical for regular use due to ammunition cost or the pain they inflict on me when I fire them.
Others were my late father's. I see myself as their steward more than their owner. Still others are self defense weapons that are only fired to keep me sharp or hunting weapons for various game.
They are just guns. They are no more, nor no less moral than shovels or old coins, stamps or tea pots.

I admit your collection doesn't sound very dangerous, given the antiques.

However, I maintain that the whole point of collecting the assault rifles and high-capacity magazines is obvious: it's to kill people. Lots of people.

Because that is the known function of these weapons: that is exactly what they are designed for.

My shovels are designed to dig trenches, or shovel snow, or clear a stable, etc. My yarn has a well-known function: it's all for knitting sweaters and hats. My variety of tea from around the world all has an obvious function, which I utilize: I make and drink tea from this collection.

My hobbies are innocent because they are none of them intended to harm anyone. Harm is not the function of tea, shovels, or yarn.

Harm is very definitely the function and purpose of assault rifles and high-capacity magazines, and that's what young madmen and elderly demented paranoids are using them for, more and more all the time. Since these weapons are FOR killing lots of people, collecting them cannot possibly be innocent. These are not good guys who collect these kinds of mass killer weapons! They are being collected to kill people: there it is.


You guys who collect assault rifles couldn't just ------ build your wife a greenhouse or some nice, useful hobby like that?

The sheer number of them in private hands that have never harmed a soul expose your claims to be the foolish and uninformed ones they are. There are hundreds of thousands of them in collections in this country alone and last year rifles of ALL types killed 300 people.

Compare that to hotdogs which kill 1000 kids every year in the US alone. Or how about the 25,000 people that fall to their deaths every year? You see, there are far more people killed by FOOD than by assault rifles.

Teach people how to eat better, then you can make suggestions about weapons.