Scully Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 You will never change the viewpoint of the Goverment, Police or anti's, they will always be weapons. The Government and police fear that the guns will be used against them and anti's hate them for killing their fluffy wuffy buggsy. Yep. Call them what you like, it wont change the attitude of anyone. I can't recall how the media described them but Bird went on his rampage with a .22 bolt action 'sporting' rifle and a 'sporting' sxs double ejector shotgun. One eye-witness described the .22 as a 'snipers rifle' . By all means tell as many folk as you like they're not weapons; to them 'they're all guns for killing stuff with.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 I just knew you would say that.............. All I know is I'm completely cheesed off, grass is still too wet to mow so no chance of me taking my "rifle weapon" out for now. Beautiful here. Chatting to the farmer this morning while he changed a couple of mower blades - he was off to cut the silage in a good fox field and hopefully the rooks will also pitch in. So, I've got my weapon rifle and weapon shotgun all ready to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 18, 2015 Report Share Posted June 18, 2015 Think how much shooting time has been lost during this thread. Speak for your self ,a lot of my answers were done while laying on a lawn shooting bunnies,or walking round with my shotgun,you need to get with the mobile media age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossEM Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 A purpose-made, single-shot weapon, which has a chamfered muzzle and vented barrel to facilitate its use with the muzzle end of the barrel in full contact with the target http://www.hsa.org.uk/humane-killing-of-livestock-using-firearms-equipment/humane-killer You asked "does it have a trigger, a breech, a barrel down which a projectile is fired?" The link you've provided confirms that humane killing instruments operate with those components - so I'll say it again, your argument includes humane killers as weapons, as they are within the parameters you set! You've not replied to my post #117 about knives? The origin of the word 'weapon' is, in fact, from the Saxon "wapan", meaning an instrument of fighting and defence. You can arm yourself with whatever you wish, and use it as a weapon, but the intended usage of the object defines its proper purpose and it is false to describe it as anything else. Great oximoron! Yeah, have to admit it was accidental - but true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) You asked "does it have a trigger, a breech, a barrel down which a projectile is fired?" The link you've provided confirms that humane killing instruments operate with those components - so I'll say it again, your argument includes humane killers as weapons, as they are within the parameters you set! You've not replied to my post #117 about knives? The origin of the word 'weapon' is, in fact, from the Saxon "wapan", meaning an instrument of fighting and defence. You can arm yourself with whatever you wish, and use it as a weapon, but the intended usage of the object defines its proper purpose and it is false to describe it as anything else. Yeah, have to admit it was accidental - but true! I honestly cannot see what you are trying to argue. Try reading the whole thread. Edited June 20, 2015 by welsh1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy RV Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 I think some people enjoy arguing about the politics regarding shooting rather than pulling the trigger. What a load of ********. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossEM Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 I honestly cannot see what you are trying to argue. Try reading the whole thread. I have read the whole thread, having followed it from the beginning. I am trying to explain that you and others that labelling sporting firearms & airguns as 'weapons' is to use incorrect terminology, and the connotations of the word 'weapon' can only be damaging to the shooting community - it should therefore cease, at least from within. I would've thought that would be obvious, but perhaps not. The semantics of the argument are crucial, unfortunately, and apologies to those who find it boring but it is relevant to all of us. In terms of PR, the last thing the shooting community needs is for the general public to be led to believe we own weapons - sporting firearms & airguns are distinct from military weapons in that they are not designed to cause harm to humans, and the general public should be kept aware of that. Terminology being used correctly is the bedrock of maintaining that distinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 I have read the whole thread, having followed it from the beginning. I am trying to explain that you and others that labelling sporting firearms & airguns as 'weapons' is to use incorrect terminology, and the connotations of the word 'weapon' can only be damaging to the shooting community - it should therefore cease, at least from within. I would've thought that would be obvious, but perhaps not. The semantics of the argument are crucial, unfortunately, and apologies to those who find it boring but it is relevant to all of us. In terms of PR, the last thing the shooting community needs is for the general public to be led to believe we own weapons - sporting firearms & airguns are distinct from military weapons in that they are not designed to cause harm to humans, and the general public should be kept aware of that. Terminology being used correctly is the bedrock of maintaining that distinction. I understand perfectly what you're saying, and admire what you are trying to achieve, but the general public have no idea that there is a difference between 'weapons' and 'sporting firearms', and more importantly neither do they care. As far as the general public are concerned (whenever there is cause for them to even give a jot as to what we own) and if they were even asked what we own, their answer would be 'guns'. That's all they know and I genuinely doubt any of them would care. To them they are collectively guns, and that's it I'm afraid. There is no getting away from the fact that Bird used his 'sporting' firearms to go on his murderous spree in Cumbria, and the next one in the UK will be carried out with 'sporting' firearms also. Insistence on calling them 'sporting' firearms wont make a **** of difference when that happens, despite all the best will in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 Two very good last posts. As a compromise which suits the common ground why don't we just call them anything but weapons. Well, except of course, semi-automatics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 I have read the whole thread, having followed it from the beginning. I am trying to explain that you and others that labelling sporting firearms & airguns as 'weapons' is to use incorrect terminology, and the connotations of the word 'weapon' can only be damaging to the shooting community - it should therefore cease, at least from within. I would've thought that would be obvious, but perhaps not. The semantics of the argument are crucial, unfortunately, and apologies to those who find it boring but it is relevant to all of us. In terms of PR, the last thing the shooting community needs is for the general public to be led to believe we own weapons - sporting firearms & airguns are distinct from military weapons in that they are not designed to cause harm to humans, and the general public should be kept aware of that. Terminology being used correctly is the bedrock of maintaining that distinction. Call them what you like as a PR exercise, but it doesn't alter the fact that the Home Office, Police, CPS and indeed all government and legeslative departments refer to them as weapons, so one can hardly deem it incorrect terminology. I quote from the CPS.............. Definitions of Firearms and Air WeaponsA firearm is "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged" (section 57 (1) Firearms Act 1968), it includes: any prohibited weapon (see below in this guidance section 5 Firearms Act 1968), whether it is such a lethal weapon as aforesaid or not; and any component part of such a lethal or prohibited weapon; and any accessory to any such weapon designed or adapted to diminish the noise or flash caused by firing the weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muffin Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 Its quite sad this it is about trying to change peoples perception I will not give up on that, sounds like some already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 Call them what you like as a PR exercise, but it doesn't alter the fact that the Home Office, Police, CPS and indeed all government and legeslative departments refer to them as weapons, so one can hardly deem it incorrect terminology. Just like, 'the MoD', all those departments are not buildings in London but are made up of human beings which as we know are fallible and therefore perfectly capable, again which we know, of making mistakes. Its quite sad this it is about trying to change peoples perception I will not give up on that, sounds like some already have. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossEM Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) Its quite sad this it is about trying to change peoples perception I will not give up on that, sounds like some already have. I agree Muffin, public perception is something all shooters should strive to influence, always - if only to counter the anti-gun and anti-shooting press etc. Those that don't are sticking their heads in the sand. Charlie T - I know very well that the Firearms Acts refer to guns, rifles & airguns as weapons. So does Wikipedia. But both are incorrect in using that term, as I've explained in previous posts. The CPS language you quoted is particularly badly written - unless you know of a gun that's barrel is lethal? I don't. Scully is also right that it is immaterial what they are called when a mass shooting occurs - however, the guns in question at that point are used as weapons. The term 'guns' is fine by me as it does not have connotations of violence! Edited June 20, 2015 by RossEM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 . The term 'guns' is fine by me as it does not have connotations of violence! Police were called to deal with a weapon incident Police were called to deal with a firearm incident Police were called to deal with a gun incident The only statement if these were in the press that doesn't scream rifle is the term weapon,because it covers many different implements,the very thing that you object to is the kindest when used in a statement.The other two immediately tell you that a firearm was involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossEM Posted June 20, 2015 Report Share Posted June 20, 2015 Police were called to deal with a weapon incident Police were called to deal with a firearm incident Police were called to deal with a gun incident The only statement if these were in the press that doesn't scream rifle is the term weapon,because it covers many different implements,the very thing that you object to is the kindest when used in a statement.The other two immediately tell you that a firearm was involved. It's always a 'firearms incident.' Again, at the point where a sporting firearm is used to harm people, it becomes a weapon (as would a spade, or a tyre iron, etc) I'm talking about general usage of the correct terms, not in relation to mass shootings - see my post above agreeing with Scully on that point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motty Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 I can't believe people are getting precious about calling guns weapons! Do I care what anyone refers to them as? No! Should I care? No! Should anyone care? Not particularly.. Read Scully's posts again - he makes sense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 It's always a 'firearms incident.' Again, at the point where a sporting firearm is used to harm people, it becomes a weapon (as would a spade, or a tyre iron, etc) I'm talking about general usage of the correct terms, not in relation to mass shootings - see my post above agreeing with Scully on that point. It is not always headlined as a firearms incident,and a sporting firearm is already a weapon,and if you are talking about general usage of the correct terms then your sporting rifle is a weapon.no matter how much you do not like the term it is the correct usage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 (edited) Not a 'sporting' gun in sight, just 'deadly weapons' : http://www.dailymail...s-shooting.html Edited June 21, 2015 by Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossEM Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 It is not always headlined as a firearms incident,and a sporting firearm is already a weapon,and if you are talking about general usage of the correct terms then your sporting rifle is a weapon.no matter how much you do not like the term it is the correct usage. No, it's not a weapon - we've been through this already. The definition of weapon is an instrument of fighting or defence; sporting guns are not designed for that purpose - it's very simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxon T Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Boring now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Prawn Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 No, it's not a weapon - we've been through this already. The definition of weapon is an instrument of fighting or defence; sporting guns are not designed for that purpose - it's very simple. This thread has been the latest in a long line of threads (legal highs anyone) where people just won't budge despite every bit of evidence pointing the other way. The facts are these: Calling a gun a weapon is perfectly fine from a definition point of view as one definition of weapon is something that causes damage to something else so whether it's a paper target, a clay or an animal you are damaging them all and ergo a gun is a weapon, that's it, that's the ends of the argument regarding the definition of the term weapon and what it means in respect of guns. Having a preferred term is perfectly fine too but just because you prefer the term firearm to weapon it does not stop it being both of those things to different people so all your energy being wasted screaming into the wind about something which you are actually wrong would be better spent trying to re-educate people into the terminology you prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welsh1 Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 No, it's not a weapon - we've been through this already. The definition of weapon is an instrument of fighting or defence; sporting guns are not designed for that purpose - it's very simple. Bored now, your sporting gun is just a name you prefer,it is a weapon,just because you don't like it being called a weapon does not change it's classification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STOTTO Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 For those that have any doubts about what our delightful ‘Boys Toys’ really are, make just the smallest mistake in your underestimation of their capability and they will show by way of instant devastation exactly what they really are, regardless of your pet name preference! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wymberley Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 Under this category, I bet there'll be some yelps when someone decides that priests either need some form of control or even need licensing. Can you imagine it? No longer than "x" or heavier than "y" and the 'head' must be of a non toxic material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted June 21, 2015 Report Share Posted June 21, 2015 For those that have any doubts about what our delightful ‘Boys Toys’ really are, make just the smallest mistake in your underestimation of their capability and they will show by way of instant devastation exactly what they really are, regardless of your pet name preference! That says it all quite succinctly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts