4 ms·

That's quite bizarre logic for someone with that handle. Are you really implying that the great majority of guns were not designed for killing?

by ap22213 10y ago

Turing_Machine 10y ago
I'm not "implying" it, I'm explicitly stating it. If guns are "designed for killing", why is only one out of 10,000 used for that purpose in a typical year? Can you think of another example of a consumer product that's "designed" for a particular purpose that has that low a rate of actual utilization for that purpose? Most successful defensive gun use incidents don't involve anyone even getting shot, much less killed, and that's leaving out all the ones that are simply used for poking holes in pieces of paper.
- baddox 10y ago
  > Can you think of another example of a consumer product that's "designed" for a particular purpose that has that low a rate of actual utilization for that purpose? I haven't look up the actual usage rates, but I suspect things like smoke alarms, fire extinguishers, air bags, and (emergency) parachutes, are very seldomly used for their intended purpose.
  - Turing_Machine 10y ago
    Smoke detectors, at least, are designed to go off when they detect smoke. Mine goes off several times per year. Does yours not do that? Emergency parachutes aren't consumer products. Air bags aren't either -- they're required by law. It's not a matter of consumer choice. Fire extinguishers, perhaps.
    - Fuzzwah 10y ago
      Emergency parachutes, aka reserve parachutes really are consumer products... http://www.chutingstar.com/catalogsearch/result/index/?dir=desc&order=price&q=reserve http://www.chutingstar.com/catalogsearch/result/index/?dir=d...
- ap22213 10y ago
  Why did you put designed in quotes? Look - if you like guns, just say you like guns. People are allowed to like guns. But, throwing around an illogical argument as a logical one isn't going to help in persuading people - well, at least not people who follow logic.
  - schismsubv 10y ago
    Ostensibly because they're arguing about the weight and intent of the word, "designed". People saying guns are "designed to kill" are attempting to elicit an emotional response that mirrors their own in a fallacious appeal to emotion. No matter their design, guns have use beyond killing humans, and even beyond hunting. Take a knife, for example - designed to kill. Small knives, big knives, single-purpose knives, ceramic knives, and even customizable knives. Cutting living things kills them, so knives are "designed to kill". While not as destructive as guns, they account for a non-negligible ~12% of the annual murder toll. Knives even cause way more serious non-fatal injuries per year than guns, but you don't hear anyone bleating "DESIGNED TO KILL" about them because they're mostly not scary. I like guns, and most of mine _are_ actually designed to kill living beings: animals I am legally authorized to shoot. For 51 weeks of the year I shoot what averages out to 2-3 rounds per day per gun at paper. I do it with my family, my friends, and when I need to settle my nerves and meditate after a rough day. One week a year, I shoot the given gun once, maybe twice. I would argue that while their design certainly involves killing, their purpose to me is practicing fine motor skills and concentration, with an ancillary effect of giving me the excuse to go hiking for a week and put meat on the table for a large portion of the year. As far as smart guns go, it doesn't matter what the use of the gun is. It's an ineffectual feel-good measure that will primarily affect law-abiding citizens. Hell, that's why gun control is such an issue - because most gun owners fall extremely deeply into the "lawful" D&D dimension. If we didn't care, you could pass whatever laws you like and we'd ignore them, but we don't like falling afoul of laws, intentionally or not.
    - ap22213 10y ago
      Interesting stuff, especially the part about knives. I wouldn't have guessed that 12% of murders were caused by knives. But, probably that's because I can only think of one local knife murder but countless gun murders. I had to go back through the thread to see who used the word 'design' first, and it was actually me. But, given that I don't have an argument against guns, I'm confused. Is the design perspective one that's frequently used by gun regulation advocates? I used it only because when I thought of the question, 'for what purpose are guns manufactured?', 'killing' was the first thing that came to mind. Actually, now that I think of it, I'm surprised that the gun industry doesn't seem do anything to change people's perceptions of guns. They'd probably have a huge impact with a moderate campaign to soften the image of guns. Also, it may be interesting for you or other readers to know that as a 3rd-party observer, I didn't feel an emotional response to the parent's point. To me, it seemed like a rational argument. On the other hand, your comment actually gave me a very strong negative emotional response. So, if the goal is to convince people like me to side with guns, you may want to alter your approach. Again, it could be extremely effective to your cause to soften the image of guns and gun owners. Personally (as someone who even grew up with guns), guns scare me, and strong gun advocates scare me even more. Where I live, the gun advocates display a very aggressive and dangerous image - from their vehicles, to their clothing and appearance, to their mannerisms and rhetorical approach. Softening that up would probably have a huge impact.
- SixSigma 10y ago
  > Can you think of another example of a consumer product that's "designed" for a particular purpose that has that low a rate of actual utilization for that purpose? Smoke alarms, fire extinguishers, dozens of things in my kitchen, games from Steam sales, shelves full of DVDs and books, I'm sure you can think of some of your own if you try.
Karunamon 10y ago
The "designed for" argument always struck me as odd. Who gives a half toss what it's "designed for", when what it's used for in the real world is what actually matters?
- ap22213 10y ago
  Just to be clear, I don't have an argument. I am just a curious observer who's trying to follow and make sense of what's being discussed here. However, since you brought it up, do you have issue with 'smart guns' given that apparently most guns are purchased only to ever be used at ranges?
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    Not particularly - I view that the same way I view people who buy a $12,000 fully specced out Mac Pro and then browse Facebook all day with it. Sometimes you just want something to show off. Shrug

That's quite bizarre logic for someone with that handle. Are you really implying that the great majority of guns were not designed for killing?

by ap22213 10y ago

That's quite bizarre logic for someone with that handle. Are you really implying that the great majority of guns were not designed for killing?

Turing_Machine 10y ago

I'm not "implying" it, I'm explicitly stating it. If guns are "designed for killing", why is only one out of 10,000 used for that purpose in a typical year? Can you think of another example of a consumer product that's "designed" for a particular purpose that has that low a rate of actual utilization for that purpose? Most successful defensive gun use incidents don't involve anyone even getting shot, much less killed, and that's leaving out all the ones that are simply used for poking holes in pieces of paper.

baddox 10y ago
> Can you think of another example of a consumer product that's "designed" for a particular purpose that has that low a rate of actual utilization for that purpose? I haven't look up the actual usage rates, but I suspect things like smoke alarms, fire extinguishers, air bags, and (emergency) parachutes, are very seldomly used for their intended purpose.
- Turing_Machine 10y ago
  Smoke detectors, at least, are designed to go off when they detect smoke. Mine goes off several times per year. Does yours not do that? Emergency parachutes aren't consumer products. Air bags aren't either -- they're required by law. It's not a matter of consumer choice. Fire extinguishers, perhaps.
  - Fuzzwah 10y ago
    Emergency parachutes, aka reserve parachutes really are consumer products... http://www.chutingstar.com/catalogsearch/result/index/?dir=desc&order=price&q=reserve http://www.chutingstar.com/catalogsearch/result/index/?dir=d...
ap22213 10y ago
Why did you put designed in quotes? Look - if you like guns, just say you like guns. People are allowed to like guns. But, throwing around an illogical argument as a logical one isn't going to help in persuading people - well, at least not people who follow logic.
- schismsubv 10y ago
  Ostensibly because they're arguing about the weight and intent of the word, "designed". People saying guns are "designed to kill" are attempting to elicit an emotional response that mirrors their own in a fallacious appeal to emotion. No matter their design, guns have use beyond killing humans, and even beyond hunting. Take a knife, for example - designed to kill. Small knives, big knives, single-purpose knives, ceramic knives, and even customizable knives. Cutting living things kills them, so knives are "designed to kill". While not as destructive as guns, they account for a non-negligible ~12% of the annual murder toll. Knives even cause way more serious non-fatal injuries per year than guns, but you don't hear anyone bleating "DESIGNED TO KILL" about them because they're mostly not scary. I like guns, and most of mine _are_ actually designed to kill living beings: animals I am legally authorized to shoot. For 51 weeks of the year I shoot what averages out to 2-3 rounds per day per gun at paper. I do it with my family, my friends, and when I need to settle my nerves and meditate after a rough day. One week a year, I shoot the given gun once, maybe twice. I would argue that while their design certainly involves killing, their purpose to me is practicing fine motor skills and concentration, with an ancillary effect of giving me the excuse to go hiking for a week and put meat on the table for a large portion of the year. As far as smart guns go, it doesn't matter what the use of the gun is. It's an ineffectual feel-good measure that will primarily affect law-abiding citizens. Hell, that's why gun control is such an issue - because most gun owners fall extremely deeply into the "lawful" D&D dimension. If we didn't care, you could pass whatever laws you like and we'd ignore them, but we don't like falling afoul of laws, intentionally or not.
  - ap22213 10y ago
    Interesting stuff, especially the part about knives. I wouldn't have guessed that 12% of murders were caused by knives. But, probably that's because I can only think of one local knife murder but countless gun murders. I had to go back through the thread to see who used the word 'design' first, and it was actually me. But, given that I don't have an argument against guns, I'm confused. Is the design perspective one that's frequently used by gun regulation advocates? I used it only because when I thought of the question, 'for what purpose are guns manufactured?', 'killing' was the first thing that came to mind. Actually, now that I think of it, I'm surprised that the gun industry doesn't seem do anything to change people's perceptions of guns. They'd probably have a huge impact with a moderate campaign to soften the image of guns. Also, it may be interesting for you or other readers to know that as a 3rd-party observer, I didn't feel an emotional response to the parent's point. To me, it seemed like a rational argument. On the other hand, your comment actually gave me a very strong negative emotional response. So, if the goal is to convince people like me to side with guns, you may want to alter your approach. Again, it could be extremely effective to your cause to soften the image of guns and gun owners. Personally (as someone who even grew up with guns), guns scare me, and strong gun advocates scare me even more. Where I live, the gun advocates display a very aggressive and dangerous image - from their vehicles, to their clothing and appearance, to their mannerisms and rhetorical approach. Softening that up would probably have a huge impact.
SixSigma 10y ago
> Can you think of another example of a consumer product that's "designed" for a particular purpose that has that low a rate of actual utilization for that purpose? Smoke alarms, fire extinguishers, dozens of things in my kitchen, games from Steam sales, shelves full of DVDs and books, I'm sure you can think of some of your own if you try.

Karunamon 10y ago

The "designed for" argument always struck me as odd. Who gives a half toss what it's "designed for", when what it's used for in the real world is what actually matters?

ap22213 10y ago
Just to be clear, I don't have an argument. I am just a curious observer who's trying to follow and make sense of what's being discussed here. However, since you brought it up, do you have issue with 'smart guns' given that apparently most guns are purchased only to ever be used at ranges?
- Karunamon 10y ago
  Not particularly - I view that the same way I view people who buy a $12,000 fully specced out Mac Pro and then browse Facebook all day with it. Sometimes you just want something to show off. Shrug