PS: without me my rifle is useless, without my rifle I am useless, my rifle is my life.
Rifle Serial number from more than five decades ago = ( 1198063 )
It wasn’t a gun and it wasn’t for fun, it was a weapon.
I’ll add that to my tortilla today.
PS: my father had a very vicious big dog that his mother tried to kill by putting broken glass in his food ; when he got home there was a pile of glass near the dogs dish
Mamma, per favore, non dare da mangiare al cane.
Grandma only spoke Italian.
PS: if you really want to piss me off , kill me.
Yes, please don’t feed the dog. She tried to kill the dog because the dog had a salesman on a cord of wood all day long ; the dog was bad to the bone and caused a lot of trouble.
PS: not to get off topic but I was given a attack trained dog and normally they will only take commands from their handler or master. He was black and silver colored and, he was truly my best friend.
For 25 years in the Navy I was in the “Weapons” Department. Small arms, torpedoes, missiles and not so small arms.
Then I got commissioned and my title became “Gunner”. Still have an old jacket that says “Weapons Officer”.
The Armory had the guns and the magazines had weapons.
Range Safety Officer for years, always called them “gun”.
It’s not that hard to understand.
One of the services provided through USCCA is legal defense after a defensive encounter. That context provides legal defense whether you used a firearm, a golf club, a chair, a spoon or a pencil. In that context any of those would have been used as weapons. So, IMO, it has to do with context.
My firearms are simply tools. I can use them for shooting at the range, for training my kids on firearms safety, or for self-defense. In a defensive encounter they are a weapon, but your mind is the best weapon in any encounter. In a defensive encounter you are using your mind to eke out every advantage in effect using your mind as a weapon.
If someone is talking in the context of defensive encounters I don’t have much problem when they refer to firearms as weapons. I don’t get too wrapped up around the axle with what people say as long as it is in an innocent manner (honest mistake). I might or might not correct them because I find it is better to have productive conversations. Correcting someone or criticizing them about semantics when it’s an honest mistake is not, IMO, a good way to have productive conversation.
Then there are some that try to use particular words in a sneaky way for “harmful” effects. That is when I’d make it a point to correct someone. In that context, the correction might be necessary because the “sneaky semantics” are being used for a different purpose, not an innocent mistake.
For example I was having a conversation with my wife about something or another, and she used the term “assault weapon”. She did not know any better, and was simply having a conversation. If I had jumped all over her about the proper terminology, and that it is a political blah, blah, blah. It would have led to a totally unproductive conversation.
However, I let her get on with the conversation. The conversation was actually productive. Later I had a conversation with her and explained the “assault weapon” terminology so that she would be better informed. Not to correct her. She actually appreciated that better than me “correcting” her. Now she’s better informed, and understands things better. We got 2 productive conversations out of it.
Yep! Even though a lot of people might seem to be in direct opposition to our goals of “freedom”, we will never be able to win them over if we don’t at least listen to them.
Having a respectful attitude will go a long way with most people. Eventually we might have to agree to disagree, but if we can’t even have a conversation we’ll never have an opportunity to get to that agreement.
Granted, some people are willfully blind, but I don’t think that applies to most. Specially when it comes to the 2A. Look at the number of new firearms owners in the past 2 years. That number is still growing. People are waking up to the mess that is created when crime is allowed to run rampant. That is a perfect entryway to get people thinking about their RIGHT to defend themselves. That can become the opening to a much more involved conversation.
Sometimes letting people listen to themselves starts to get them thinking about how misguided their position actually is. People usually don’t like to think of themselves as hypocrites, and when they can listen to their own thoughts, SOMETIMES, they actually catch on.
Love it. Heard that approach before in our greater community, from some pretty staunch firearm advocates.
In thinking about it, I imagine both sides would influence each other, we them and they us. Personally, I went from no interest, to great interest, but now also beginning to have more interest in reducing accidents and violence. Dynamic, ever changing, learning.
I’m an owner for life. Heard another topic ask what should we all ourselves, one of many posted was “guardians”. I kinda liked that one, in that one can be a guardian of a firearm, it connotates being responsible.