At best you can say "fully automatic weapons are made almost exclusively for war". That much is true, but doesnt describe any of the guns owned by civilians.
Muskets, one of the earliest forms of guns, was predominately used for hunting. In fact all guns throughout history outside of fully-automatic guns, were used almost exclusively for hunting and sport with only a small minority used for killing or protection.
Besides, who even cares what they are "made for".. by that logic nuclear power plants are evil because nuclear power was originally made to create bombs. The logic is extremely weak.
All good points. The argument that what something was "meant for" somehow dictates its moral existence is absurd to me. A tool is a tool and the creator of the tool, regardless of his intent, does not imbue it with any special quality through that intent.
Not sure why it would flop the examples. I was mostly agreeing.
@freemo @lucifargundam @retiolus @zleap @Chrisleon27
I think the crux of the issue is that guns are used to project power, either through the threat or use of violence
when people try to paint guns as evil, often their real position is "the state should have a monopoly on violence"
when people pretend they just want their guns for hunting often their real position is "I don't trust the state to have a monopoly on violence"
it's analgous to bitcoin - is it used for illicit activities? certainly, the reason people tout/oppose it is not to buy or sell drugs/stop the drug trade however - it's an expression on their political position on the control of money
@skells @freemo @lucifargundam @zleap @Chrisleon27 less guns and more spoons.
@retiolus @skells @freemo @zleap @Chrisleon27
No, less guns- more lightsabers
@freemo @retiolus @zleap @Chrisleon27
That is true- in that case, my list of examples flip-flops on the topic. I believe I was able to convey my intent though.