Re: OT: The semantics of "Guns don't kill people" (was Re: OT: Helen Keller & Whorf-Sapir)

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 23:16:44 +0100, Chris Bates
<chris.maths_student@...> wrote:

>The problem is, no one is passing judgement on the guns themselves as
>evil. Or at least I'm not. I'm passing judgement on the scary people who
>feel they need to own a weapon that allows them to kill across great
>distances and with much more emotional removal from the act than with a
>more close and personal weapon (like a knife). I know if I was mad
>enough I could pull a trigger even if I wasn't acting in self defense,
>but I'm not sure I could stab someone, because its much closer and more
>emotionally involving. I do believe that guns make it easier emotionally
>to kill, so they're a very bad thing in the hands of human beings, who
>are basically killer apes.
> Sorry for the politics.. I just don't see that the argument "Gun's
>don't kill people" works, because I can just say back "No, but guns make
>it too easy for people to kill people.". I mean, bombs don't kill
>people, and lock-picks don't commit burglary, but I presume the NRA is
>not in favour of anyone being allowed to own them.
That's the beauty of the gun. Some people, there's a real need to kill
them. Unfortunately, most of them already have squads of goons armed with
more than guns.