May I suggest a different choice of words when referencing one's firearm?

WhistlingJack · Jul 12, 2012

When I was still actively serving as an instructor for the NRA they constantly rammed this "It's not a weapon, its a firearm" down our throats, especially when teaching Boy Scouts.

My Firearm is a weapon, that is the purpose for which it was designed. A weapon is a tool which has been constructed with such an application as to inflict harm on living things by design.

Owning a weapon is the right of a free man, I as a free man own weaponry for the defense of my person and my liberty, and I as a free man bear the responsibility to employ the weaponry that I own only when it is in fact necessary to do so. I will not mask the nature of my weapon, the purpose for which it is designed, or my own responsibility in being able to do so by being lured into the application of more politically correct terms simply because there are people who care more about what something is called than what it is.

Political Correctness is at its best an attempt to deceive even on the most minute levels, and at worst it is inellectual cowardice.

It is also rare in fact to find someone who does not have an opinion on firearms ownership, just as you will rarely find someone who does not have an opinion on abortion. When someone has made up their mind to believe a certain thing, no amount of data, facts, or terminology will sway their opinion as they have made the choice to believe as they do. Once a person's mind is made up, only they can change their mind.

I often ponder if those who are so adverse to calling a weapon what it truly is would ever actually posses the fortitude to use it when the time came, since they cannot even bring themselves to call it by what it is. Weaponry and its use is intrinsic to our nature just as is many other things. Firearms applications which are not weaponized are still applications that hone the use of a firearms capabilities, such as sports first grew among primitive populations as a means to teach teamwork and provide for the physical maintaineance which was critical to soldiery.

TL DR Version
-I reject with naught but bile and contempt any effort to spread Political Correctness to any facet of life, including how I reference my weapon. Too many have forgotten that to own a weapon, and bear the responsibility of its ownership is an intrinsic component of living free.

tcox4freedom · Jul 12, 2012

WhistlingJack said:
When I was still actively serving as an instructor for the NRA they constantly rammed this "It's not a weapon, its a firearm" down our throats, especially when teaching Boy Scouts.

My Firearm is a weapon, that is the purpose for which it was designed. A weapon is a tool which has been constructed with such an application as to inflict harm on living things by design.

Owning a weapon is the right of a free man, I as a free man own weaponry for the defense of my person and my liberty, and I as a free man bear the responsibility to employ the weaponry that I own only when it is in fact necessary to do so. I will not mask the nature of my weapon, the purpose for which it is designed, or my own responsibility in being able to do so by being lured into the application of more politically correct terms simply because there are people who care more about what something is called than what it is.

Political Correctness is at its best an attempt to deceive even on the most minute levels, and at worst it is inellectual cowardice.

It is also rare in fact to find someone who does not have an opinion on firearms ownership, just as you will rarely find someone who does not have an opinion on abortion. When someone has made up their mind to believe a certain thing, no amount of data, facts, or terminology will sway their opinion as they have made the choice to believe as they do. Once a person's mind is made up, only they can change their mind.

I often ponder if those who are so adverse to calling a weapon what it truly is would ever actually posses the fortitude to use it when the time came, since they cannot even bring themselves to call it by what it is. Weaponry and its use is intrinsic to our nature just as is many other things. Firearms applications which are not weaponized are still applications that hone the use of a firearms capabilities, such as sports first grew among primitive populations as a means to teach teamwork and provide for the physical maintaineance which was critical to soldiery.

TL DR Version
-I reject with naught but bile and contempt any effort to spread Political Correctness to any facet of life, including how I reference my weapon. Too many have forgotten that to own a weapon, and bear the responsibility of its ownership is an intrinsic component of living free.

Excellent Post!!!

MAC702 · Jul 12, 2012

WhistlingJack said:
When I was still actively serving as an instructor for the NRA they constantly rammed this "It's not a weapon, its a firearm" down our throats, especially when teaching Boy Scouts....

This is only when teaching basic safety, familiarization, and marksmanship classes.

The NRA does use the term "weapon," appropriately, in the Personal Protection classes.

KYGlockster · Jul 12, 2012

Merlin said:
Agreed. I already do this. Consistent, non-threatening terminology can only benefit us. If anyone doesn't agree with that, then try calling your pocketknife a pig-sticker, and see where that gets ya.

Speaking if knives, the same applies, and maybe even more so. In many places, if a knife is agreed to be a 'weapon', then it can get you in trouble. If it is a tool, that is different. One reason I like my Leatherman.

Never, ever, acknowledge, or permit an LEO to refer to anything on you as a weapon. He is likely stealthily using the terminology to preheat your goose. "What weapon, oh, you mean my firearm/utility-tool? Gotcha."

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

There is a big difference in calling something what it is, and calling a knife a "pig sticker." Most states that recognize the right to bear arms, meaning all arms, normally refer to them in their statutes as weapons. Here in Ky, our license to carry a "concealed weapon" is called a "Concealed Deadly Wepaons License." I don't see a problem with calling a firearm, knife, baton, brass knuckles, etc., what they are, weapons. Now, the problem arises when our liberal media tries calling our firearms "assault weapons" or "assault rifles." It is not the term "weapon" or "rifle" that makes them sound menacing, it is the word "assault." People tend to realate assault with bad actions, which is all the term assault can be used for, because it is an action.

Merlin · Jul 13, 2012

I never said there was anything wrong with referring to it by what it is, a weapon. The original question, and my statements, were more to the effect of this:

Is there something to be gained, I.e. would it be better for our cause if we used terminology that is less threatening to the uninformed masses?

No, you don't have to.
No, you SHOULDN'T have to.
But, is it in our collective best interest to put a non-threatening face on something that is, well, threatening?

Is it silly? Yes. But is it worth it anyway, in spite of that fact? I think so. If you don't, understood. Agree to disagree on that one.

The the liberal, uninformed media tend to like the term "Assault Weapon" for damn near everything. And it works, much to my dismay. We could learn something from that.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

ak56 · Jul 13, 2012

Merlin said:
...
But, is it in our collective best interest to put a non-threatening face on something that is, well, threatening?

My weapon ( I named it 'George'

) has never threatened anybody.

Merlin said:
...
...
The the liberal, uninformed media tend to like the term "Assault Weapon" for damn near everything...
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Which just proves that whatever WE call it, does not affect what THEY call it.

Merlin · Jul 13, 2012

So we should just concede that the anti's get to dictate the terminology? I think that is missing an opportunity.

You still didn't really address the spirit of the original question. Would the pro-gun community and related causes (OC) realize any benefit by using more carefully chosen terminology, that the public finds less threatening/intimidating/aggressive?

Yes, I said, it's silly that we would have to. That is well established. I think we largely all agree that it is silly. But does that make it a bad idea?

Remotely applied lead-poisoning delivery mechanism. Heh.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

OC for ME · Jul 13, 2012

"a real tack driver"...."tool"...."hammer"...."used to drive tacks"

A gun can be used as a hammer....a hammer can not be used as a gun.

Beer is food, food is not beer.

Beer is proof that God loves us all and wants us to be happy.

God made men, Sam Colt made men equal.

'Gun' is fine cuz everybody calls them guns.

Now, if you will excuse me, I need to go strap on me gats.

papa bear · Jul 13, 2012

if you are using a firearm to kill someone, then i agree it is a weapon. just like the military is out to kill personnel. but if you are carrying a firearm for self defense, i hope you are not out to kill someone

i stand by my post. if you use the POLITICALLY CORRECT term of weapon then you are the same as the Brady bunch. using the same tactics against them is a good thing

don't understand the "head in the sand" comment, i find the old term of weapon to be stagnant. here in NC the term weapon is used to describe anything used to kill or harm another human being. the other day i ran into a traveler that asked "can you carry your weapon in NC", to which i replied " no, you can only carry a firearm in NC, not a weapon"

Brutus · Jul 13, 2012

Tony_B said:
The media and [so-called] law enforcement always refer to firearms of any type as "weapons." The term weapon, at least to my ears and I suspect the majority of the brainwashed masses, tends to connote an item used in an offensive nature as opposed to a defensive nature. A weapon sounds menacing.

Might I suggest that we use the term "firearm" when referencing those items we own that are best characterized as "firearms?" I'm not sure when and where the term weapon came into play in describing what we know as firearms, but I'm certain is was calculated to elicit a specific response in those people who hear that term. A negative one at that.

Furthermore, using an opponent's terms to define us and our property can never be a good thing. Just a thought I've had for some time that I'd throw out for consideration.

Excellent idea, sir!

I think we should all make a conscious effort to stop referring to our firearms as "weapons" from now on. Here on OCDO I always make a very specific reference, to even include my holster, belt, flashlight, etc... For example: "yesterday, I was going about my usual business ...wearing my 511 tactical trousers, Brauer shirt, and Danner desert boots. As usual, I was carrying my daily OC usual firearm, compensated Glock G22 in a Blackhawk SERPA Level III holster, with my favorite Benchmade knife (an olive Infidel DA OTF) and my Streamlight Stinger in my right front pocket. My BUG (a Glock G19) was in my left front pocket and balancing out the load was my was my SERPA double magazine holder with two extended DF Glock 30 round magazines, giving me 81 rounds of CCI Gold Dot 180 gr JHP (plus the 15 rounds of CCI Gold Dot +p 124 gr JHP in my G19...a total load-out of 96 rounds.) Anyway, when I stopped for fuel at the local Gas-n-Go, I saw this shifty-looking fellow eyeing the gas pump. As soon as he saw my OC firearm, he quickly paid for his gas and left. I'm sure my presence possibly prevented a potential armed robbery and drive-off."

From now on, I am going to call mine a "gat", or a "heater", or a "piece" when I'm speaking generically. When I want to be more specific though, I will directly reference my "equalizer" (d'oh, there's another!) as to the caliber and/or model. For example, if I'm carrying my S&W 36 I refer to it as my "trey-eight", but if I'm packing my Glock 22 I tell my posse that I'm packing my "glock fo'tay." I typically tuck into the front of my pants "Mexican style" or in the hood of my hoodie, "Miami style. I think this will clearly demonstrate my fellings about the semantics of gun ownership. (D'oh, I did it again!)

Evil Creamsicle · Jul 13, 2012

Just sayin'...

Also, Merlin, I'm stealing this.

I prefer the term constitutionally-protected-constitution-protector.

mwaterous · Jul 13, 2012

papa bear said:
if you are using a firearm to kill someone, then i agree it is a weapon. just like the military is out to kill personnel. but if you are carrying a firearm for self defense, i hope you are not out to kill someone

i stand by my post. if you use the POLITICALLY CORRECT term of weapon then you are the same as the Brady bunch. using the same tactics against them is a good thing

don't understand the "head in the sand" comment, i find the old term of weapon to be stagnant. here in NC the term weapon is used to describe anything used to kill or harm another human being. the other day i ran into a traveler that asked "can you carry your weapon in NC", to which i replied " no, you can only carry a firearm in NC, not a weapon"

I still think it's being more PC trying to rename something (which is why PC terms, whether or not correct, are applied to anything that may possibly offend people with weak constitutions). When you fence, your sword is still considered a weapon. The only reason we don't get all up in arms about that (pardon the pun) is because there is no wanky bunch trying to outlaw fencing.

With the clarification that I was not intending that as a personal attack, my "head in the sand" comment was referring to the situation at hand; when you attempt to pretend something is what it isn't, or isn't happening when it is, I consider that an ostrich penalty. It's a weapon. If we start calling them "tools" the semi intelligent to intelligent antis will all catch on that we're trying to placate and patronize them. That tends to tick people off and rejuvenate their zeal. I'd rather not offend anybody's intelligence by lying to them. It's a weapon. I will use it as a weapon if I need to, god forbid I ever need to. It will never harm an innocent though and if it ever does I'll happily throw myself on the sword.

pfries · Jul 13, 2012

Merlin said:
I prefer the term constitutionally-protected-constitution-protector.

May I borrow this?

scott58dh · Jul 14, 2012

This is my Rifle, This is My gun !

This is my Rifle, This is My gun !

Sound Familiar ?,,, "Full Metal Jacket"

Name Your Poison,,, Firearm, Sidearm, Wheelgun, Pistol, Piece, Roscoe, Rod, Heater, Hog Leg, Burner, Strap, etc.,,,

ANYTHING but,,, *My Gun* !

Merlin · Jul 14, 2012

Evil Creamsicle said:
.

Exactly. I love that picture. Immediately Facebooked. Yep, I think that's pretty much what we are talking about here. We should seize the reins and steer the conversation. That starts with terminology that is precise, succinct, and if-at-all possible, non-threatening to the uninformed.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Merlin · Jul 14, 2012

mwaterous said:
It's a weapon. If we start calling them "tools" the semi intelligent to intelligent antis will all catch on that we're trying to placate and patronize them. That tends to tick people off and rejuvenate their zeal. I'd rather not offend anybody's intelligence by lying to them. It's a weapon.

Agreed. I don't think "tool" was really being suggested. That is how I refer to my Leatherman.

I think the term that I find to be precise, succinct, and non-threatening, is Firearm. It is not dishonest, inaccurate, patronizing or squishy. I just think it conveys a different tone. The best way I can convey it is that, to me, the term "weapon" has a certain "hostility" to it. I don't feel the same can be said about "firearm".

Yes firearms are still useful when hostility is needed. There, I saved you a reply.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Merlin · Jul 14, 2012

pfries said:
May I borrow this?

Hells yeah! This is part of what is so beautiful about our constitution. It has a built in Alarm System (1st amendment), with a backup armed security response (2nd amendment), and a last resort panic room (10th amendment).

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

pfries · Jul 14, 2012

Merlin said:
Hells yeah! This is part of what is so beautiful about our constitution. It has a built in Alarm System (1st amendment), with a backup armed security response (2nd amendment), and a last resort panic room (10th amendment).

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Moments like this I wish we had a like button...

WhatTimeIsIt? · Jul 14, 2012

Merlin said:
I never said there was anything wrong with referring to it by what it is, a weapon. The original question, and my statements, were more to the effect of this:

Is there something to be gained, I.e. would it be better for our cause if we used terminology that is less threatening to the uninformed masses?

No, you don't have to.
No, you SHOULDN'T have to.
But, is it in our collective best interest to put a non-threatening face on something that is, well, threatening?

Is it silly? Yes. But is it worth it anyway, in spite of that fact? I think so. If you don't, understood. Agree to disagree on that one.

The the liberal, uninformed media tend to like the term "Assault Weapon" for damn near everything. And it works, much to my dismay. We could learn something from that.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

If you are worried about terminology, you ought to watch the phrase "collective best interest" because that vague, borderline meaningless, phrase is straight out of the liberal/socialist handbook. It is never in my in my best interest to deny reality, so I will acknowledge that my handguns are weapons. I typically call them handguns, because that is a more precise term, but "weapon" would definitely apply, so it is therefore not wrong. I will argue the merits of the 2nd amendment and individuals carrying firearms using reason and logic, not careful wordplay to elicit certain emotions. If people don't respond to reason and logic, then I ignore them, because they aren't worth my time.

papa bear · Jul 14, 2012

mwaterous said:
I still think it's being more PC trying to rename something (which is why PC terms, whether or not correct, are applied to anything that may possibly offend people with weak constitutions). When you fence, your sword is still considered a weapon. The only reason we don't get all up in arms about that (pardon the pun) is because there is no wanky bunch trying to outlaw fencing.

With the clarification that I was not intending that as a personal attack, my "head in the sand" comment was referring to the situation at hand; when you attempt to pretend something is what it isn't, or isn't happening when it is, I consider that an ostrich penalty. It's a weapon. If we start calling them "tools" the semi intelligent to intelligent antis will all catch on that we're trying to placate and patronize them. That tends to tick people off and rejuvenate their zeal. I'd rather not offend anybody's intelligence by lying to them. It's a weapon. I will use it as a weapon if I need to, god forbid I ever need to. It will never harm an innocent though and if it ever does I'll happily throw myself on the sword.

not trying to start an argument, but "weapon" is the modern PC word. look at the 2ndA, it says firearm not weapons (oh how different things would be if it did). the terminology of "weapons" didn't come about till the 70's. then as the police started to militarize and the anti's started to heat up, that they started using the term weapons.
if you were active in advocating carry (any kind) then you would see that we have to convince more people that carrying a firearm is not trying to incite or kill anything. when you use the term "weapon", it confirms what they see in their (brain washed) minds. and you pretty well loose the argument then. i would love to share with you, even with the anti's, the light that goes off when you convince someone that you and your firearm is safe to have around

BTW, NEED is a communist word

May I suggest a different choice of words when referencing one's firearm?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Activist Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member