this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
231 points (96.8% liked)
Technology
59587 readers
2729 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Mate, he's right. First definition. "A handheld device used to aid in performing a task." Any gun falls into that definition. But sure, get hung up on asking them to define every word in their statements, that's a good way to not have to actually engage with the concept.
Task =\= murder
When I hire a task rabbit is that the same as hiring a hitman? When I open task manager should I see process "kill my cheating ex"?
Did I do that? Yes or no question.
I am fine with engaging with the topic, I did so. He/she clung to definitions while I was blunt and pointed out that a gun is not a screwdriver and should be banned or regulated just like we do with any weapon.
Ironic that the first thing you jump to in defense of your previous point is a definition argument.
Hilarious that that argument is, again,flat out wrong.
something hard or unpleasant that has to be done
It was always a definition argument. Oh and that wasn't actually ironic just thought you would like to know.
Now instead of trying to score rhetorical points why don't you answer literally any of the questions I asked in the previous comment. I know it's vital to defend your BFF Rittenhouse but you don't do a good job defending him when you don't actually engage with what is being presented.
This whole tangent began because you asked for someone to prove that weapons are tools. Dictionaries report common usage of terms, and a gun absolutely, 100% meets the criteria for the top definition for "tool". I'm literally giving you the information you asked for. If you didn't want a definition for tool, why would you ask for someone to prove that a gun is a tool, one of the necessary steps of which is to agree on a definition?
Keep going off, though.
No. You obviously need help reading.
Do I, though? I'm pretty sure I read it right.
Not if you think a gun is a tool in the sense a claw hammer is
Okay now we're getting somewhere. What definition of tool do you propose we use, that includes claw peen hammers and other "obvious" tools, but excludes firearms?
Noun, a device that aids in productive work.
Now my turn to ask a question, which one of these images is not like the other
So do you not consider hunting for food productive? What about sporting purposes?
There's a very real reason I'm digging in on this. You can't just arbitrarily say a certain thing isn't what it clearly is, because it suits your purposes. A gun is still a tool, even if it's quite regularly misused. You lose nothing by classifying it as a tool, and by seeking to reclassify it as something else, you open the door to a host of legal fuckery.
Further, we regulate tools all the time, so it's not like saying it's a tool means we can't, or shouldn't, regulate firearms. Just look at cars. Definitely tools, and regulated to high hell. It's important to be specific, though, if we're proposing to regulate things. If you're not specific, you end up with dumb things like certain kinds of nail guns being regulated as firearms.
I'm not some crazy gun nut. I think there should absolutely be some more regulations on guns. I think they should make sense, though, and to do that you have to define your terms rigidly.
I will play the Jeopardy theme song while I wait. Dun dun dun du dun dun...dun du dun du
Well, three of them are construction workers, and one is a kid misusing a tool, is what you want me to say. If you want an example of what I'm talking about, though - three are white, and one is black. Three are facing left, and one is facing right. Three have their arms up, and one had their arms down. All of those are valid answers to your question. This is why definitions, agreeing on them, and sticking to them, are important.
There, you got my response, now go engage with my argument, instead of deflecting.
Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Great job.
Hey you know what has never happened to me? I have never been attacked by people in sheer terror when I handled a multimeter during a riot. Funny story I did have to go to a customer site very close to a BLM protest. No problems, guess when you are holding tools in your hand and have a hardhat on you are invisible as you present zero threat. Some people are trying to keep civilization going and others are waving guns around, what can I say.
Fine but yeah let me engage with your "argument". As I noted before the use cases for a gun are an almost invisibly small fraction of what they actually get used for. For every guy out there who needs to use one to hunt or will starve there about 1 million out there who are wannabe tough guys with small dicks or school shooters. When something is used as a weapon 99.999999% of the time it is not a tool.
And weapons are tools. We've come full circle. Appeal to emotions all you want. That's all your argument boils down to. It's fuckin hilarious to me that you seem to think this argument is about whether or not guns are a good thing. That's NEVER been the argument here. Guns aren't good or bad, they're simply tools. Treat them with respect and seek actual understanding, and maybe we can actually effectively regulate them.
Nope. Weapons are weapons, tools are tools.
Pretty sure definitionally speaking, you're wrong, as evidenced above.
No. An AR-15 is not in the same category of a claw hammer.
You clearly don't care to listen to any of the heaps of evidence that points to the contrary. If you're not arguing with the intention of actually hearing anything your opposition is saying, why argue? Just like wasting time?
I have seen none of these heaps.
Because you choose not to look. That's the whole point. You refuse to engage with anything.
Guess I have to post those four pictures again. Maybe you will figure it out next time
You sound angry.
Even if I were it wouldn't be a big deal since I don't own a weapon, only tools. Unlike your boy Rittenhouse
You make a lot of assumptions about me based on nothing. Not a good look.
By many you mean one. Not trying to defend your argument about guns being tools I noticed
Why would I defend it when it hasn't been attacked?
Yes it has, just like your boy Rittenhouse did to those protesters
Mate the closest thing you've done to making a counter argument is say "nuh uh!" Lol. And again, you're making baseless assumptions about me.