Guns and Intent

[Deleted member 42253]

In some countries in the world, you automatically are on the hook for murder if you use a gun to kill someone.

The reasoning behind this is pretty simple. Guns have only one purpose and that is to kill human beings. There is no other use for a gun(Hunters being the exception here). So, keeping that in mind, you are already planning to kill someone, the moment you buy or otherwise aquire a gun. Which means, if you use the gun to kill someone, no matter the excuse you got, you have commited murder.

Agree or disagree if you like, but what I am most interested in, is how to explain that pretty simple line of reasoning(I tried and failed .. multiple times, very frustrating). The main problem seems to be, that they refuse to even acknowledge that guns are for killing people(Interesting enough, had the same problem with trying to explain, that killing people is in a soldiers job description).

 

[Led Zeppelin]

In some countries in the world, you automatically are on the hook for murder if you use a gun to kill someone.

The reasoning behind this is pretty simple. Guns have only one purpose and that is to kill human beings. There is no other use for a gun(Hunters being the exception here). So, keeping that in mind, you are already planning to kill someone, the moment you buy or otherwise aquire a gun. Which means, if you use the gun to kill someone, no matter the excuse you got, you have commited murder.

Agree or disagree if you like, but what I am most interested in, is how to explain that pretty simple line of reasoning, to an American(I tried and failed .. multiple times, very frustrating). The main problem seems to be, that they refuse to even acknowledge that guns are for killing people(Interesting enough, had the same problem with trying to explain, that killing people is in a soldiers job description).

I could possibly come up with a few reasons as to why your stupid argument is not working. Probably the main reason is that people can instinctively tell that you are full of shit. So they dont waste much time arguing with you. 2nd reason is that there is no real constructive outcome of what you are arguing anyway.

Consider this, you get thrown in prison one day for breaking some stupid law they have in the US. You are hoping to goto an easy prison, but your pre-sentence investigation shows you brought a water gun to school back when you were 18 so you are considered a threat. Now you get to go to the bad prison. Lots of guys want to fuck your pretty ass there, because you are punk. The only thing that's stopping them is a shank you made from some thin pieces of metal you found inside an air filter stuck in an old wall somewhere in the complex.

Lol! Are you going to give that shank to the guards and tell them "Shanks are wrong because they are for killing people!"

I think not. So what's the point?

 

[Deleted member 42253]

Oh, go ahead, give me a couple of reasons, why guns are ... not meant for killing people?

Thanks for illustrating my point though. So .. how do I explain this to Led Zeppelin?

And just as a side note, people usually do not get raped or killed in prisons .. thats not normal.

 

[*SD*]

Guns have only one purpose and that is to kill human beings. There is no other use for a gun(Hunters being the exception here).

Sorry, wait, is this your assertion or is this someone elses position? This is demonstrably incorrect for at least a million reasons. I'll wait for you to clarify before I respond further.

 

[Greg the Grouper]

My understanding of murder is that it assumes premeditation. Even granting you that one purchases a firearm with the understanding that it exists solely as a means of killing someone, I fail to see how this then translates to premeditation. Maybe if it was purchased within days of its use, but years prior? I doubt that would hold up in a court of law.

 

[*SD*]

Oh, go ahead, give me a couple of reasons, why guns are ... not meant for killing people?

Gladly.

Target sports
Plinking
Olympic Sports
Collecting
Items of historical interest
Pest Control
Recreation
Cinematic Reenactment

None of which have anything whatsoever to do with killing humans. The only one that has anything to do with killing anything in that list is pest control. And this is just off the top of my head, as a firearms owner.

 

[Deleted member 42253]

Sorry, wait, is this your assertion or is this someone elses position? This is demonstrably incorrect for at least a million reasons. I'll wait for you to clarify before I respond further.

Both my assertion, as well as official government position in a few countries, Germany for example. Of course excluding hunting and sports. But you would have a really hard time explaining why you would need a handgun for hunting.

My understanding of murder is that it assumes premeditation. Even granting you that one purchases a firearm with the understanding that it exists solely as a means of killing someone, I fail to see how this then translates to premeditation. Maybe if it was purchased within days of its use, but years prior? I doubt that would hold up in a court of law.

Since a gun has no other purpose than to kill someone, the moment you get it, you are planning to kill someone with it. There is no other purpose you can use it for. So its premediation. Applies for everything classified as a weapon actually, rather than a tool.

 

[*SD*]

But you would have a really hard time explaining why you would need a handgun for hunting.

No, you wouldn't. Handguns are often used for humane dispatch of injured quarry.

 

[Deleted member 42253]

What is plinking?
How do you use a gun .. recreationally?
No need for a real gun for Cinematic Reenactment.
What kind of pests do you need a gun for?

No problem with the rest of them and its possible to get a license/exception for those.

Does not change though, that if you are not a hunter, sportsman or collector, you have no reason or justification for owning a gun.

 

[*SD*]

Since a gun has no other purpose than to kill someone, the moment you get it, you are planning to kill someone with it. There is no other purpose you can use it for.

Incorrect. But maybe you haven't seen my previous post yet.

 

[Deleted member 42253]

Yeah SD, already cited hunter as an exception in the initial post, should have added sportsman and collector also, little oversight on my part.

Then lets modify, there is no reason for a regular Joe to have a gun, except for killing people.

 

[Greg the Grouper]

Since a gun has no other purpose than to kill someone, the moment you get it, you are planning to kill someone with it.

Even granting your premise, this is incorrect: one can purchase a firearm for the purpose of defending their home from intruders, hence a scenario where they possess a firearm with the intention of killing someone without actively planning to do so. You might say otherwise, but that being the case, I'd like for you to explain how a person can plan to have someone else plan to break into their home.

And even granting the above, this still fails to qualify as premeditation, simply because you're not actively planning to kill a specific person. Purchasing a firearm to defend yourself and then shooting someone that poses a threat isn't premeditation; purchasing a firearm to kill your ex-wife and then shooting your ex-wife is.

 

[*SD*]

Then lets modify, there is no reason for a regular Joe to have a gun, except for killing people.

I appreciate your attempt at a steelman, but this is still incorrect for the above mentioned reasons (which is by no means an exhaustive list)

Yes, there are reasons, some of which I've already mentioned.

 

[Sparhafoc]

Guns have only one purpose and that is to kill human beings.

It's quite clearly not true.

Even without addressing the numerous other ways guns are used.... you could buy a gun in the hopes that having one means that no one needs get killed. For example, a guy with a knife breaks into your house and threatens you and your kids, but if you had a gun in your hand then the intruder's knife threat can be neutralized thereby plausibly saving someone's life.

This is of course entirely hypothetical, but it's a hypothetical scenario that could be occurring in a person's imagination as they decide to buy a gun, hoping never ever to need it or harm a person.

So a better rendition then would be that guns are a credible threat to people: it's why people buy them, and it's also why so many people are killed with them.

 

[*SD*]

What is plinking?

Plinking is shooting at inanimate objects (tin cans, paper targets, spinners etc etc) on land where you have permission to do so and can do so without danger to the public and without disrupting the peace.

How do you use a gun .. recreationally?

See above.

No need for a real gun for Cinematic Reenactment.

It's not an absolute requirement, but it still counts as a reason for realistic effect in some scenarios with clever editing

What kind of pests do you need a gun for?

I'm not trying to be rude, but is this a serious question?

No problem with the rest of them and its possible to get a license/exception for those.

Legalities and qualifications vary from country to country, not sure what you're getting at here

Does not change though, that if you are not a hunter, sportsman or collector, you have no reason or justification for owning a gun.

Yes, it does, see above.

 

[Greg the Grouper]

@*SD*

I would assume that he's thinking of mice, or something similar when you mention pests.

 

[Sparhafoc]

What is plinking?

Target practice.

How do you use a gun .. recreationally?

Well, shooting targets, for example.

No need for a real gun for Cinematic Reenactment.

No need, but then if they have one, it's still a gun with no intent to kill./

What kind of pests do you need a gun for?

Rabbits are probably the most common for farmers in the UK. It would depend on where you live.

Does not change though, that if you are not a hunter, sportsman or collector, you have no reason or justification for owning a gun.

What have the Romans ever done for us?

 

[Deleted member 42253]

Even granting your premise, this is incorrect: one can purchase a firearm for the purpose of defending their home from intruders, hence a scenario where they possess a firearm with the intention of killing someone without actively planning to do so. You might say otherwise, but that being the case, I'd like for you to explain how a person can plan to have someone else plan to break into their home.

And even granting the above, this still fails to qualify as premeditation, simply because you're not actively planning to kill a specific person. Purchasing a firearm to defend yourself and then shooting someone that poses a threat isn't premeditation; purchasing a firearm to kill your ex-wife and then shooting your ex-wife is.

Yeah, thats a problem psikhrangkur. I have no right to kill someone over my property in Europe and it is the job of the police to protect me. When someone intrudes my home, I am supposed to run or hide in the bathroom.

And honestly, I personally find the idea that my TV is worth more than someones life, morally reprehensible .. and no, no one wants to kill me or my family.

And yes, puchasing a firearm to defend yourself(by killing someone) is .. premediation. The only difference is, that I am not planning to kill someone specifically.

 

[Sparhafoc]

And yes, puchasing a firearm to defend yourself(by killing someone) is .. premediation. The only difference is, that I am not planning to kill someone specifically.

It's still trivially false as well.

Buying a gun to ward off intruders indicates zero intent to kill someone.

 

[Deleted member 42253]

@*SD* Yeah ... I was thinking cockroaches when you mentioned pests, anything bigger is a job for a hunter.

And I disagree with anything other than hunting, sports and collections, considering how dangerous guns are. And many countries actually agree there.