What Does A Gun Mean To You?

From Control Arms.. a global campaign for a universal arms trade treaty:

OH NOES A killing machine in the wrong hands?!  So exactly like a car? steak knife? drill? hammer? baseball bat? beer bottle? etc… etc…

0:27 – I love how they didn’t seat the magazine, just to make it look longer (more deadly). They should have just got a drum or a 45 rounder instead.

1:07 – “I can’t look at a gun without thinking of the gun runners who are responsible for the bloodshed and the communities destroyed…” – Sucks to be her… she must get pretty freaked out and get flashbacks around law enforcement and members of the military too.

This weekend, lets destroy all the guns and hold hands and sing Kumbaya.  It will really make the world a better place. :/

So what does a gun mean to you?  Do you like the idea of a global universal arms trade treaty (ha!)?

Hat tip: Kyle P.



Dan The Viking June 23, 2012 at 12:17 am

“guns are a major part of what esq-u-lates conflict”
All I could do was scream a distraught “WHAT?!” at my monitor.

Poppy June 23, 2012 at 03:07 am

I know! If some dude is trying to mug/murder/rape me and I react by redecorating the sidewalk with his brain-matter, I’m pretty sure that the conflict has been ended and not escalated.

Rob C. June 23, 2012 at 12:22 am

A gun means I’m a citizen, not a subject

Komodo Saurian June 23, 2012 at 04:46 am

Must be nice having gun rights.

hydepark June 23, 2012 at 04:15 pm

Ditto, Rob.

James M&P June 23, 2012 at 01:50 am

These same people that are crying out for Gun Control(Gun Prohibition) can look in history and see that is doesn’t work for Alcohol or Marijuana. What makes them believe that it will work for guns? Ok after gun control my Grandpa can’t go get a firearm but the gangbanger down the street won’t be deterred. A gun means to me the ultimate freedom and responsibility. gun control ≠ freedom.

W-Dawg June 23, 2012 at 01:55 am

You can’t look at a gun and not think of gun runners…? Oh so your a liberal who makes decisions based on emotions rather than fact. Just wanted to clarify.

Rydak June 23, 2012 at 02:44 am

I’m thinking that if you were able to instantly destroy all guns in the world and then chose to do so. And then actually did it. The people with bows and arrows or machetes would be the same people, only with a different type of weapon. Slightly older and slower, but just as effective and then end result would be the same.

The same can be said if you destroyed all bows and arrows and all long knives. Then it would be groups of young and strong men doing the same thing, only with their hands. The body count would be the same and so would the victims.

This type of methodology is fundamentally flawed and has in fact led to the death of more people than can be counted.

Chrontius June 29, 2012 at 12:10 pm

Actually, the victims wouldn’t be the same. The better your weapon, the more you can replace raw physical brawn with skill. The survivors would be biased toward young adult males, and as the peaceful folks died off, people (both individually, and as a group) will probably become, paradoxically, more violent.

Enjoy your unintended consequences! :D

Komodo Saurian June 23, 2012 at 04:43 am

From their website:

Thousands of people are killed, injured, raped, and forced to flee from their homes as a result of the unregulated global arms trade.

Uhhh, you sure? Because people have been killed, injured, raped and forced to flee from their homes for thousands of years long before the gunpowder was discovered.

Chrontius June 29, 2012 at 12:12 pm

Wasn’t the Darfur massacre being perpetuated by people with sticks and/or agricultural tools and horses against people without modern arms?

Will June 23, 2012 at 06:40 am

Guns Cause wars? I’d bet religion has caused more wars then guns, why not ban that?

Church June 23, 2012 at 05:43 pm

Sick burn.

ozwald June 23, 2012 at 07:12 am

i made a shotgun from shit i stole from a hardware store and my neighbor’s trashcan when i was 14… it always amuses me when people assume banning or restricting firearms will somehow make them vanish.

bima June 23, 2012 at 08:19 am

this gun “treaty” thing will only harm law abiding citizens..
because criminals/terrorist don’t care what ever ban/rule/law is out there about gun control/restriction.

jodark June 23, 2012 at 08:31 am

This is going to have its comments disabled so fast it isn’t funny.

dave w June 23, 2012 at 09:29 am

:07 – “I can’t look at a gun without thinking of the gun runners who are responsible for the bloodshed and the communities destroyed…”
I would take that up with eric holder if i were them

Jim P. June 23, 2012 at 09:36 am

Just think of World of Warcraft. Outside of the mages, what has not previously existed as a ranged weapon. It is the person behind the weapon, not the weapon itself*, that is dangerous.

* I have seen some really crappy firearms, knives and other tools that to use would be dangerous to the user. ;-)

Ed June 23, 2012 at 08:42 pm
Jeff June 23, 2012 at 11:35 am

I dunno, I’ve stared at designs long enough that all those connotations lost its meaning.
When I see a 1911, I think “Mother of all autoloading pistols, barrel links, locking lugs”
Glocks are “Striker Fired, tilting barrel, WTF happened to Gen4”

Tanner June 23, 2012 at 12:28 pm

What does a gun mean to me?

It means that I might be about to run outta safe space. Or ammo. Or money. Probably all three.

hydepark June 23, 2012 at 04:14 pm

A gun to me is what is necessary to prevent any tyrant or dictator from personally subjugating me.

Aaron June 23, 2012 at 05:38 pm

As I recall, the vast majority of deaths in the mid-1990s Rwanda genocide were inflicted by machetes. Perhaps if the intended victims had AK-47s, they could have resisted successfully and more would be alive today?
Machetes are a vital tool for jungle clearing and other purposes in third world nations – no one would serious talk of taking those away.

AKFTW June 23, 2012 at 07:36 pm

Guns are the most expeditious, and efficient means of each person enforcing their own universal human right to self-defense. Those who fear guns still inevitably rely on those who do wield them for their safety and protection. Take out the middleman, arm yourself and take control of your own destiny.

War June 24, 2012 at 03:50 pm

Removing guns only means that those with guns (criminals, political criminals and the military they control) now are vastly superior in firepower, and are now extremely capable of ruling in whatever way they see fit. Kind of a “No shit.” scenario.

NKato June 24, 2012 at 06:51 pm

Guns are, to me, a form of defense and offense when it comes to survival.

Stick a MG32 in my hands, and throw me against a street gang wielding pistols who bear the intent to kill, and I will most certainly ensure their demise without another word.

Eric June 24, 2012 at 10:50 pm

I think we should outlaw murder and get the problem at its source. Like in California when they outlawed pacifiers and plastic bags to stop ecstasy use and litter. Probably should just outlaw ecstasy and littering, and then nobody will do it.

Jwhite June 25, 2012 at 05:03 pm

Must to cleans my spirit of this Anti propaganda….

TEDx – Peter van Uhm: Why I chose a gun

Jwhite June 25, 2012 at 05:04 pm

I must have thought of a different sentence or something. I say shutup and watch the video.

Dennis June 27, 2012 at 05:48 am

This video is ignorant.

Plus, at 1:16…was somebody hammering nails with the muzzle of that Ak?

Ray.C June 27, 2012 at 06:14 pm

This video is stupid saying “weapons escalate conflicts”??! Have these people ever heard of the Romans or Genghis Kahn? If we didn’t have guns we’d use bow and arrow, or rocks and sticks, or hands and feet.. “conflict escalation” has nothing to do with weapons…

Older post:

Newer post: