Originally Posted by The Saint
That's not how the legal definition of weapon works....
And giving into the idea that all weapons are evil is self-defeating. That's buying into ANTI's tagline and the last thing any self-proclaimed PRO should do. By law, weapons aren't evil, evil intent are evil. If you give into the silly notion that weapons can be evil, you might as well bury your guns now because your guns will never, ever be safe.
Brian's right, pro-gun arguments steeped in the same rhetorical BS as the anti-gun arguments is counter productive. It just makes it impossible to deal with the issue in a logical manner, because both sides are arguing from extremes that doesn't work.
The biggest enemy of gun ownership isn't the so-called ANTIs, it's the way the extreme PRO and ANTI drown out rational discourse with a lot of chest pounding.
And your point is what, exactly?
Our current round of laws was rammed through Parliament with suspended debate in a mjority goverment. Lobbyists were paid to lobby the government by the government (Kim Doran and Wendy Cukier and the CGC) for just such an act.
Now, we have a generation born and bred to hate guns, fear them, and demand their removal at worst and severe restrictions at best.
You are not ever going to win the argument that guns are not dangerous weapons that people don't need, like you aren't going to win the argument that explosives or martial arts weapons should be unregulated.
So, then what?
Are people simply going to allow guns because other people like the idea? Get serious. There are times when you have to fight fire with fire, as gun owners and pro-gun advocates don't have any water.