Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Is everyone who uses a weapon for target practice secretly thinking about violence? [View all]Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)24. You are assuming people cannot have different thoughts at different points in time.
The mind works in interesting ways but what I find truly telling is how you stated in just the other thread that: "If two armed robbers are shot dead during the commission of their crime or they are hung while caught in the commission of their crime, what, in practical terms, is the difference? Not much." - Please explain to us the philosophical mechanics that would allow you to hang someone "while caught in the commission of their crime" and not have been previously engaged in a violent fantasy life.
I assume this goes back to your assertion that people cannot target shoot without having violent fantasies.
You are making the assumption that people cannot think about one thing at one point in time and think about another thing at another point in time.
For example, I frequently have to think about mathematics in my profession. This does not mean that I think about mathematics all the time.
I frequently contemplate violence, particularly violent crime and the violent consequences and intents of the second amendment, which is at its heart an amendment which gives the people the ability to inflict violence.
This does not mean that I think about violence all the time or that every time I use firearms I am thinking about violence.
Seems to main motive one would have for going to a shooting range is to accustom themselves to the use of firearms, which only have one function, the application of lethal force.
But firearms have more than one function. Firearms can also be used to shoot targets. This has absolutely nothing to do with lethal force.
If you're not contemplating the application of lethal force, why would you need a gun?
It is rather hard to smack a clay pigeon out of the air by force of thought. I suppose you could use sling-shots or some other kind of projectile or energy weapon but it would still be a weapon.
This about the nature of motive and how we justify it to ourselves. For a military sniper, the training difference between shooting a target and a human being is negligible. When you go to the range, you are training in the lethal application of force, and that is the only thing you are really actually doing. You may take pleasure in that, but that does not negate the purpose in which the activity has been constructed, your sense of your own identity has changed.
It is entirely possible for someone to train to use a weapon to kill people and also train to use a weapon to shoot targets. This does not mean that when they are shooting targets they are contemplating killing people, or even training to do so.
I will give an example: Some boxers and other martial artists will train in ballet as it improves balance. This does not mean that training for ballet implies you are training for a martial art, even though ballet training might be beneficial in a martial art. Ballet training is training for ballet. It may have other happy consequences.
Target shooting is about shooting targets. It may well also improve one's ability to shoot people or animals, but this does not mean that shooting targets is necessarily about shooting people or animals. Obviously if you are shooting targets simulating people then you are, in fact, training to shoot people.
But people who are training to shoot targets are simply thinking about shooting targets.
People who throw javelins are likewise thinking about how far they can throw a javelin. Even though javelins were historically used as a weapon, this does not mean that everyone who is throwing a javelin is contemplating skewering someone with it.
People who compete in fencing attempt to tag their opponent with their epee. This does not mean that everyone who competes with an epee is contemplating running their opponent through with their weapon.
People who shoot archery are likewise thinking about shooting a target. They might be practicing to improve their ability to shoot a living creature while hunting, but they might just be practicing to improve their ability tho shoot a target.
I assume this goes back to your assertion that people cannot target shoot without having violent fantasies.
You are making the assumption that people cannot think about one thing at one point in time and think about another thing at another point in time.
For example, I frequently have to think about mathematics in my profession. This does not mean that I think about mathematics all the time.
I frequently contemplate violence, particularly violent crime and the violent consequences and intents of the second amendment, which is at its heart an amendment which gives the people the ability to inflict violence.
This does not mean that I think about violence all the time or that every time I use firearms I am thinking about violence.
Seems to main motive one would have for going to a shooting range is to accustom themselves to the use of firearms, which only have one function, the application of lethal force.
But firearms have more than one function. Firearms can also be used to shoot targets. This has absolutely nothing to do with lethal force.
If you're not contemplating the application of lethal force, why would you need a gun?
It is rather hard to smack a clay pigeon out of the air by force of thought. I suppose you could use sling-shots or some other kind of projectile or energy weapon but it would still be a weapon.
This about the nature of motive and how we justify it to ourselves. For a military sniper, the training difference between shooting a target and a human being is negligible. When you go to the range, you are training in the lethal application of force, and that is the only thing you are really actually doing. You may take pleasure in that, but that does not negate the purpose in which the activity has been constructed, your sense of your own identity has changed.
It is entirely possible for someone to train to use a weapon to kill people and also train to use a weapon to shoot targets. This does not mean that when they are shooting targets they are contemplating killing people, or even training to do so.
I will give an example: Some boxers and other martial artists will train in ballet as it improves balance. This does not mean that training for ballet implies you are training for a martial art, even though ballet training might be beneficial in a martial art. Ballet training is training for ballet. It may have other happy consequences.
Target shooting is about shooting targets. It may well also improve one's ability to shoot people or animals, but this does not mean that shooting targets is necessarily about shooting people or animals. Obviously if you are shooting targets simulating people then you are, in fact, training to shoot people.
But people who are training to shoot targets are simply thinking about shooting targets.
People who throw javelins are likewise thinking about how far they can throw a javelin. Even though javelins were historically used as a weapon, this does not mean that everyone who is throwing a javelin is contemplating skewering someone with it.
People who compete in fencing attempt to tag their opponent with their epee. This does not mean that everyone who competes with an epee is contemplating running their opponent through with their weapon.
People who shoot archery are likewise thinking about shooting a target. They might be practicing to improve their ability to shoot a living creature while hunting, but they might just be practicing to improve their ability tho shoot a target.
TopBack to the top of the page
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
ShareGet links to this post
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
64 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Is everyone who uses a weapon for target practice secretly thinking about violence? [View all]
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
OP
When I go target shooting, of course I'm thinking and speaking openly about violence!
slackmaster
Feb 2012
#6
When I was shooting tanks I was thinking about chasing women and getting high.
era veteran
Feb 2012
#7
You are assuming people cannot have different thoughts at different points in time.
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#24
So are the Olympic games in shooting and archery and fencing leading to militarism?
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#33
"...my argument was that it conditions them to accept and participate in violence."
Glassunion
Feb 2012
#19
Sometimes metaphysics has nothing to do with anything. Sometimes it is just physics...
Glassunion
Feb 2012
#25
Assuming that everyone who shoots projectiles is thinking about violence...
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#36
You obviously would never appreciate how difficult accurate shooting at long range is...
spin
Feb 2012
#38
Of course you realize our Constitution explicitly endorses militarism.
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#63
To say using weapons is to be into a "death cult" is like saying being into sex is being into rape.
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#47
This "militarization" has been going on since man first picked up a rock.
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#32
As I said, I often contemplate violence and the implications of firearms and violence.
Atypical Liberal
Feb 2012
#56