TexasCHLforum.com

G26ster wrote:

Thomas wrote:

Purplehood wrote:

G26ster wrote:What difference does any of this make???

It gives us a topic to discuss!

Heh

I'm just curious about what everyone thinks. I'm sure there are some others who are interested in reading everyone's comments.

I do appreciate everyone's responses so far.

Why would a law abiding CHL holder consider anything but the legal definition as stated in Texas PC 1.07(a)(17)? The way your questions are worded it appears we have a choice, and our opinion is what matters. In any case, it's your poll/thread, not mine.

The fact of the matter is that in common conversation, we do have a choice and I think that's what this thread is about.

When preparing a legal document or testifying in a courtroom, it's a different story and I think our members understand that distinction.

RottenApple wrote:

AndyC wrote:If some anti happens to get their knickers in a twist over the term "weapon", that's their problem - I couldn't care less what the uninformed think of it, so I'm not going to be bludgeoned to death by the PC crowd into referring to it only as a tool.

"That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."

Andy, please don't assume that just because I (and some others) refer to it as a tool that we are being PC. In my case that really is how I view it. There is nothing PC about it.

When a gun is at rest on a table, it's an object with tool potential. When someone picks it up to use it, it becomes an extension of that person's will to either attack or defend, for good or evil. At that point it's a weapon.

When I refer to it as a tool when it is at rest, I'm not bowing to the allowable speech confusion of someone with wadded knickers. I do it to emphasize the neutral nature of inanimate objects and to counter the common hype that guns are inherently destructive by virtue of their simple presence.

srothstein wrote:

Thomas wrote:In my opinion, a weapon is just a tool that is used for malicious purposes.

I could not answer because I disagree with this part of your logic. The word malicious implies a certain morality to actions that is not necessarily connected to the tool.

A weapon (which may be a firearm or may not be) is a tool that is used for specific purposes. The purposes involve generally combat but may be used for either aggressive or defensive combat. Aggressive combat may or may not be malicious or may or may not be justified. The same is also true for defensive combat (you might be surprised at how many criminals think they shot in self defense while they were committing their crime).

So, I consider my pistol a weapon, and I consider all weapons to be tools.

I generally agree with Steve here with some picky refinements:

1. Any object is potentially a tool. It becomes a tool when it's used with intent to achieve a purpose.
2. Any object, even a tree branch or infant diaper, can be used to injure or kill a living being. When it is so used, it becomes a weapon in that time, place, and circumstance. When it is not being so used, it is merely an object and a potential tool.
3. Some objects are designed and constructed to enhance their use for injuring or killing living begins (e.g., firearms). However, they can be used for other purposes (e.g. a rifle stock could be used to break out a window to rescue a crash victim) and in those roles they are not weapons as I have defined them here.
4. A weapon is defined as such by the situation and intent when it is used, not solely by its physical configuration.
5. The primary determinant of whether a given object in a given situation is used as a weapon is the intention and action of the user.

A common military observation sums all this up:

The mind is the weapon - everything else is a tool.