Unpopular Opinion

This is only unpopular in the USA, it's the popular opinion everywhere where we don't worship guns.

That's like saying all cars are meant for the racetrack or all knives are made for spreading butter.

I own several guns, and none of them are so I can kill. My over/under shotgun is designed for skeet shooting. My 22 pistol is for plinking. My precision rifle weighs 30 pounds with its optic, so is incredibly impractical as a weapon.

That’s not an impopular opinion, that’s the opinion of normal people, firearms are not toys, unless you are in murica of course; then it’s like a Barbie, you buy the Barbie itself and then collect all the accessories

I, on the other hand, am fascinated not just by guns but by weapons (and other military technology) from throughout history. Weapons, as products of human ingenuity, are unusual in the sense that they function in direct opposition to the ingenuity of other humans. It's a very high-stakes competition.

I guess I’m the opposite then - I love guns, yet I probably wouldn’t get one even if I could. I definitely wouldn’t carry one. It’s too easy to make hasty, irreversible decisions with a firearm.

Carrying a gun means that every altercation has the potential to become life-threatening. I wouldn’t want to end up in a brawl while armed and risk having my own weapon used against me if I got overpowered. That’s something cops, for example, have to constantly be aware of.

I am very leftist and somewhat split.

Modern guns are an engineering marvel and I can understand if someone is fascinated in the precision and engineering knowledge needed to construct them - the same way some people are fascinated by mechanical watches, steam engines, etc.

They are also a necessary tool for some jobs - I can worked alongside these and in theory am trained to handle one(but haven't had a gun in my hand for 15 years if you don't count two instances I had to take it from a patient before law enforcement arrived). So I am very happy that the people who need to have it have modern,safe, versatile and easy to handle guns at their disposal. And I want these people to have the best training,the best equipment and the best recruitment and background check possible.

This brings me to another point: I am sternly against people using "shooting" (large calibers) as a hobby and the whole gun culture around it - we see in the US this can easily become a purpose on it's own and the detrimental effects it has on everything, from mental health care,policing, emergency medicine to the political culture, even influencing their neighbours negatively.

Go for small calibers all you want, no problems with that. But there is no reason an average private citizen needs a 9mm or a AR15 (even with manual fire)as a hobby or for self defence here. (There might be some very rare cases when people are under so much threat for their life that it is different - but these are really rare and tbh should require the same amount of training a professional carrier needs)

Hunting is a bit different, but even there I see problematic behaviour within recreational hunting. I am not at all against hunting per se, it's absolutely an requirement in most industrial nations to keep the ecological balance in the few remaining ecosystems and is the most ethical source of meat available.

But again in some nations a subculture around it has formed that is not healthy,not required to maintain biodiversity and ecological balance, etc. My shire owns large wooden areas and has decided to switch to (semi-) professional hunters quite a while ago, they are payed to hunt according to a ecological plan, do not get less or more money if they are successful, the shire sells the meat to the inhabitants for relatively cheap prices. This model has been proven (scientifically) to be successful as it allows very targeted hunting, e.g. to keep animal tracks away from certain roads, to intentionally allow the reintroduction of larger predators,etc.

No, only some are and even then it's not broadly accurate, it's closer to Anthropomorphism.

Weapons are designed from the ground up to kill animals. From birdshot 10g shotgun to bolt action plastic tip single shot rifle.

Assault rifles are a category designed primarily to kill humans

Pretty popular opion though, isn't it?

i own a gun whose sole purpose of being manufactured was to kill himans - it is a war rifle.

i have killed as many things with it as i want to: zero.

i am not a gun nut, but i do enjoy the history of it. i learned a lot about yugoslavia just because i was curious about the time period it came from.

i agree that some guns are created with the sole purpose of killing people... i just dont feel like killing people with it. never have, never will (its not for protection, etc.. its for history)

God made man. Samuel Colt made him equal.

Any tool used incorrectly is a significant danger.

I already found the ideas and the people who hold those ideas that you're referencing are a minority who are scared fanatic and unreasonable and those are the type of people that should not have guns or tools of any capacity.

However, someone like you who wants one for protection and the ability to protect those around you regardless of circumstance are why it's important to protect gun rights in my opinion.

I've played shooter games since a kid and I've never wanted to own a gun. it's 100% a special kind of brainrot/power trip to want to hold and own deadly weapons and you won't convince me otherwise

yes hunting is a thing, I promise you the vast majority of American gun owners are not hunters.

I agree with op. Guns are used to intimidate, and for entertainment. Men and their fascination with power by holding a gun is toxic and a failure of society.

Is this community just popular opinions? Every comment agrees with OP.

It's sad to see this is an unpopular opinion (context from the community rules: if you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.)

I don't like guns my self, but I don't have a problem with people who own them responsibly in a locked safe unloaded. I understand for some people a gun is needed, Hunters for one, while bow hunting is a thing a gun is just easier to use.

They're tools designed specifically for killing, not just for killing humans.

The people who take umbrage at that distinction are an actual problem.

I’ve held this position for a long time. Guns are designed to kill. They are they threat of death even if the trigger isn’t pulled. They are there to force compliance with the bearer, for good or for ill. Even as a “tool” to put food on the table, they kill the thing that is to be food.

That said, I don’t have too much problem with guns. I have major problems with those who own them, make them, or turn them into part of identity politics.

They are exploited for profit and control, and the mulish obstinacy of gun owners in general is in part their enslavement to identity politics and those that profit from it - the politicians looking for election and money in the pockets of the manufacturers and supporting lobbies. Guns have become fashion accessories for the owners, and are often treated with similar gravity. Gun owners feed guns to criminals because of lax storage security on the owner’s part - just leave them in the car or closet unsecured - and they get stolen, used in crimes, for which they gun nuts “need” to buy more guns to leave laying about for instant access and which can be stolen. Nearly 80% of guns used in crimes are taken without permission or stolen from owners.

And the worst part are the killing sprees, workplace or schools, where gun owners just distance themselves so that the rest of society can be the victims of their refusal to regulate their hobby.

Guns can be safely kept in a society. There are plenty of countries that manage it. In this context I’m going to use this line: “Guns don’t kill people, people do”….and the people doing the killing are the owners that refuse to deal with regulating and securing guns.

there are antimaterial guns as well.