>>>>My statement deals with y'all having much to say about gun deaths and nothing to say about dui deaths, or others. Why have you homed-in on this one issue? If it is concern for human life, why not decry cars. That's right, cars, not the drivers. Since you focus on the gun, not the shooter, you should also warn people about the evils of cars (not just SUVs).
>>>
>>>That would probably be because the subject of the thread is gun deaths, not DUI.
>>>
>>>No contest from me that we all should be doing something about "car abuse" and, if you like, incompetent doctors.
>>>
>>>But yes, one could focus on the gun. A car has uses: it gets you from A to B, but it can cause death. A gun in this context has NO use other than to cause death (or to threaten). If you say "protection" then it's only really protection vs the other guy with a gun (whose only use is to threaten or kill you). OK the other guy could have a machete, granted, and so I'd drop the SOB myself!
>>
>
>Now in the following I detect a certain facetiousness but, never the less:
>
>>A gun has many uses. It can be used to:
>>knock on a door
>
>could go off in the hand
>
No bullets

>>prop a door open
>
>could go off if the door bangs on it
>rolled up socks would be better
No bullets
>
>>be a movie prop
>
>won't be a real gun
no bullets - real gun
>
>>be a paperweight
>
no bullets
>>be a bulge in the pants
>
>Could go off and ruin your prospects.
no bullets
>rolled up socks would be better
>
>>hammer a nail
>
>er - DUH-UH!
no bullets
>
>>impress friends and enemies
>
>With its ability to cause death (or to threaten).
>
no bullets

>You forgot "to scratch the nose or tilt the hat back off the forehead with, as in films"
>
>>etc.
What did you think etc meant?

So from the above, we learn it's the bullets we should be talking about!