The definition of a tool has for some odd reason been put into question. I am not sure as to why anyone smart enough to type more that a four word sentence finds it difficult to understand what a tool is or why said person would admit to this (be it inadvertently by miss use of the word) with out first typing the three simple letters that make it up into a search engine and seeing what pops up (yes I said three letters, get over it before you try to call me out).
I did a simple search for anyone and everyone that is still pondering how to properly place this word into their day-to-day vocabulary list.

According to Wikipedia “A broad definition of a tool is an entity used to interface between two or more domains that facilitates more effective action of one domain upon the other.”

More simply put a tool is one that is used or manipulated by another. By this wording a person can be a tool or in some cases a Tool (get it Mike?).

Check Merriam/Websters dictionary if you’d like. I did. The simplest definiton they list is as follows;

1.) A hand-held device that aids in accomplishing a task.

I will admit not all tools are hand held but I am also sure no matter what definition you come across you will find the same thing. I’ll spell it out as simple as I feel can be done…

A GUN IS A TOOL.

Simple fact. It is used, it does not use. It is manipulated. It does not manipulate. A gun will only do what it is made to do.

With that out of the way I look forward to catching up with past post and adding my two cents while I am still allowed to do so. I believe that freedom of expression is still in play… for now.

“Or is Travis just maybe a little bit out there?”

By “out there” do you mean that I don’t believe govt’s always have the people’s best interest in mind. If so, I’ll agree with that.

“outrageous as is your characterizing guns as a tool”

hammer=tool
hammer+ smashed into your forehead=weapon
firearm=tool
^^What changed? Only the intent of the person using it.

If I send a letter to the white house saying something to the effect of “I reject your tyrannical government and declare myself and my property independent from the United States. Furthermore, any attempt to reclaim the United State of Me will be an act of war and as such will be met with lethal resistance.” What do you suppose will happen to me? If I uphold the word of my declaration, I will be labeled as a terrorist and be dealt with as such.

Now, subtract a few hundred years, move to jolly ole’ England and put a name to the gaggle of colonists who just wrote you a letter very similar to mine. I doubt the name applied will be patriot. You still laughing Mike?

btw, the declaration made by our patriot forefathers would not have had much purchase in England or the U.S. if not for the equalizing power of their modern (at the time) assault rifles, that were at least, the equal of the firearms carried by the English soldier.

Why shouldn’t we supply the mexicans with guns, we supply them with the funding by purchasing their products(drugs). Do you think it would be better if we just bought their products and then sold them security in the form of PMC’s? Why weren’t you outraged when your neighbor was just smoking their product? Finally, why do you think these drug cartels are in Mexico and not in the U.S. where it is obviously easier to obtain the guns?

‘This is the United States of America — we’re not supposed to be the supply source for terrorist weapons!!!’

Have you ever heard of Charlie Wilson? Does the date 9/11/01 mean anything to you? Perhaps your familiar with the terrorists who founded the United States?

Firearms are a tool, plane and simple. It is not the fault of the manufacturer, dealer or the tool itself for how it is used or misused.