You replied to me. I replied to someone named “ToastedTires” which began this branch. Toasted tires made an argument that guns are designed to kill. I responded that many guns are designed for other purposes. I later further refined hunting as a separate purpose by not designed to kill people. You then entered with…

“Every country in the world requires drivers to be licensed and regulated.”

“...says the guy who believes guns aren’t for inherently for killing. What a laugh!”

So then a bow and arrow has one innate purpose too, using your limited thought process anyway. And since you’re including hunting animals as destructive purpose, then so the teeth of any predatory animal have one innate purpose, “to kill, to destroy”. Tools for the creature to feed itself not even being on your radar.…

So what you’re saying is that it is aliens?

“Why don’t you shoot yourself with one of those “no-kill” guns a few times and see what happens?”

Dial back your attitude. You come at me with ‘not good enough, prove it’ that means you either have no idea what it is or you do and you’re playing a game.

“because now cars are just staying on the major thoroughfares instead of driving 60 in a 25 zone.”

How about you stick your head further up your ass?

“That is a crock of ideological horseshit.”

The first ‘knife’ was probably a stone tool used for skinning animals, but it’s nothing like the sort of knives that were brought up in this discussion.

Fission as the word is commonly used refers to a process that man initiates. It does not occur in nature. Now I understand you are exploiting the lesser used in common discourse definition of radioactive decay, but we both know which sort of Fission was being discussed here.

“So you want to kill service members. Noted.”

“You are suggesting that guns are not used to kill people.”

It’s an introductory article. If you want details you are free to use your own search engine skills instead of playing the “not good enough” game. The fact that you don’t even know of shared space demonstrates the typical ignorance that drives all the poor practices of more lines, more signs, and putting hazards on…

Those trying to leverage zero fatalities have social engineering and political goals in mind. They are looking for power. They aim to restrict and control how far, easily, and cheaply the regular people may be able travel to achieve their goals.

Bad faith is simply more projection of yours. When I have made an argument you can’t deal with you do one or more of five basic things.

Ah, dishonesty, name calling, insults, and projection all in a couple lines.

Might as well just do a mayor Daley to the road then. The effect will be much the same.

Horses and horses pulling wagons kill people too.
Automobiles and motoring require registration and licensing because the new technology allowed for a government power grab. Now government has historically unprecedented control of the public way.