Shadi Khalil said:
A couple people commented on the poor use of toy when referring to any gun, something I kind of agree with. What do you all think? Is it in bad taste to refer to any gun as a toy or is it acceptable in some circumstance? Does it put fun owners in a bad light and make us seem irresponsible? Lastly, how might it reflect on a young person who has no firearms safety training?
Considering that I just returned home after sharing dinner at a Burger King with a good friend who is a fellow Army veteran, and that I opened our after-dinner conversation by relating that yesterday I took my new "toy" to the range to try out ... I guess it's safe to say that I don't see any problem with it. Someone above mentioned that context is important, and I agree. I certainly don't use "toy" to describe all firearms to all people, but neither do I refer to every firearm as a "weapon." And we all know (or should) that "guns" are found on Naval vessels and large military vehicles, so if we're being technically correct we shouldn't be calling our ___ "guns," especially not to novices whom we would like to see learn correct terminology.
In other hobbies, some people who (as an example) drive a pickup for work every day keep a Mustang or a Corvette in the garage to drive on weekends. Is it wrong for them to refer to said vehicle as a "toy"? I would say it is not wrong and, if it isn't wrong to refer to a car that is maintained and used for non-essential, pleasureful activity, why should it be any different than a firearm? Yeah, "guns" are tools. So are motor vehicles, but some tools provide more enjoyment than other tools.
I own two or three handguns that I rotate as carry weapons. Whatever other firearms I own (the old Mauser M48, the Ruger Single Six, the junk 1911 receiver with a .22 caliber conversion kit on it) have no purpose in my life other than shooting for fun (and practice, but mostly fun. There's little about shooting an 8mm bolt-action Mauser rifle that directly translates to practice for self defense with a handgun). In practical terms, that makes them toys. If that's what they are, why is it in any way irresponsible to refer to them as such?
To the gentleman who implied (rather directly) that calling a firearm a "toy" is immature -- let me state for the record that I am officially a senior citizen, I am a veteran of the U.S. Army who served in Vietnam and who has a couple of (minor level) decorations to show for it, I have been licensed to carry handguns in multiple states for multiple decades, and I am an NRA-certified instructor in four different disciplines. I do not consider myself immature, nor does anyone who knows me.