Firearms are most effective when not fired. A firearm gives the holder the ability to kill, yes. A person who poses that threat is a powerful deterrent. Armed guards are used to prevent attacks, not to gun people down with their killing machines.
So, besides just being killing machines guns are also very powerful deterrents. They can diffuse a violent situation without being fired.
Guns can also be used exclusively for recreation. That's how I've used all the guns I've ever owned. Shooting accurately is a challenge and requires skill and practice. No one needs to die for a person to become proficient in the use of a firearm. I never considered my firearms as home defense weapons. I was never willing to keep them at the ready in such a way as that they could be deployed effectively in the event of a home invasion or robbery.
Any professional who carries a firearm as part of their job will tell you that they have been trained to shoot to stop the threat. No professional is trained to shoot to kill. Their gun is not a killing machine, it is a threat stopping tool.
Guns propel a projectile at a high rate of speed along a predictable trajectory. That's what they do. That's what they are designed to do. To say that they only kill is beyond simplistic. It is ignorant of the facts. What makes a gun different than a hand grenade? If they are only meant to kill then why is there a difference? What is the purpose of that difference? Killing can be achieved with much simpler designs and methods, so why is a gun designed the way it is?
fishonjazz, if you want to say guns are only for killing please at least address those points. I've made them several times before directly in response to your comments. It's frustrating that you repeat the same thing yet remain completely unaware of, or are completely unwilling to even acknowledge the arguments to the contrary. It's fine of you disagree, but at least know what you're disagreeing with.
