Good points about the frying pan or other things such as hands not being expressly designed as a weapon.
I guess my point was is that you cannot blame the weapon, only the person who uses it.
I can't really think of any good reason for guns to exsist other than to kill.
Yes, you can argue target practice and markmanship, and I would submit that in that case, you could use a gun in a non-violent way.
Then again, we use "weapons" in martial arts, bokken, tanto, etc.
Are not the designs of these things expressly for killing? and do we not use them in a non-violent way to train and cultivate ourselves to become better?
I believe it is possible to kill with compassion and in a non-violent way. An example would be a police officer that does so to protect another's life. Does this meet the definition of violence?
The more I think about it...the muddier things seem to get!