No guns = Better world ?
M'kay , let's just say that some generic brand of Aliens have destroyed every gun upon the planet , and erased the knowledge of making them from our minds (we also have no way of re-discovering said knowledge) as well as turning all our nuclear weapons into lead.
Would the world become a better place ?
Originally posted by grey fox
M'kay , let's just say that some generic brand of Aliens have destroyed every gun upon the planet , and erased the knowledge of making them from our minds (we also have no way of re-discovering said knowledge) as well as turning all our nuclear weapons into lead.Would the world become a better place ?
I think probably yes, yes.
Thing is, when someone carries a weapon, especially a firearm, that person will likely use it in a confrontation, if only to force supremacy. While the same conflict could be solved with words or perhaps a less damaging fistfight.
History provides enough statistics on this. Before the common use of firearms in wars or public, the death-rate in wars and crime-releated events was significantly lower.
Originally posted by Pandemoniac
Thing is, when someone carries a weapon, especially a firearm, that person will likely use it in a confrontation, if only to force supremacy. While the same conflict could be solved with words or perhaps a less damaging fistfight.History provides enough statistics on this. Before the common use of firearms in wars or public, the death-rate in wars and crime-releated events was significantly lower.
The death rate in wars was lower? Do you honestly believe that? Look at how many US and Iraqi soldiers died in Iraq during the war, then compare that to an average battle fought in Medieval times...
Sure guns can keep on killing after the initial invasion is over, but the battles themselves are far less cruel. And if you honestly believe that crime has increased because of guns I sure as hell would like to see some statistics or any kind of proof really.
Originally posted by Fishy
The death rate in wars was lower? Do you honestly believe that? Look at how many US and Iraqi soldiers died in Iraq during the war, then compare that to an average battle fought in Medieval times...Sure guns can keep on killing after the initial invasion is over, but the battles themselves are far less cruel. And if you honestly believe that crime has increased because of guns I sure as hell would like to see some statistics or any kind of proof really.
The death toll in medieval wars mostly concerned those directly involved with the battle at hand. No long-range warheads, nukes, poison gas or land mines killing bystanders.
Ancient battles took relatively less lives amough the involved parties, just because of the inefficiency of the applied weaponry.
What is more cruel anyhow, stabbing a person who is equally motivated to appear at the front, or just pushing a button and destroying a whole family that wants nothing to do with the mess their leaders gotten them into.
More so, a mere robbery in the old days consisted of getting clubbed across the head and having your gold stolen, waking up bruised but alive.
Today crooks shoot you in the face to take your phone.
The power of weaponry distorts one's judgement and actions, leading to disastrous results
Originally posted by Pandemoniac
The death toll in medieval wars mostly concerned those directly involved with the battle at hand. No long-range warheads, nukes, poison gas or land mines killing bystanders.
Ancient battles took relatively less lives amough the involved parties, just because of the inefficiency of the applied weaponry.
What is more cruel anyhow, stabbing a person who is equally motivated to appear at the front, or just pushing a button and destroying a whole family that wants nothing to do with the mess their leaders gotten them into.
More so, a mere robbery in the old days consisted of getting clubbed across the head and having your gold stolen, waking up bruised but alive.
Today crooks shoot you in the face to take your phone.The power of weaponry distorts one's judgement and actions, leading to disastrous results
In the most recent wars advanced weaponry has been used to avoid civilian casualty's they happen sure, but precise weapons are becoming more and more popular.
In ancient times it wasn't uncommon to slaughter the population of the city you took in order to make sure the rest wouldn't resist. The casualty's of actions like that by far outweigh the casualty's in wars of today including the total amount of casualty's in Iraq. Modern weapons have the potential to do far more damage but recently it seems like they are doing less then ancient times would have.
Originally posted by Fishy
We'll just beat the shit out of each other and use natural resources like rocks and wood to kill others... Removing weapons will just make people die in a more painful way.
I don't think so. I think it would also decrease the amounts of death due to different factors. Though I am not for banning weapons.