Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/19/2017 7:27:10 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/18/2006 2:18:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:20:47 PM EDT by AKJonny]
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, just wondering what the statistics on this look like.

I encourage you to discuss this, and support your replies.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:19:41 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:21:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:21:43 PM EDT by VTHOKIESHOOTER]
Um no. Swords just aren't fun, but if that was all we had there would probably be an assault sword ban. Sword owners would argue about what is better a main battle sword or a sabre. Life would be incredibly dull.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:22:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.



Hi .


Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?


No real gun enthusist would say such a thing.


I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, ....


Yeah.

Right.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:23:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:24:07 PM EDT by snipAR_15]

Originally Posted By VTHOKIESHOOTER:
Um no. Swords just aren't fun, but if that was all we had there would probably be an assault sword ban. Sword owners would argue about what is better a main battle sword or a sabre. Life would be incredibly dull.




Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:23:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:

...Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?...



Guns have saved far more lives than they have taken.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:24:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:25:31 PM EDT
Hi, you're stooopid
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:26:39 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:27:02 PM EDT by AKJonny]

Originally Posted By California_Kid:

Originally Posted By AKJonny:

...Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?...



Guns have saved far more lives than they have taken.



I definately agree. I voted for "Yes, I for reasons other than leisure, think that guns and explosives should have been created." myself.

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying call anyone senseless killers or anything of that nature. I am only trying to stimulate discussion this topic.

Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:27:47 PM EDT
Why don't you take a look at history

- Prior to firearms, the dominant military force was armored cavalry. Because of this, political systems such a feudalism arose to provide as many such warriors as possible. Democracies were rare, as the heavy cavalry of the elite classes generally destroyed any citizen army. Most democracies existed in unique situations where heavy cavalry wasn't the dominant force such as Athens (large fleets manned by sailors) or Switzerland (mountains + pikemen = dead cavalry).

- Prior to firearms, war was just as violent as it was today. When Carthage was sacked at the end of the Third Punic War, all the men were killed and the women and children sold into slavery. The land was then sown with salt so that nothing would grow there again. Read up on the campaigns of the Mongols, Huns, Assyrians, Arabs, etc. All waged similarly brutal war.

- Prior to firearms, briggandage, thievery, and all other violent crimes were probably more prevelant then they are today. Gangs in London in the 1500s were armed with longbows, daggers, swords, and other weapons. Gentlement did not travel unless heavily armed. In open Stepps or plains, bandits armed as light cavalry (Indian Raiders, Cossacks, Huns, etc.) could - and did - raid settlements and escape relatively unharmed. These groups were not stopped until accurate rifles were developed that could render light cavalry obsolete.

In short, my guns are not a toy. They are a bulwark of democracy. Its just too bad that many people don't recognise this.

Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:29:49 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:33:43 PM EDT by NonConformist]


A gun owner huh? What kinda guns do you own?




Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?



What is your DU name again? Go troll somewhere else boy!


Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:30:06 PM EDT
DUng troll!
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:31:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, just wondering what the statistics on this look like.

I encourage you to discuss this, and support your replies.



That in blue tells where you are really coming from.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:32:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:
Why don't you take a look at history

- Prior to firearms, the dominant military force was armored cavalry. Because of this, political systems such a feudalism arose to provide as many such warriors as possible. Democracies were rare, as the heavy cavalry of the elite classes generally destroyed any citizen army. Most democracies existed in unique situations where heavy cavalry wasn't the dominant force such as Athens (large fleets manned by sailors) or Switzerland (mountains + pikemen = dead cavalry).

- Prior to firearms, war was just as violent as it was today. When Carthage was sacked at the end of the Third Punic War, all the men were killed and the women and children sold into slavery. The land was then sown with salt so that nothing would grow there again. Read up on the campaigns of the Mongols, Huns, Assyrians, Arabs, etc. All waged similarly brutal war.

- Prior to firearms, briggandage, thievery, and all other violent crimes were probably more prevelant then they are today. Gangs in London in the 1500s were armed with longbows, daggers, swords, and other weapons. Gentlement did not travel unless heavily armed. In open Stepps or plains, bandits armed as light cavalry (Indian Raiders, Cossacks, Huns, etc.) could - and did - raid settlements and escape relatively unharmed. These groups were not stopped until accurate rifles were developed that could render light cavalry obsolete.

In short, my guns are not a toy. They are a bulwark of democracy. Its just too bad that many people don't recognise this.




My hat is off to you sir *bow* VERY good post. Far to few people realize this, hence the reason the socialists are trying to ban them
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:32:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:32:47 PM EDT by AKJonny]
Very good response happycynic. Exactly what I was looking for.

I'd appreciate it if people would, for the sake of discussion quit trolling. This is a topic that everyone should have a solid stance on, so I would expect everyone to speak about it in depth. Which so far isn't really the case.

What part of stimulating discussion makes me a troll? This is a discussion board, is it not?
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:32:25 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:32:51 PM EDT
I would probably have been a Life Member in the NPSA, National Pointed Stick Association. Pointed sticks don't kill people, people do. Instead of the NFA, we would have had the NSA, National Stones Act. Most people get hurt or killed by non-firearms like knives and blunt objects, anyway.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:34:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LARRYG:

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, just wondering what the statistics on this look like.

I encourage you to discuss this, and support your replies.



That in blue tells where you are really coming from.



No, that is ABSOLUTELY NOT where I am coming from. That was a tongue-in-cheek remark on how some ignorant liberals view gun owners. For the record, I am a conservative, republican, gun owner. So don't try that on me.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:34:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:


What part of stimulating discussion makes me a troll? This is a discussion board, is it not?

Low post count and you ask us a loaded question if we thought it was bad that guns were created ON A GUN BOARD. Not to flame you but geeze what do you think we would say, we are gun enthusists.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:35:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:35:39 PM EDT by RustedAce]
Guns make people free.

A poor man can afford a gun, he cannot afford a warhorse armor and a castle.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:36:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Very good response happycynic. Exactly what I was looking for.

I'd appreciate it if people would, for the sake of discussion quit trolling. This is a topic that everyone should have a solid stance on, so I would expect everyone to speak about it in depth. Which so far isn't really the case.

What part of stimulating discussion makes me a troll? This is a discussion board, is it not?



We are not trolling, YOU are.

What makes you a troll?

Oh, comments like:

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

And

Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:36:19 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:37:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:

Originally Posted By LARRYG:

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, just wondering what the statistics on this look like.

I encourage you to discuss this, and support your replies.



That in blue tells where you are really coming from.



No, that is ABSOLUTELY NOT where I am coming from. That was a tongue-in-cheek remark on how some ignorant liberals view gun owners. For the record, I am a conservative, republican, gun owner. So don't try that on me.



You are brand new, you do nothing to indicate that those remarks were sarcastic. What do you expect us to think?
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:37:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sylvan:
without firearms, men would be slaves.
The advent of firearms was the advent of freemen.



yup
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:38:24 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:40:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:40:50 PM EDT by AKJonny]
*sigh*

Yes, I have a low post count. Got to start somewhere, and I'm not the type to just sit back and watch.

I understand that we are all gun enthusiasts. But would we trade in our enthusiasm if guns were to never have been created? Basically what I am trying to ask is, if you believe the world would be better off WITH or WITHOUT explosives/guns. I personally think that wars can be ended quicker and with less loss of life with the technology we have today- precisision bombs, missles, superior weaponry/tactics, etc, versus a massive, hand to hand brawl with swords.

So my stance is that, yes, guns should have been created. Not everyone shares this same reason, so I would like to hear yours. Don't take everything in the original topic as what I PERSONALLY believe.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:43:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Not everyone shares this same reason, so I would like to hear yours.

This is a gun board, I don't think you will find anyone here would be happy if guns weren't invented.


<-----------This way to DU
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:45:57 PM EDT
Lets lighten up on the guy. He wasn't just stirring shit to stir shit, he was trying to start a philosophical debate. I don't think he is a troll, although I do question the wisdom of such a post on a board like this. Unless tc556guy shows up, everyone's going to be on the same side of this debate.

Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:46:15 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, just wondering what the statistics on this look like.

I encourage you to discuss this, and support your replies.



I am a woman.

The saying goes, "God created all men (and women). Sam Colt made them equal." Or something like that, anyway.

Sticks, stones, swords, bows and arrows all depend to a degree on the strength and agility of the handler. Guns are the only thing that can keep little widowed grannies on semi-equal footing with 6'4", hardened criminals.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:46:21 PM EDT
We would be living in villages and castles and bathing every few months.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:48:13 PM EDT
Good post happycynic

Well said

GM
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:48:44 PM EDT
asking if guns should have been created is like asking if women should have been created. I'll take problems with them any day over without them...
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:49:10 PM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:
s. Unless tc556guy shows up, everyone's going to be on the same side of this debate.


Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:50:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:54:12 PM EDT
Good post LadyLiberty. I understand how a post like this might open up a can of worms. And possibly some whoop ass (on myself). But I wanted us to really think about the history of the gun outside of our own personal weapons. I want to know if you think they have been beneficial to the human race as a whole (and why). And if you happen to think contrary, then I would still like to know why. Obviously nobody is probably going to say they wish guns were NOT invented- but thats fine. This does not have to be a debate- it wasn't intended to be. I think, for the sake of knowledge, knowing WHY guns are important to society is a very good thing.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 2:55:22 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 2:56:26 PM EDT by vito113]
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:07:51 PM EDT
3 people voted no.

Speak out! I would love to hear why you chose this answer.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:09:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 3:11:32 PM EDT by Admiral_Crunch]
Without explosives, you lose all heavy construction and earthmoving projects. Say goodbye to canals, heavy landscaping, mountain roads, tunnels, and who-knows-what else.

Mining would be extremely difficult, and mined materials would cost about 10,000 times as much as they do today. Say goodbye to almost anything that uses large amounts of metal. We're back to wooden ships, wooden and stone buildings, and wooden horsecarts. Goodbye automobiles, airplanes, locomotives, and most wire, including telephone & telegraph. Goodbye electricity, except as a novelty.

In short, welcome back to the 1400s.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:09:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
*sigh*

Yes, I have a low post count. Got to start somewhere,



And you start by trolling.

And poorly, btw.

out of
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:15:50 PM EDT
Very good point Crunch- exactly the kinda of outside-the-box thoughts I was looking for.

As for trolling, the only troll here is you. If you feel I am trolling, back it up.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:20:20 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:29:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 3:30:55 PM EDT by LonePathfinder]

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Would you have preferred that all forms of explosives/guns have never been created? Battles would still be fought with swords, arrows, and stones. Firearm related crimes would not exist. Shooting accidents would not exist. Potentially thousands of deaths would be prevented.

Or do you love your toys so much that you would not trade all those lives for your plinkers?

I am not trying to suggest any stereotypes on shooters, as I am a gun owner myself, just wondering what the statistics on this look like.

I encourage you to discuss this, and support your replies.



Joined this month and 12 post. Hmmm.

So instead of shootings there would be slashings, stabbings or any other manner of crimes.

You're bias comes out in your question. Guns are not causing all the deaths. I'm surrouned by a assault rifle on one side and a hand gun with 13 round capacity in the other side of me. Am I in danger of being shot by my guns. Fuck no.

People are the ones that pull the trigger, or in your little world, shoot with an arrow, cross bow, stab with a sword, spear or pike.

Battles were much bloodier with melee arms than with fire arms. Do you know what warfare would be like w/o Modern Weaponry? Lets take Iraqi. If we invaded, we'd sack every fucking town we took. That means kill every living thing (kill the women and children after raping them), and burn the shit to the ground. Man sure would be a lot less bloddier.

Wonder why people will respond in a hostile manner to your "question"? One is you are either bias or woefully ignorant on the issue and it shows through in your "innocent" question. If you just plain ignorant on the issue, then well tough cookies. Two we gun owners and lovers hear this same crap about guns; guns kill people, if we didn't have guns the world would be a better place. Bullshit. Guns give the weaker man (innocent man, under dog) a chance against the bigger man. I 6'7" 250lb guy with a battle sword is going to kick a little 5'0" guy with a gladius any day of the weak. Stronger, more endurance, height etc. Guns leveled the playing field for all mankind. Even the persecuted weaklings could pull a trigger and start a revolution.

for the grammar nazi's

Edit: Arms control is much older than guns. Romans would not allow civilians to carry swords inside rome. The Japanese would not let peasents own a sword.

Arms control is about ONE thing. POWER. It NEVER is about anything else.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:29:30 PM EDT
WTF have you been smoking? Guns are fun!
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:31:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By g3shooter:
WTF have you been smoking? Guns are fun!



+87
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:32:48 PM EDT
The question is not just nonsensical, but downright idiotic.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:33:54 PM EDT
Some people are not reading all of my posts. There is no bias. Obviously it is too hard for some of you to actually read, compute, comprehend, and reply. At no point in the original post did I express a stance on this. I AM A GUN OWNER WHO BELIEVES THAT THE INVENTION OF FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES HAS BEEN A BENEFIT TO MANKIND.

I believe that is about the fifth time I have said something to that effect.

Give me a break! Learn to maturely discuss something.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:39:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/18/2006 3:40:17 PM EDT by LonePathfinder]

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Some people are not reading all of my posts. There is no bias. Obviously it is too hard for some of you to actually read, compute, comprehend, and reply. At no point in the original post did I express a stance on this. I AM A GUN OWNER WHO BELIEVES THAT THE INVENTION OF FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES HAS BEEN A BENEFIT TO MANKIND.

I believe that is about the fifth time I have said something to that effect.

Give me a break! Learn to maturely discuss something.



The entire topic you chose to discuss is elementry and niave.

Guns would have been invented one way or another with industrialization.

If we didn't have guns we would have combustion engines, even steam power, communications or anything of that nature. Guns are machines highly based on the knowledge of physics. So is every other major machinery of the industrial age.

No guns, we still live in the dark ages.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:40:34 PM EDT
It's hard to say what the world would be like without them. I think their invention changed the dynamics of battle and self-defense from strong/weak to have/have not. On the one hand, they do make killing much easier for evil people, but on the other hand they give the rest of us means to defend ourselves. Would we need defending if guns didn't exist? I think so, if history is any indication. Those with armies of strong soldiers on horses and whatnot would annihilate simple citizens.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:49:52 PM EDT
About 10% of the voters said that the world would be better off without guns- While I am not looking for a totally sensible answer, I would like at least one or two reasons for the sake of balance.

Thanks Dolan and Pathfinder for your constructive discussion.
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:50:52 PM EDT
Without guns we are slaves.
With swords and maces, you must spend a lifetime training, and be an expert in their use.
With a gun, it is as simple as point and pull - the citizen can say "no" to an oppressive gov't.

Kind of a bad example
Navy SEALs are badass dudes.
Navy SEAL got killed in Afghanistan - he was shot from behind by a 12 year old with an AK.
If they just had swords.....

Also, as far as "thousands" of lives being saved, have you ever studied ancient warfare?
Do you realize how many people DIED in those battles?
Hundreds of thousands fucking people would be killed in one or two battles.

FWIW - I have known many liberals who have made this argument to me.
That we should have swords, not guns.
Crime would go down, as people would have to actually get in close.
1) most crimes are commited with everyday objects anyway
2) liberals live in a fucking fantasy land as they refuse to accept that guns are here to stay, and that guns have no morality.

In my hands, my M1 is a force for good and righteousness.
In a gangbangers hands, my M1 is a travesty. (No seriously - no gangbanger scum should ever touch an M1)
Link Posted: 1/18/2006 3:51:20 PM EDT

Originally Posted By AKJonny:
Some people are not reading all of my posts. There is no bias. Obviously it is too hard for some of you to actually read, compute, comprehend, and reply. At no point in the original post did I express a stance on this. I AM A GUN OWNER WHO BELIEVES THAT THE INVENTION OF FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES HAS BEEN A BENEFIT TO MANKIND.

I believe that is about the fifth time I have said something to that effect.

Give me a break! Learn to maturely discuss something.



You're here what, less than 2 weeks,and you're already giving lectures on how to act?

Just go away.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top