“If you hold a gun and I hold a gun, we can talk about the law. If you hold a knife and I hold a knife, we can talk about rules. If you come empty-handed, and I come empty-handed, we can talk about reason. But if you hold a gun and I only have a knife, then the truth lies in your hand. If you have a gun and I have nothing, then what you hold in your hands isn’t just a weapon, it’s my life."
This is only true for exactly as long as the weapons are held, though. Unless you plan on holding someone at weapons -point for life, the power eventually reverts.
Sometimes they did. It’s not like nobody got shot in the Rwandan genocide. Lots of people did, and when it happened, it went like it almost always does, the people with guns killed a bunch of people with impunity unless the people they were shooting at also happened to have guns.
I’m hearing a lot of things that are true but I’m getting confused as to why they were said. Like what does the Rwandan genocide have to do with the post other than the almost unnerving lack of firearms involved? Ik you aren’t the one who brought it up but just had to ask.
The Rwanda genocide wasn’t carried out with guns as the primary weapon. It was machetes and fire.
It was volumes of people, primarily. An oppressed underclass poisoned with fascist ideology who overwhelmed they’re wealthier tribal neighbors not unlike how the French ended up butchering their aristocracy at the end of the 18th century.
Had the Tutsis been more heavily armed, they might have given as well as they took.
The Nazis built the gas chambers because shooting crowds of women and children was giving their low end grunts PTSD, even the hardcore SS. They needed something where you didn’t have to watch them die.
I think it’s the ‘equalizer’ aspect. A knight would have to train for years to be proficient in swordplay, horse riding, and usage of a lance. Longbowman had to train from childhood. A wizard has to study magic for years.
A peasant could pick up a gun and theoretically kill any of them.
Americans in general are also more familiar with guns than swords or bows, so the “effectiveness” is more intuitive for our minds.
With guns, the mightiest general can still be killed by a lucky private. In most fantasy worlds, that would be near impossible for a basic untrained person to be a threat to a skilled warrior or mage.
And you are right, in the US there are an insane amount of gun deaths from murder, suicides, and accidents. Too many of us treat them like toys or emotional support Glocks, use them to be their masculinity.
Yes, but also that doesn’t really mean anything in relation to what’s being talked about. Americans have more exposure to firearms on average I’m sure the folks of Svalbard would have a similar thing going on, same with basically any country with mandatory enlistment. Whoopty fucken doo folks can be controlled with words this observation was first made in writing in the fucking early bronze age when mammoths were still extent.
I’m afraid I have to ban you. Your original comment is hateful and toxic towards a particular group of people, millions of whom are innocent. My users deserve better than to be threatened and insulted by the likes of you.
You’ll be left with this:
many Americans campaign for gun control, meaning we want fewer guns available
citizens of countries other than the USA think guns are powerful
wishing nuking or genocide on anyone is evil
there’s so much wrong with your statement that I don’t have time today to scrutinize it all. I wish you the best of luck in your personal growth journey. Goodbye.
why do americans think guns are so powerful? they act like people who haven’t been nuked or genocided
Why do you think nukes and genocide are such a big deal? It’s like you’ve never been hit by a gamma ray burst before smh
“If you hold a gun and I hold a gun, we can talk about the law. If you hold a knife and I hold a knife, we can talk about rules. If you come empty-handed, and I come empty-handed, we can talk about reason. But if you hold a gun and I only have a knife, then the truth lies in your hand. If you have a gun and I have nothing, then what you hold in your hands isn’t just a weapon, it’s my life."
This is only true for exactly as long as the weapons are held, though. Unless you plan on holding someone at weapons -point for life, the power eventually reverts.
That’s why weaponizing ideas is such an insidious practice. Give a man a gun he carries around in his mind and you have a never sleeping army.
The Rwanda genocide wasn’t carried out with guns as the primary weapon. It was machetes and fire.
It’s only very rarely one-on-one like a movie gunfight.
Now imagine if someone came in there with a gun. That would change things. In which direction, I couldn’t say.
Sometimes they did. It’s not like nobody got shot in the Rwandan genocide. Lots of people did, and when it happened, it went like it almost always does, the people with guns killed a bunch of people with impunity unless the people they were shooting at also happened to have guns.
I’m hearing a lot of things that are true but I’m getting confused as to why they were said. Like what does the Rwandan genocide have to do with the post other than the almost unnerving lack of firearms involved? Ik you aren’t the one who brought it up but just had to ask.
It was volumes of people, primarily. An oppressed underclass poisoned with fascist ideology who overwhelmed they’re wealthier tribal neighbors not unlike how the French ended up butchering their aristocracy at the end of the 18th century.
Had the Tutsis been more heavily armed, they might have given as well as they took.
The genocide ended with the victory of the rebels led by Kagame. They were mostly Tutsis.
The armed Tutsis did indeed hit back.
What do you think people use to commit genocide?
Oh that’s right, guns!
The Nazis built the gas chambers because shooting crowds of women and children was giving their low end grunts PTSD, even the hardcore SS. They needed something where you didn’t have to watch them die.
Do you think they can get anyone into the chambers without guns?
I think it’s the ‘equalizer’ aspect. A knight would have to train for years to be proficient in swordplay, horse riding, and usage of a lance. Longbowman had to train from childhood. A wizard has to study magic for years.
A peasant could pick up a gun and theoretically kill any of them.
Americans in general are also more familiar with guns than swords or bows, so the “effectiveness” is more intuitive for our minds.
that’s what i think is so perplexing
modern war completely negates your individuality, i mean unless you count your individually starved ass, but uhhh the world won’t
maybe if you’re lucky your incineration shadow on a wall will become part of an artistic photograph
there’s nothing to equalize but Americans think a glock and sunglasses mean something other than your suicide or a childhood gun accident
It absolutely does, cogs in the meat grinder.
That said, It brings everyone down to that level.
With guns, the mightiest general can still be killed by a lucky private. In most fantasy worlds, that would be near impossible for a basic untrained person to be a threat to a skilled warrior or mage.
And you are right, in the US there are an insane amount of gun deaths from murder, suicides, and accidents. Too many of us treat them like toys or emotional support Glocks, use them to be their masculinity.
Is this the same America where words controlled the people who controlled the guns on 6January?
Yes, but also that doesn’t really mean anything in relation to what’s being talked about. Americans have more exposure to firearms on average I’m sure the folks of Svalbard would have a similar thing going on, same with basically any country with mandatory enlistment. Whoopty fucken doo folks can be controlled with words this observation was first made in writing in the fucking early bronze age when mammoths were still extent.
what?
try asking your mom
I’m afraid I have to ban you. Your original comment is hateful and toxic towards a particular group of people, millions of whom are innocent. My users deserve better than to be threatened and insulted by the likes of you.
You’ll be left with this:
there’s so much wrong with your statement that I don’t have time today to scrutinize it all. I wish you the best of luck in your personal growth journey. Goodbye.
Stinky of Redlemmy