mrlefty0706 wrote: ↑March 7th, 2023, 2:03 am
A world without guns would be safer for all, no wars, no crime involving guns, many lives would be saved.
With extreme politeness and respect, I think that is clearly not true. War existed long before guns were invented, and the murder rates per capita were much higher back then.
It's easy to imagine why that might be. For example, it is easier, more profitable, and less dangerous to be a viking when the women and farmers you are going to rape and pillage don't have guns. Might might make right, but equal access to simple guns helps equalize might slightly, and thereby reduces raping and pillaging and such. By simple guns, I mean something as simple as a 10-round non-automatic pistol. And by access
I do not
mean to exclude any limitations in terms of training, age, and licensing that are much different than it takes to get to drive around legally in a car in places like the USA. I'm generally all for limiting access to guns to the same degree and in the same way we limit access to cars.
Cars of course kill a lot more people than guns, especially simple guns like a 10-round non-automatic pistol.
While history shows it is untrue the world would be safer without the invention of guns, the world almost certainly would be safer without cars.
Granted such discussions are purely hypothetical, unless one has a time machine. We cannot undo the invention of guns or cars.
But the terrible destruction caused by the invention and mass rollout of the latter (cars) is something we can learn from, for the the purposes of how we approach new technology today and in the future, such as AI.
In any case, in regard to the titular question and primary subject of this thread, I know we already agree, which is great: We both chose equality as our answer in the 3-question poll in the Original Post (OP)
. The majority of other respondents also agree with you and I, which is also great. So it appears gun control isn't nearly as divisive of an issue as many would often think.