3 ms·
The author misses on a few points and the article comes across as nostalgic more than realistic. First: violence was a lot worse before, so what makes the auth
by chmod600 3y ago
The author misses on a few points and the article comes across as nostalgic more than realistic.
First: violence was a lot worse before, so what makes the author think going back in time with weapons is actually good?
Second: that guns allow the weak to be as threatening as the strong is considered a feature by many people; an equalizing force. As the saying goes: "God made men, Sam Colt made them equal." The idea that you can find vulnerable people and exploit them without fear is a big driver of violence -- but if everyone must fear violence coming back at them, that's a pacifying force.
Third, the author goes on about the sustainability of guns. But arrows are a lot bigger and more expensive, so I question the idea that they'd be made sustainably. "Artisanal" means wood, I suppose, and that could be much more problematic than a few factories cranking out bullets. People would reuse arrows more, but there are also a lot more people today so that would really involve some kind of industrial process and I doubt it comes out as a net advantage.
Even when it comes to public safety, I'm not quite sure it's a win. We are pretty safe most places, and in the US, violence is mostly local to known areas.
- metabagel 3y ago> but if everyone must fear violence coming back at them, that's a pacifying force This isn’t self-evident. In fact, evidence suggests that more guns leads to more violence. But, we continue the experiment in the U.S.
- chmod600 3y agoI think you missed the point: the author is suggesting that everyone would give up guns and exchange them for bows. Including military and police. But only strong and well-trained people can use bows effectively. In other words, it's a world where the strong are in control.
- malfist 3y agoThe author also ignores barrier to entry. He says guns are no more/less dangerous than bow and arrow when comparing the best bowman to anyone with a gun. Yeah, the best bowman can fire an arrow every 5-6 seconds. But that random person off the street that is having a mental breakdown and wants to kill a bunch of people as a type of suicide? Yeah, he's not going to be a world class bowman.
- chmod600 3y agoI'm not sure what that means when you net it out. Maybe mass shootings go down and regular violence goes up? Who knows? The safest places still have some guns around. Enough that when something is happening, they arrive on the scene quickly. You could imagine those translating to skilled bowmen instead, and that's an interesting thought experiment, but it's hard to conclude much.