4 ms·
That's such a BS comment that gets trotted out every time something like this is discussed. It's meaningless. The invention of the AK47 and its ease of manufact
by mikecsh 13y ago
That's such a BS comment that gets trotted out every time something like this is discussed. It's meaningless. The invention of the AK47 and its ease of manufacture led to its proliferation which led to more people being able to kill than would otherwise have been possible. Don't wilfully ignore the underlying message by using bullshit quips.
- gaius 13y agoIn Rwanda they had AKs but the instrument of the massacres there was the humble machete.
- aaronem 13y agoObviously, had Rwanda's government banned machetes, those massacres would never have happened, or would at least have been much more limited in scope. (I always know better than to engage in snark. I hope you'll forgive me for not having been able to restrain myself this once.)
- xorgar831 13y agoDemonstration by Indiana Jones of how determination is really the only difference between the two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DzcOCyHDqc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DzcOCyHDqc
- aaronem 13y agoThis (the "no difference between AKs and machetes" stuff, which you seem to have edited out) would be a telling response, except that the Hutu had AKs; they did their killing with machetes not because machetes were all they had, but because machetes were what they preferred. Thank you, all the same, for helping me boil down this argument to its very bones. I'm talking about killing; y'all are talking about guns -- but there doesn't seem to be a general recognition of the distinction between the two. I've flailed in the direction of recognizing that distinction before, but thinking about your response was just what I needed to put my finger squarely on it. Thanks again! I greatly appreciate that.
- xorgar831 13y agoValid point, there's no relation between guns and killing, Rwanda clearly proves this.