Quote:
Originally Posted by DontRunMeOver
The existence of violence existed before humans started to use their tools as weapons, true, it's not just part of human nature, it's just a part of nature in general. All mammals have violent sides (even a hamster will bite you when it's annoyed!), so the idea that human society could exist completely free of violence is almost certainly incorrect.
Although it can be argued whether the existence of advanced weaponry pushes people towards or away from violence, weapons certainly increases the effectiveness of violence, in terms of the amount of injury which can be inflicted with one weapon.
So even if weaponry is unrelated to the motive or desire for violence, weaponry has a very strong relationship to the outcome of that violence.
Some people say "guns/weapons don't kill people, people kill people." But if you take away the weaponry then a lot of people wouldn't kill people, because that killing involves a hell of a lot more effort and personal risk. Even if they do try to kill people then they're a lot less likely to succeed with their bare fists than they are with guns.
|
Dude, you can kill a person by snapping their neck. You'll have to learn how to do it, of course, but people will learn how to if it means being the most effective way to kill people.
You are right. Weapons do increase the effectiveness of killing people. But even without guns and bombs, we'd still find some way to kill people. On some level, we all wanna kill. We all feel anger and the need to push back. Just some people accept this barbaric trait alot more than others.