How come most modern states, most particularly modern Free® Democracies® who believe in Equal Rights®, heavily restrict or even outright ban people from owning weapons while in many premodern societies - and a breathtaking number of them, monarchies- are more lax, if not encouraging of, weapons ownership?
I mean, I find it ironic that the societies with KINGS N SHIET, from Europe to China, are the ones who have no problems with their subjects owning weapons, while many modern free democracies place heavy burdens and stringent requirements in owning weaponry. even outright banning it. Let's not even forget dictatorships, to whom kings and emperors are usually compared to.
Why is this, Veeky Forums? How come when society now is supposed to be more equal and democratic, that weapons restrictions and bans on civilians are more commonplace than the supposedly un-freer past?
Noah Long
Weapons changed, they weren't as available, you are making very broad stokes, your examples often don't hold up, you can own a "weapon" in almost any democracy,
Easton Roberts
Because lots of these societies are rather urban and have low crime rates and thus weapons pose a higher risk of people accidentally killing themselves or others with them than save their lives at some point. They're simply not necessary any more. You might as well ask why people hand their money to banks rather than store it underneath their mattress or why they pay for insurance than save money for bad times.
Owen Collins
>why did places with no standing police force and that relied on militias for most of their life accept weapons When you say weapon you mainly just mean farming instruments on sticks like billhooks, not muh AR-15 Anyone got the clip of open carry activists walking into a police station and then surprised when the police tackle them
Ethan Cruz
because they don't want you to be actually FREE.
Carter Nguyen
because mass shootings, getting executed by dumbfuck cops is a non european sport and we dont wish to parttake in it either
Hudson Carter
>Hadji shoots up French night club >B-but we banned guns!
Jose Harris
Because a king wants trouble makers to arm themselves, to justify their persecution.
Liam Lopez
>mass shootings >non european sport hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
David Wright
>but den dey will just use da shirt swords >being king >not being able to do whatever you want Popish plot had almost no grounding but still persecuted Catholics We're more fans of American truckers over here
Nolan James
> in many premodern societies - and a breathtaking number of them, monarchies- are more lax, if not encouraging of, weapons ownership Yeah, and so they were laxer about and encouraging of about child marriages, slavery, corporal punishment, lack of due process and state-funded police, witch hunts, burning of heretics and vigilantism. As a result, it was a way more violent and dangerous place to live. This is called progress, m8.
Kayden Butler
>firearms make a country more violent
Cameron Rivera
What weapon could they own that you can't own today, and in what country?
Owen Reyes
In Europe it's still a tragedy when someone dies. In Chicago, New York, Detroit and the like people get shot every day.
Bentley Martin
Ah yes the ghetto a peaceful place
Julian Reed
Who gives a fuck about the ghetto? Thats why its a ghetto. Because crime stays there. Also, this thread is more /pol/ than Veeky Forums. Mods pls
Ian Lopez
Not necessary, but the availability of firearms makes it more likely for violence to result in deaths. You just need to compare US statistics with European or Australian. >inb4 Finland and Switzerland Firstly, these countries are small and homogeneous enough to have low crime rates, to begin with. Secondly, both countries have military conscription, and thus the culture of gun ownership, something most of the US citizens lack.
Civilized societys have no need for private weapons ownership. Unfortunatly, most of the world is not a civilized society, or persons in said society are uncivil and hostile, thus equating a need for private ownership of weapons.
As for why many states do not allow private ownership of weapons, I would belive it is to maintain order, not nessicarily for the people, but of the people.
Blake Gutierrez
a government in the past and a modern government are very different things.
used to be you didn't need anything like a majority vote or to even be remotely agreeable to almost anyone of your subjects. you might just have some lads who could make a nice shield wall and people would go "in this land bob and those loyal to him are the law" without any further qualifications. doesn't mean you had any real adminstrative power, but if you have the monopoly on violence then you get considered a government no matter how shitty and powerless you are.
you think bob can control private ownership of weapons? people can't trust bob and his lads to be there to protect their personal safety, so they'll just hide their weapons or something. so he can't enforce it. so he doesn't try, or he'd look silly.
Liam Morris
overall numbers are higher in the US due to a larger population pool. Per capita however, England suffers from more violent crime per 1000 people than the US.
Also I find it quite humorous you belive firearm legislation will affect criminals wh disregard said legislation and change law abiding gun owners into criminals and easy targets for afformentioned criminals.
Jackson James
Because the people of said states support gun control. This is something that is very hard for americans to understand.
Colton Allen
I'm pretty sure more people are being killed by amateurs than by "professional criminals", rarely anyone buys a gun specifically to kill people but having a gun increases your chance of killing someone in the long run. Like, if you find out your friend sleeps with your wife you go and beat him, but if you have easy access to a gun, you go and shoot them both because why the fuck not. > change law abiding gun owners into criminals and easy targets for afformentioned criminals You see, most criminals don't want to kill you, most likely they want to rob you, and letting them rob you and go away is a more sure way to stay alive than to start a gun fight.
Andrew Miller
From what I know of Medieval England and Imperial China
1) Commoners and peasants were expected by legal officials to help in apprehending criminals. In medieval england, there is Hue and Cry laws that when a Sheriff raises an alarm, you're bound to help out in catching the malefactor. Old China meanwhile had a system of collective justice in which communities are held responsible by legal entities for their well being, therefore they too are encouraged to own weapons to help enforce the law. 2) That said: self-defense. What's the most effective deterrent to crime? Your victim being armed. 3) Urban societies in feudal Europe and the Middle East were often reliant on their own defense because they don't have feudal lords and their professional soldiers to hide behind. As such they were responsible for their own defense and formed up and trained militias comprised of their own citizens to do so. 4) The Monarchs of the world are confident in the fact that the belief systems they had (i.e. divine right, Mandate of Heaven) are more than enough to uphold their legitimacy. And so do not fear the fact that their subjects are armed. 5) That, and the fact that any rebellion by upstart peasants can be dealt with the fact that they have *professional soldiers* like warrior castes, mercenaries, and standing armies. Professional fighters being something of a rarity amongst commoners and peasants.
There's also the fact that -outside Greco-Roman culture and China- there is no such thing as "military" or "civilian" divide. Just "subjects" who ought to be loyal cunts who should rush to the defense of the realm. Even then, in Greece, Rome, and Old China, they didn't mind civilians owning weapons.
Cameron Smith
Because the weapons have changed. I'm not advocating whether this justifies the infringing of the right to own arms or not, but it was obviously harder for the authorities to control the ownership of weapons when everyone was using tools that could be considered as weapons. Also there was no centralization, no police and no database to enforce the law in every countryside. The State could do fuck all about peasants owning axes and messers.
Jordan Green
Our dicks grown.
Alexander Wilson
the local noble is de facto the local central power of a feudal state it does the juridication, the policing and enforces the law,or ignores it if the kings power is not enough
the "state" could and would give a fuck about weapons of the peasantry, for 2 reasons >hunting forrests were divided into common and noble useage, nobility always had an interest in making noble only, stripping weapons off serfs made it easier since if they have nothing to hunt with... >safety many of these nobles were not exactly popular and there was no year without a smaller or a bigger peasant uprising, their best interest was to have the peasants without weapons
Joshua James
thats a terrible arguement, most people even when in a state of rage know enough not to murder, but thats subjective with no real supporting evidence on either side.
Most criminals who use guns, whilst not "professional killers" do buy them off the black market. making firearm laws moot. even in places with very restictive gun laws criminals still manage to their hands on a firearm.
Gunfights rarely do happen like in the movies. Most people would prefer not to be robbed. You're saying being helpless to a robbery is preferrable to arming oneself in case of such a situation occuring. There are plenty of documented cases of robberies being stopped by a gun owning citizen, even when the robber had his own weapon drawn.
Gun "death" statistics are high granted, but deaths due to "gun" violence is a small fraction of the overall numbers. Biggest cause is police shootings (which I'd wager are justified 75% of the time on the low end), Justified self defense, and then Suicides/Accidental deaths (without guns the suicidial would still attempt.) next you have gang violence which is once again black market guns and mass shootings taking a tiny tiny portion of total statistics.This holds true for the US. Cant say much for other countries.
Benjamin Adams
Gun autism is an American phenomenon that no one else in the developed world cares about, with the exception of Switzerland and its unique foreign policy approach. There's no evidence that owning firearms makes you more "politically free".
Eli Walker
In classical Democracy you couldn't vote unless you had enough money to outfit yourself for the phalanx. There was no concept of protecting yourself from the state, but the idea was that you had to be willing and able to protect the state to participate in it.
In an old style Monarchy or Democracy the state has very limited resources to draw upon for collecting taxes from the people, so it becomes more efficient to have the people arm themselves for their own defense rather than doing everything for the top down, though there are always many variations for different circumstances. Contrast that with our modern hyper centralized Bureaucratic states that can siphon off as much of a persons income as they please and don't care enough about external threats to want a society capable of physically defending itself and you have the modern no guns idea.
Sebastian Nelson
Very few Western countries actually ban private weapon ownership though OP? It's just regulated just like everything else in the fucking economy.
You can't expect guns to be laissez-faire when literally nothing else is.
Blake Ross
>Because the people of said states support gun control. That's a very broad generalisation you have there.
Camden Walker
>I mean, I find it ironic that the societies with KINGS N SHIET, from Europe to China, are the ones who have no problems with their subjects owning weapons, while many modern free democracies place heavy burdens and stringent requirements in owning weaponry. even outright banning it. Let's not even forget dictatorships, to whom kings and emperors are usually compared to.
But user, the Kings n Shiet do the same thing: not bans though, but regulation.
For one thing there's shit has said.
In addition: in Imperial China, peasants can buy regular ass weapons like swords, spears, and bows, but "military weapons" were restricted to them. These were shit like crossbows and muskets, though I understand that crossbows were just banned earlier in Chinese history, and then was ok in latter dynasties, while muskets were banned during the early 16th century, but they didn't mind later.
Pic related, one of the ingenious ways Chinese militias skirted firearms bans was making one shot bamboo tube handcannons. They're like LAW or Panzerfaust in that they are one shot and disposable.
Cooper Roberts
/thread
washington would be probably making fun of them since they are still LARPing as they were governed by the brits
Levi Morris
I live in Britain. Gun control is not a political issue at all. Not a single mainstream party supports loosening restrictions on guns.
William Torres
>1984: the country what a fucking surprise
Justin Rivera
>CCTV IS BAD GUYS Wow user I really care that at 12:53 on the 11th August 2017 you posted on the /cm/ board and said 'all your cummies belong to us'
Ethan Phillips
Faggot detected.
My state has jack shit for violent crime, and is absolutely satureated with firearms.
19k registered destructive devies for 1.3 million people.
DDs menaing machine guns, hand grenades, and the the like.
Other guns are so common that virtually everyone has shot them, and even our feminists fucking own guns. No license or permit is required to carry a concealed weapon, and you can sell rifles out of your trunk.
Head up north and any given yard sale will have a gun blanket laid out.
Murders per 100k residents? >1.1
Meanwhile, all but one of my guns are a felony in Massachusetts. "Gun licenses" are may issue. Women who are being stalked are routinely denied the right to carry a gun, EVEN IF THEY HAVE PROVEN THEY ARE IN DANGER IN COURT.
their per capita murder rate? >1.9
Jew york, land of gun confiscations and no rights at all? >3.1
>and thus the culture of gun ownership, something most of the US citizens lack. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Christopher Perez
>but it was obviously harder for the authorities to control the ownership of weapons when everyone was using tools that could be considered as weapons The overwhelming majority of people weren't.
It's real, real fucking hard to explain that a shield, spear, and helmet are totally for farming, and the ONLY weapons that you could explain off as "totally not for fighting" are bills and broadhead arrows.
Even then, there's a world of difference between a bill for work and a bill for war.
Wyatt Jones
Because legislation understand that the free use of weapons implies the generating risk situación that could totally end in behaviours incriminated un criminal law, so its a prevention thing.
The truth i wont tell on this board
Matthew Taylor
And to answer this: >How come most modern states, most particularly modern Free® Democracies® who believe in Equal Rights®, heavily restrict or even outright ban people from owning weapons Because most people genuinely trust their government and think they have their best interests at heart, and thus don't feel oppressed when disarmed.
Europeans are naive, user. This isn't hard.
Jason Morris
>thus weapons pose a higher risk of people accidentally killing themselves You're deluding yourself if you genuinely think the reason behind modern weapon restrictions is preventing people from "accidentallly killing themselves".
>Uh-oh! Better ban black-jacks, somebody might hit themselves in the head and die lol! please It's about control and reminding the plebs that they exist entirely at the mercy of the oligarchy.
Connor Lopez
>Yeah, and so they were laxer about and encouraging of about child marriages, slavery, corporal punishment, lack of due process and state-funded police, witch hunts, burning of heretics and vigilantism. *sigh* Those were the days....
Easton Hughes
>modern weapon restrictions Like what? You can own weapons in most European countries, it just requires a licence, just like driving a car requires a licence. Those who really want guns still get to own guns.
Dylan King
>In Europe it's still a tragedy when someone dies. lol They barely even cover the terrorist attacks over there anymore for more than a day because they're so common and nobody gives a shit.
The only "tragedy" Europeans recognize is Muslims being confronted with the fact that their foreign pieces of shit that don't belong in Europe.
Eli Campbell
I'm not talking about Europe as I don't know the details of the laws that govern each country, I'm talking about my shithole city that restricts everything that isn't a pocketknife under 4 inches, and even that they can fuck you for, because they consider any folding knife that you can flick open to be a "gravity knife" and therefore illegal. Which basically means any folding knife can give you a criminal record.
Dominic Gray
>They barely even cover the terrorist attacks over there anymore for more than a day because they're so common Jesus crist dude have you been to europr recently? You think the situation is really that drammatic over here?
Noah Ross
Because most modern states aren't really "free democracies" and the very first step down the authoritarian path is to restrict people from owning common place weaponry for "their own good".
John Rivera
The US firearm homicide rate has more to do with urban blacks killing each other over drug money and other reasons then it does anything else. Just about every other ethnicity in the country has a lower homicide rate then urban blacks.
Nolan Kelly
It's dramatic enough that the virtue signalers have stopped putting up solidarity flag transparencies on their facebook profiles due the level of violence losing it's novelty. So don't give me that bullshit about how Europeans dying is a tragedy. Nobody gives a fuck anymore, Euro lives are cheap.
Nathaniel Martinez
>How come most modern states, most particularly modern Free® Democracies® who believe in Equal Rights®, heavily restrict or even outright ban people from owning weapons
This isn't true, though. As autistically as Europeans may caterwaul about American gun crime, firearm ownership is alive and well in the west and in many other parts of the world. It's perhaps not as broad as in the U.S. but to call it heavy restriction is insane.
Firearms ownership is mostly restricted in countries with either very recent or slim-to-no history of democratic governance. See: China, Russia, India, Japan.
Robert Hughes
are you memeing? I refuse to believe someone seriously browsing and posting on Veeky Forums would have such a dumbass, babby tier opinion
Jackson Morris
Sorry, I don't want to have a license to use a fork
Carson Stewart
guns are much cheaper and easier to make than swords
Benjamin Reyes
If firearms access is about control, why has it done absolutely nothing to curb the accretion of elite power in the US, a society with one of the worst Gini coefficients in the developed world?
Ethan Morris
>you just need to compare US statistics with European or Australian.
White Americans have similar homicide rates to white Euro's....despite the fact we are armed to the teeth.
Niggers, on the other hand, are responsible for over 50% of all homicides, despite the fact they make up less than 13% of the total population.
Hispanics make up an increasing number of people in the U.S., and while they're crime rates aren't as high as blacks, it is higher than whites.
The bottom line is that niggers and spics skew American crime statistics.
Cameron Walker
I'm American and that's blatantly false. The rate goes down significantly with African Americans removed but American whites are still more violent than European whites
Connor Reed
>that's blatantly false
No, it's not.
We're actually on par with Belgium.
Jaxson Hughes
Are you seriously suggesting normal peasants could even afford to own weapons that were on par in any sense with those of professional soldiers or that it would have done them any good without the nigh lifelong training that was required to use them effectively?
Firearms changed absolutely everything.
Robert Price
It's not a right if you need to give proof for why you should have a firearm. The US is very unique in how firearms are a right allowed to all non felon citizens. States put restrictions on it, but in 75% of the US it's no one's business but my own if I want to have an arsenal to arm a mob in my home.
It's so very rare even for the weapons to be used for political terrorism. Most often it's mentally deranged that use the firearms for tragic effect. The places with the most firearm restrictions are the places where the most violence is committed with illegal weapons.
Legal weapons meanwhile are primarily for committing suicide or a drunk weekend hunting
Leo Lopez
Thank globalization intersecting with Reagonomics to create the perfect storm to drown the poor in miserable standard of living while the wealthy are well past robber barons rich.
Josiah White
look out of your well to do developed nation amd realize that the world we live in is harsh and cruel, and whilst most people are just trying to get by, there are persons who seek to gain at your expense. This group of persons exist in every level of society, from the penniless to the insanly wealthy.
whats so hard to understand about that?
Parker Allen
Except they weren't that lax about owning arms. One of the more famous examples is Toyotomi Hideyoshi going on sword-drives among the Japanese peasantry towards the end of the Sengoku period. IIRC the Tokugawa shogunate made it illegal for non-samurai to bear arms.
Connor Ward
I'm a European. I never understood the barbaric obsession of Americans with their guns. Here it is much better, as they are not needed. Instead of guns, the government gives us clear instructions on how to apologize when a muslim terrorists is about to decapitate you.
Maybe you can learn from us in the future and lay your toys away one day ;)
Gabriel Foster
>Jesus crist dude have you been to europr recently? You think the situation is really that drammatic over here? not him but i remember reading how france was stopping a terrorist attack DAILY
Dylan Ramirez
Europe has always been a terrorist hell hole.
Instead of IRA scum in the U.K., and communists on the mainland, now it's just mainly Muslim shitbags.
Jace Foster
>Per capita however, England suffers from more violent crime per 1000 people than the US. That´s because some offenses that are labeled violent crime in the UK are not labeled violent crime in the US.
