• Wheel
• Internet
• Integrated circuit
• iPhone (I just love it so much!)
• Internet
• Integrated circuit
• iPhone (I just love it so much!)
Well my point was, ya can't count to 1000 without first counting 1, guns pretty much started it all. Guns provided the necessity for more powerful guns, which provided the necessity for even more powerful guns, leading up to the nukes. It all had a beginning, and sticks and stones and fists were not inventions.Braddock wrote:
The point is that the gun is just one of a long line of inventions that have fulfilled the same purpose. If guns were top of the pecking order than Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn't have been such significant events. Nuclear bomb has been far more significant, it's what keeps countries like the US and Russia top of the food pyramid.lowing wrote:
I am in no way insinuating a positive invention, but none stand out as a greater influential invention in human history, less the fuckin' wheel I suppose. If you wanna replace weapons for guns OK, but sticks and stnes and fists were not inventions.CameronPoe wrote:
They're just one rung on a ladder starting with fists, sticks and stones and ending with the fusion bomb and beyond. I wouldn't single them out as a 'great' or pivotal invention.
What if a big guy has a gun and a little guy has none? Or what if one country has tonnes of weapons and another country has none?Dilbert_X wrote:
Probably the invention of gunpowder, the brass cartridge, repeating firearms.
One positive aspect of firearms is they are 'equalisers'. Give a little guy and a big guy a gun each and suddenly they are equal.
It's a nonsense argument to be honest. Whether or not a weapon is a positive or negative is entirely subjective and depends on the context.
IIRC Firearms were the first products mass-produced with interchageable parts, and also subjected to real standards.
So you could say they kicked off modern manufacturing.
So you could say they kicked off modern manufacturing.
Fuck Israel
In the contect I picked its positive.Braddock wrote:
What if a big guy has a gun and a little guy has none? Or what if one country has tonnes of weapons and another country has none?Dilbert_X wrote:
Probably the invention of gunpowder, the brass cartridge, repeating firearms.
One positive aspect of firearms is they are 'equalisers'. Give a little guy and a big guy a gun each and suddenly they are equal.
It's a nonsense argument to be honest. Whether or not a weapon is a positive or negative is entirely subjective and depends on the context.
The downside is everyone needs a gun, more so than an iPhone.
Fuck Israel
Spears? Swords? Daggers? Bow & arrow? You should really read some book on the stone, bronze, and Iron age. Guns are just one in a loooong line of innovative weapon designs. If you were counting to 1000 guns would probably be up around the 100 mark somewhere.lowing wrote:
Well my point was, ya can't count to 1000 without first counting 1, guns pretty much started it all. Guns provided the necessity for more powerful guns, which provided the necessity for even more powerful guns, leading up to the nukes. It all had a beginning, and sticks and stones and fists were not inventions.Braddock wrote:
The point is that the gun is just one of a long line of inventions that have fulfilled the same purpose. If guns were top of the pecking order than Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn't have been such significant events. Nuclear bomb has been far more significant, it's what keeps countries like the US and Russia top of the food pyramid.lowing wrote:
I am in no way insinuating a positive invention, but none stand out as a greater influential invention in human history, less the fuckin' wheel I suppose. If you wanna replace weapons for guns OK, but sticks and stnes and fists were not inventions.
Guns were a quantum leap in that the power of the weapon was suddenly independent of the strength of the user.
Fuck Israel
I don't need a gun... I need my iPhone though!Dilbert_X wrote:
In the contect I picked its positive.Braddock wrote:
What if a big guy has a gun and a little guy has none? Or what if one country has tonnes of weapons and another country has none?Dilbert_X wrote:
Probably the invention of gunpowder, the brass cartridge, repeating firearms.
One positive aspect of firearms is they are 'equalisers'. Give a little guy and a big guy a gun each and suddenly they are equal.
It's a nonsense argument to be honest. Whether or not a weapon is a positive or negative is entirely subjective and depends on the context.
The downside is everyone needs a gun, more so than an iPhone.
You mean guns are for pussies and weaklings?Dilbert_X wrote:
Guns were a quantum leap in that the power of the weapon was suddenly independent of the strength of the user.
Yes, but all of those weapons were dependent on the strength of the man bearing them. A bigger man had a serious advantage in any engagement. The gun changed that forever.Braddock wrote:
Spears? Swords? Daggers? Bow & arrow? You should really read some book on the stone, bronze, and Iron age. Guns are just one in a loooong line of innovative weapon designs. If you were counting to 1000 guns would probably be up around the 100 mark somewhere.lowing wrote:
Well my point was, ya can't count to 1000 without first counting 1, guns pretty much started it all. Guns provided the necessity for more powerful guns, which provided the necessity for even more powerful guns, leading up to the nukes. It all had a beginning, and sticks and stones and fists were not inventions.Braddock wrote:
The point is that the gun is just one of a long line of inventions that have fulfilled the same purpose. If guns were top of the pecking order than Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn't have been such significant events. Nuclear bomb has been far more significant, it's what keeps countries like the US and Russia top of the food pyramid.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Bigger man with hand thrown stone versus smaller man with sling. Bigger man with sharpened stick versus smaller man with obsidian tipped spear. Bigger European knight in full heavy battle gear versus lightly armored Mongol with composite bow. Both warriors given the same for all three weapons above, the nimble warrior would have an advantage over the bigger warrior.JohnG@lt wrote:
Yes, but all of those weapons were dependent on the strength of the man bearing them. A bigger man had a serious advantage in any engagement. The gun changed that forever.Braddock wrote:
Spears? Swords? Daggers? Bow & arrow? You should really read some book on the stone, bronze, and Iron age. Guns are just one in a loooong line of innovative weapon designs. If you were counting to 1000 guns would probably be up around the 100 mark somewhere.lowing wrote:
Well my point was, ya can't count to 1000 without first counting 1, guns pretty much started it all. Guns provided the necessity for more powerful guns, which provided the necessity for even more powerful guns, leading up to the nukes. It all had a beginning, and sticks and stones and fists were not inventions.
Last edited by Ilocano (2010-01-11 16:52:50)
In each instance, the weaker person has a technological advantage, so it isn't a fair comparison. Moreover, you didn't disprove the notion that a stronger person would have a competitive advantage given similar weaponry.
Gunpowder is the great equalizer, period. The only other weapon that even comes close is the crossbow, but even then it is clumsy and the draw time is poor.
Even compared to the nuclear bomb, guns have a finesse that raw power just does not have. Nuclear weapons are a tactical advantage and a game changer to be sure, but the gun gives people the opportunity to take things, not just decimate them.
Even compared to the nuclear bomb, guns have a finesse that raw power just does not have. Nuclear weapons are a tactical advantage and a game changer to be sure, but the gun gives people the opportunity to take things, not just decimate them.
1) digital power amps
2) electric bass guitar
3) the snuggie
2) electric bass guitar
3) the snuggie
Aircon
i vote BF2s.
Batteries > all
It gave us:
Walkie-Talkies and GPS.
FlashLights.
and portable porn.
There are some other things too.
It gave us:
Walkie-Talkies and GPS.
FlashLights.
and portable porn.
There are some other things too.
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
The Spork.
hygiene
The written word.
No, everyone on the battlefield is equal, pussies and weaklings can defend themselves against thugs.Braddock wrote:
You mean guns are for pussies and weaklings?Dilbert_X wrote:
Guns were a quantum leap in that the power of the weapon was suddenly independent of the strength of the user.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2010-01-12 00:28:08)
Fuck Israel
the vagina and boobs and anal
lol well I don't fuckin need a gun I tell ya that much.Dilbert_X wrote:
The downside is everyone needs a gun, more so than an iPhone.
Dilbert's gone all NRA on us apprently.
a lot of the time, yeah! I'll go along with that statement. Guns allow pussies the opportunity to bully other people that they otherwsie wouldn't have.Braddock wrote:
You mean guns are for pussies and weaklings?
And weak thugs who fancy themselves as 'tough guys' can bully law-abiding citizens on the 'battlefield' of everyday life. I see lots of gang-bangers and muggers 'defending themselves' on the news every day.Dilbert_X wrote:
No, everyone on the battlefield is equal, pussies and weaklings can defend themselves against thugs.Braddock wrote:
You mean guns are for pussies and weaklings?Dilbert_X wrote:
Guns were a quantum leap in that the power of the weapon was suddenly independent of the strength of the user.