this is not really true, yes ww2 was the king of death, but the mongol conquests, the tai ping rebellion, the ming dynasty conquests, all of them killed more people than ww1 did where machine guns, artillery and mustard gas was used. just using horses, swords and arrows for the most part these conquests topped the death count of machine guns and mustard gas.
I don't want to sound like an ass but at least 60 million people died in WW2. The Tai Ping Rebellion killed only 20 million. The Mongol invasions lasted at least a century and here's a link to show some 'slight' exaggerations known to occur when historians wanted to get the audience involved.
http://bedejournal.blogspot.com/2011...e-mongols.htmlOr here's a quick link to show one 6 year war led the pack.
http://top10wtf.com/top-10-wars-by-death-toll/Oh, BTW, which was second on the list? Not swords, spears, and horses for a quick reference.
What is the real evidence that crime went down as we got closer to the modern era? It's called civilization. The exact opposite of the Dark Ages followed by the Middle Ages. You know, the eras of great medicine, inventions, art, theory, and civilization? Next I guess you'll say guns brought us civilization again right? LOL.
I also stated that we hold the largest prison pop in the world. 5% of total world pop has 25% of the prisoners. I guess if you put over 2 million in jail, your crime rates might go down right? Only so many criminals right? Possible?
I would like to see anything more than the most aggressive guesses and supposition for the rape preventions. It is the most fallacious, overgeneralized, 'stat' I've seen. 'We think only 10% of all rapes are reported and based off a survey(really top notch research), we think there should be this many rapes but those women who had a gun...what heroes!' Which degree of error do you think this 'research' may have?
I do think the research Obama had done needs to be an ongoing project. Considering gun lobbies have helped shoot down this research for the past 15 years, I'm thinking it may not be as good for activists as they'd like. Read this link from the research you highlighted.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=18319&page=10Now look on page ten and read the very first paragraph. Read where the lack of meaningful earlier research has severely hampered this effort? See some cause and effect here? Think this research will continue for the next decade?
I've never thought guns were the problem but only one state takes away from the mentally ill and ex criminals. California. Some people don't need guns because they aren't right in the head or are criminals. No one is willing to take those guns away though. This isn't a throw the baby out with the dirty bathwater case. It's called responsible gun ownership but fear mongering is preventing the discussion ever moving forward. Just like the gun lobbies like it.
I don't understand the ban argument either. I still haven't seen where people are trying to get rid of shotguns and hunting rifles but I'm more than willing to see this. This is a more generalized statement than a reply.