dudeone Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Truly Stunning: More Americans Killed by Guns Since '68 Than In All Wars Put Together By tomasyn SAT JAN 19, 2013 AT 08:01 AM PST http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/19/1180353/-Truly-Stunning-More-Americans-Killed-by-Guns-Since-68-Than-In-All-Wars-Put-Together I'm motivated to write this diary by a diary that appears on the rec list calling my ignorance of gun nut culture "stunning". You want stunning? Try this on for size: More than a million Americans have been killed by guns since 1968. More than in the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and various smaller conflicts. Combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortorella's Rant Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Perhaps it's time to take a page out of Rick Perry's book and pray away the gun violence in America. Okay, I couldn't contain myself. What a joke LOL And this guy had a shot at becoming president? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Hmm Interesting but not surprising at all. Russia lost the most in WW 2 (25 million) and were the ones who defeated Germany. America (400 k) loves to take credit but didn't enter the war until Germany was falling. US lost around 60 k in Vietnam, less in Korea around 40 k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpcurtly Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Where does it say how many people guns protected huh? ....HUH?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:D Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Not Truly Stunning: Another dudeone gun news thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklax Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It makes sense when you realize the population growth. In the revolutionary war, 1 in 20 white males* were killed, but since the population was so low at the time, the number comes out to 4000 ish deaths, which is equivalent to 3 million killed by today's population.http://www.shmoop.co...statistics.html *Given the social customs at the time, this would be the population of men eligible to fight I don't want to downplay the problem, but stats can be misleading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Very informative post with proof of claim. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie.the.Unicorn Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 What about the Americans killed by guns in wars? Do those count? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Not Truly Stunning: Another dudeone gun news thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrison Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Classic USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancaster Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Maybe this just proves how much more effective the US military is vs other countries, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Hmm Interesting but not surprising at all. Russia lost the most in WW 2 (25 million) and were the ones who defeated Germany. America (400 k) loves to take credit but didn't enter the war until Germany was falling. US lost around 60 k in Vietnam, less in Korea around 40 k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 My father who fought at D-day says hello , so do the millions of allied troops who flew , sailed and fought in europe. And also the brits payed for and sent millions of tons of military supplies to Russia on the kola run , where an icy death waited for many a sailor . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 Its a touchy subject. My family members also served in WW2 under the British flag. Soviet Union lost far more ppl than all the allied countries combined, approx 25 million and 14 % of population. US lost 400 k and less than 1/2 of 1%. Canada lost more per capita than US. It's a fact the Americans spent most of WW2 sending in aid. They didn't enter the war until Pearl Harbor which was 4 years after the war started. Even then they fought Japan, not Germany. US didn't get into a head to head fight with Germans until end of 1943 in Africa. D day landings were about 6 months later 1944. By now the Germans were essentially defeated by the Russians. The war ended in 1945. Stalin had continuously asked America to enter the Euro front against Germany but Roosevelt refused and only sent in aid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 In what universe is this revelation "truly stunning?" I should think it falls more under the category of "duh". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Electro Rock Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 The Soviets did handle 75% of the fighting vs the 3rd Reich, however the weaknesses in their system were to blame for their ludicrous casualty figures, a system that would ultimately kill just as many of its own people in "peacetime". What's more is that the Soviets were heaviliy responsible for the Nazis being so strong in the first place, the plan was to have Germany fight itself and the rest of Europe to exhaustion, then roll in with the Red Army for the enormous backstab, only they never foresaw how easily continental Europe would fall, and ended up getting backstabbed themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamboni_14 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 The Soviets did handle 75% of the fighting vs the 3rd Reich, however the weaknesses in their system were to blame for their ludicrous casualty figures, a system that would ultimately kill just as many of its own people in "peacetime". What's more is that the Soviets were heaviliy responsible for the Nazis being so strong in the first place, the plan was to have Germany fight itself and the rest of Europe to exhaustion, then roll in with the Red Army for the enormous backstab, only they never foresaw how easily continental Europe would fall, and ended up getting backstabbed themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.