Home General Discussion

machine gun vs car

polycounter lvl 18
Offline / Send Message
dejawolf polycounter lvl 18
just started wondering, which invention has killed more people,
the machine gun, or the car?

as a figure, 3500 people are killed every month on the streets, in the US alone.

Replies

  • MoP
    Offline / Send Message
    MoP polycounter lvl 18
    i imagine during WW2 they didn't send troops into battle armed with cars, probably a reason behind that somewhere
  • Mechadus
  • Ninjas
    Offline / Send Message
    Ninjas polycounter lvl 18
    do subtract people killed by alternate modes of transportation from car deaths? ie, walking, horse riding, trains? I think you would have to.
  • Ferg
    Offline / Send Message
    Ferg polycounter lvl 17
    MoP wrote: »
    i imagine during WW2 they didn't send troops into battle armed with cars, probably a reason behind that somewhere

    yah but how many people fire their machine gun all the way to and from work every day?
  • aesir
    Offline / Send Message
    aesir polycounter lvl 18
    i think in a lot of africa people make pretty daily use of their AKs on the way to work
  • Thegodzero
    Offline / Send Message
    Thegodzero polycounter lvl 18
    nahh just the ones infected...
  • Rory_M
    Offline / Send Message
    Rory_M polycounter lvl 10
    dejawolf wrote: »
    as a figure, 3500 people are killed every month on the streets, in the US alone.

    ...um, by cars or guns?
  • blankslatejoe
    Offline / Send Message
    blankslatejoe polycounter lvl 19
    hm...guns are meant for killing, but I bet cars would win on this. I was pretty curious, so I did some math.

    According to this page http://www.car-accidents.com/pages/stats.html we can say roughly 41,000-43,000 people die in the US alone to car accidents each year.

    According to this page on gun violence in the US:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States#Homicides, the amount of gun violence drastically depends on the density of an area, in terms of how its calculated, but if we take the WORST case scenario (over urban areas over 250,000, 12.1 people killed by guns per 100,000) and apply it to the ENTIRE country (303,824,000) then we get 36,784.

    So, assuming the entire country to be at the worst death-by-guns percent, and and pretending that EVERY gun killer in the US used a machine gun.. you're still more likely to die by car than by machine gun in the US today.

    As for totals through all time, who knows, but I'd still put my money on cars. Slow and steady death toll versus a spikey sporadic one..
  • glynnsmith
    Offline / Send Message
    glynnsmith polycounter lvl 17
    Goddamn. I thought thise was going to be some kind of Lion vs Bear thing (Bear. BEAR!).

    Continuing on that path, I'd say a machine gun could whoop a car, no bother.

    America is a scary place :(
  • hobodactyl
    Offline / Send Message
    hobodactyl polycounter lvl 18
    I came in here expecting a video of a machine gun shooting a car, damnit! :P Cars and guns BOTH kill too many people :/
  • jrs100000
    Offline / Send Message
    jrs100000 polycounter lvl 8
    dejawolf wrote: »
    just started wondering, which invention has killed more people,
    the machine gun, or the car?

    as a figure, 3500 people are killed every month on the streets, in the US alone.


    Car hands down.

    Although machine guns are responsible for far less than half of combat deaths in conventional armed conflict (artillery gets the top spot), cars also only get a fraction of automobile deaths (trucks and motorcycles have to have some pretty impressive numbers on their own).
  • anoon
    "i imagine during WW2 they didn't send troops into battle armed with cars, probably a reason behind that somewhe"

    Fucking. Hilarious.

    And true.
  • TelekineticFrog
    Offline / Send Message
    TelekineticFrog polycounter lvl 18
    I was gonna say cheeseburgers...but I guess cars will do.
  • glib
    Cars with frickin' machineguns on their roofs.
  • jocose
  • dfacto
    Offline / Send Message
    dfacto polycounter lvl 18
    Cars, hands down. You can't compare wartime figures because the gun is a weapon, while the car is a conveyance. You can only get a fair comparison when both are intended to be used for recreational purposes or as necessary tool (though how necessary hunting or home defense is is pretty ambiguous).

    If this statistic is to be believed, http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/04/21/weekinreview/20070422_MARSH_GRAPHIC.html then you have a total of around 90 gun related deaths per day. Eliminate suicides, because those are figures that could just as well be from another cause such as pills or roof diving, and which do not have a reliable equivalent in the automotive statistics.

    You have around 30 homicides/accidental deaths per day. Per month that's around 900 deaths caused by guns. Per year it's nearly 11,000.

    Take these stats into account http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx and you see that the average fatalities per year for cars are in the 42,000 range.

    So basically OMG CARS ARE MURDER MACHINES WE NEED TO BAN THEM!

    As for the intial question of machine-gun vs car, I'm sure the car beats the machine gun by loads and loads considering handgun crime is the norm. In war the machine gun is number one obviously.
  • MoP
    Offline / Send Message
    MoP polycounter lvl 18
    You then need to also look at the number of people who have guns versus the number of people who have cars, and use those values to modulate the "total per year" figure, if you want an actual comparison of "relative fatality". Since there are way more people with access to cars than there are with access to guns.

    Also, guns have been around a fair while longer than cars... like a couple of hundred years... still it seems like the car might win in terms of total fatalities, if not actual relative risk factor (eg. 10% of guns may have killed someone, while only 1% of cars may have killed someone, but if there are more than 10x cars than guns then already the car has won, even though the gun is more deadly percentage wise).
  • Firebert
    Offline / Send Message
    Firebert polycounter lvl 15
    What makes & models? Types of vehicles? Full-size, mid-sized, compact, LiteTrailerLoad, Semi's, Trucks, Trucks with extended cabs? Taxi's in NY?!? OMF that could be an interesting number. Those guys haul ass.
  • MachineMinded
    hobodactyl wrote: »
    I came in here expecting a video of a machine gun shooting a car, damnit! :P Cars and guns BOTH kill too many people :/
    So did I. :( But as for machine guns vs. cars killing more people, I think cars win hands down. There are far more idiots out there with cars than with machine guns...

    I'd also want to see a remade version of Interstate '76 or '82 or even Quarantine as cars with machine guns are awesome. :thumbup:
  • blankslatejoe
    Offline / Send Message
    blankslatejoe polycounter lvl 19
    good points mop. I'm not sure how number of total fatalities compares to number of total cars/machineguns in existence. Cars would definitely be safer if you look at things that way.

    Though, talking about machine guns and not just any gun the over-time issue isn't as relevant. I'm not sure whether or not things like the gatling gun count, but yeah, the two seem to have evolved pretty much at the same time.

    I'd think the bigger thing that would throw off the statistics would be wars. if 72 million people died in WW2 , and only a fraction of that was to machine gun fire...well, that could still be significant enough of a spike to propel it above the steady rate of car-accidents. Throw in every war of the last 100 years and you've got an interesting number for someone with a longer attention span than I do to tally up. :)

    Also, we'd have to consider that the amount of cars probably correlates to the amount of accidents--that is, I doubt there were as many car accidents in 1909 than in 1999. I'm not so sure I'd vote cars anymore.
  • MoP
    Offline / Send Message
    MoP polycounter lvl 18
    MachineMinded: Hell yes, Quarantine! I'd totally remake that.
  • dejawolf
    Offline / Send Message
    dejawolf polycounter lvl 18
    i used to have a hardon for twisted metal.
    there was just something retardedly pleasing about being able to destroy the eiffel tower of paris.
  • Mark Dygert
    "which invention has killed more people, the machine gun, or the car?"

    If you're going to limit the type of gun, you need to limit the type of car. level the two things being compared. You don't hear about mass graves filled with victims of auto accidents. But if they all died by pistol then we can't count them? That's cooking the books.

    Guns VS cars, who has killed more? Guns hands down.

    WW1 1914-1918 5,525,000 dead (a good % by bullets I bet) alone probably wracked up more kills for guns before the first commercial cars started rolling off the lines in the 1920's. Not to mention guns have been around for centuries before WW1. Toss in WW2 and a bunch of wars since.

    We keep dreaming up ways to make cars safer, and guns deadlier. With cars in the hole on kill count already it will have to be a long peaceful time with a lot of crazy drunken drivers to pull ahead.

    On second thought, guns don't kill people, cars don't kill people, people kill people.
    So the question is: "people vs people, who kills more?"
  • jrs100000
    Offline / Send Message
    jrs100000 polycounter lvl 8
    For WWII artillery was responsible for roughly half of all combat casualties. That leaves handguns, rifles, mines, weather, disease, drowning, malnutrition, fire, accidents (including vehicular accidents), etc to divide up the other half. The other issue is that the 72 million figure is referring to total deaths, where as deaths caused by combat would be a tiny subset of that figure. I cant find any hard numbers for this, but if the number of machine gun deaths in WWII was higher than just one million I would be surprised, and a number that small doesnt add up to much when diffused over 100 years of history and extended to cover the entire wold.

    This wikipedia article I think does shed some light on the issue: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_death

    You will notice that worldwide neither car accidents or gun violence (of any kind) make the top ten list. In the US alone car accidents result in 43,000 deaths every year while gun violence does not make the list.

    You will also notice that 260,000 children are killed every year by vehicle accidents. Based on this I would guestimate that it is reasonable to assume that perhaps 1 to 2 million people are killed by cars every year.

    In conclusion: My barely educated guess is that cars have killed many times more people than machine guns and that cigarettes and put them both to shame.
  • Mark Dygert
    "Call in the big guns" as in artillery.

    Because the question says "machine guns" it attempts to stack the deck. If its going to be limited to a specific type of gun then you can't count all automotive fatalities that get recorded, just cars. No motorcycles, mopeds, trucks, pickups, RV's, SUV's, buses, trains or farm equipment or anything else that isn't a "car".

    If you count all automotive related deaths, then you need to count all gun related deaths. You can't limit one and not the other.
  • Joseph Silverman
    Offline / Send Message
    Joseph Silverman polycounter lvl 17
    jrs100000 wrote: »
    For WWII artillery was responsible for roughly half of all combat casualties.


    Artillery are guns.

    And i think guns win -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
  • jrs100000
    Offline / Send Message
    jrs100000 polycounter lvl 8
    Well yes, artillery are guns. They arnt machine guns tho, and if you are going to get specific about it then then you exclude nearly all firearms except artillery and muskets. We also havent determined if sub machine guns count either. That could throw off the count (assuming we had a real count going) due to the very common models that would be included/excluded.

    I sited WWII specifically assuming that it would be a high point for machinegun related deaths. Is there a different highwater mark that I should be considering?

    Edit: and I do agree that Im doing a lot of number fudging, but there just arnt that many hard numbers to go off of so when a real number does show up, even if it isnt a great fit Ill go with that rather than a number Im pulling out of my ass.
  • Ghostscape
    Offline / Send Message
    Ghostscape polycounter lvl 13
    I was hoping this would be something like the buick of truth or that one video with the dude who makes custom cars turning the minigun on his failed creation.
  • Ghostscape
    Offline / Send Message
    Ghostscape polycounter lvl 13
    SupRore wrote: »
    Artillery are guns.

    And i think guns win -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

    I'm pretty sure a lot of the WW2 casualties are not specifically gun related. There are scores of them that have more to do with logistics than anything else - Food, Fuel, Clothing, medical supplies, etc, to say nothing of internment camps and other mistreatment of prisoners. I'm not saying guns aren't a significant factor, but you can't point at a war and say "these are all gun deaths" and then compare that number to auto fatalities in a modern country and say those conditions are comparable. Hell, I'm sure a number of the WW2 fatalities are automobile crashes - zipping around in a Jeep off-road isn't the safest thing in the world :)

    Anyhow, machine guns are pretty much unheard of in non-war situations, so I'd say machine guns vs cars is cars without question. If we're comparing all automotive or traffic fatalities to all guns, then still, outside of wartime, cars win hands down, and I'd imagine the significant margin that cars have on guns in non-wartime tends to bring those numbers a lot closer than anyone would like to imagine.

    And of course cigarette and alcohol related diseases and deaths put them all to shame.

    edit: dammit I thought I was editing my first post.
  • Vailias
    Offline / Send Message
    Vailias polycounter lvl 18
    If we're going total deaths by 20th century and later weaponry vs total deaths by 20th century and later vehicles, then yeah. Weapons win. Its what they're for.

    If you want Americans killed by each cars win.

    FBI crime statistics 1998-2007
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_01.html

    Motor Vehicle fatalities
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year

    MOP's argument is pretty reasonable, though data for firearm possession on the African continent is likely not tabulated, but I'd bet that there are plenty of places there where more people have firearms than cars. ;)

    Anyway keeping it with "people in the USA" since guns and cars are basically equally accessible, though not automatic weapons, it seems a bit more fair.

    Best statistics I could find are from the NRA and from the Department of transportation.

    Total registered highway vehicles 2006: 250,851,833
    Total privately owned firearms in the US: Over 250 million.
    US Department of justice estimated 223 million firearms available to the US public in 1996, this includes illegal weaponry
    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/guic.pdf

    So, in the US which kills more people on a regular basis? Cars.
    Which kills more based on number available? Cars.
    Which kills more based on population? Cars.

    Taking into account war deaths: Since 1900 430,081 Americans have died in battle or of wounds sustained
    http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warsusa.htm

    Seeing as how vehicular related deaths are constantly about 20 thousand more than murder and manslaughter, the break even point, where vehicular related deaths vs weapon related deaths in the US would be about 22 years ago.

    Vehicular related death totals are hard to find pre 1975, but suffice it to say that more people have been killed in auto accidents in the us than in all the murders and direct combat fatalities in the 20th century.
  • SHEPEIRO
    Offline / Send Message
    SHEPEIRO polycounter lvl 17
    Ghostscape wrote: »
    I'm pretty sure a lot of the WW2 casualties are not specifically gun related. There are scores of them that have more to do with logistics than anything else - Food, Fuel, Clothing, medical supplies, etc, to say nothing of internment camps and other mistreatment of prisoners. I'm not saying guns aren't a significant factor, but you can't point at a war and say "these are all gun deaths" and then compare that number to auto fatalities in a modern country and say those conditions are comparable. Hell, I'm sure a number of the WW2 fatalities are automobile crashes - zipping around in a Jeep off-road isn't the safest thing in the world :)

    Anyhow, machine guns are pretty much unheard of in non-war situations, so I'd say machine guns vs cars is cars without question. If we're comparing all automotive or traffic fatalities to all guns, then still, outside of wartime, cars win hands down, and I'd imagine the significant margin that cars have on guns in non-wartime tends to bring those numbers a lot closer than anyone would like to imagine.

    And of course cigarette and alcohol related diseases and deaths put them all to shame.

    edit: dammit I thought I was editing my first post.

    aye as it states military deaths (those even likely to be caused by gun) are "only" 20 mill. the rest was civilian, which probsably means disease and bombing etc unlikely to be gunfire.

    and check out these stats for fatal car accidents in india

    http://morth.nic.in/writereaddata/sublinkimages/table-86816824487.htm

    over 92 thousand in 2004, if numbers carried on till this year they would account for 1.25 mill

    chinas is higher at 110 thousand last year

    and over a million in 1998 year as a world total
    WHO468.gif

    so im thinking the car but not by much
  • jrs100000
    Offline / Send Message
    jrs100000 polycounter lvl 8
    I think the real question here is 'who would win in a fight:a car or a gun'.

    It would be an epic battle of endurance and wits, but in the end I vote that the gun is destined for victory as the car's rubber hoses and gaskets would fail after a few years of quietly sitting on the field of battle.
  • Ghostscape
    Offline / Send Message
    Ghostscape polycounter lvl 13
    jrs100000 wrote: »
    I think the real question here is why the fuck aren't there more games about customizing your car with weapons and armor to take on other cars that have done the same

    Fixed.
  • Dusty
    A literal gun vs. car match I think would look like this.

    A gun and a car are both placed in the middle of madison square garden. On live tv. And the world watches as both just sit there, in the ring, doing nothing.
  • SHEPEIRO
    Offline / Send Message
    SHEPEIRO polycounter lvl 17
    Ghostscape wrote: »
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jrs100000
    I think the real question here is why the fuck aren't there more games about customizing your car with weapons and armor to take on other cars that have done the same
    .

    vehicle choice could drastic change a weapons effectiveness, ie single shot powerfull weapon would be shit in a car with hard suspension. while a really powerfull weapon in a small light vehicle could have some really rockin kickback. sounds fun if it was propperly dynamic
  • MoP
    Offline / Send Message
    MoP polycounter lvl 18
    yeah, and if you attached the right weapons to the right car in the right place, firing shots could actually speed you up (BF1942 tank firing backwards!) or make you fly ( flamethrowers pointing down
  • rooster
    Offline / Send Message
    rooster mod
    pretty tough one this, I've ran over plenty of people with machineguns, but at the same time I've destroyed plenty of cars using a machinegun.. I'm thinking its a tie
  • SHEPEIRO
    Offline / Send Message
    SHEPEIRO polycounter lvl 17
    i bet running over the barrel of a gun would make it missfire and make it explode....maybe
  • dejawolf
    Offline / Send Message
    dejawolf polycounter lvl 18
    SHEPEIRO wrote: »
    i bet running over the barrel of a gun would make it missfire and make it explode....maybe

    hell, packing a bit of snow into the barrel will make a gun misfire.
  • hyrumark
    Offline / Send Message
    hyrumark polycounter lvl 12
    The car could totally flank the machine gun, then it would just be a matter of getting up some speed - a one ton car moving at 50MPH packs a lot of inertia. I vote car.
  • KeyserSoze
    Offline / Send Message
    KeyserSoze polycounter lvl 18
    which has killed more people, chainsaws or gravity?
  • SHEPEIRO
    Offline / Send Message
    SHEPEIRO polycounter lvl 17
    KeyserSoze wrote: »
    which has killed more people, chainsaws or gravity?

    gravity it had a little headstart, but what about that murderation in american pyscho they teamed up for that one
  • KeyserSoze
    Offline / Send Message
    KeyserSoze polycounter lvl 18
    Chainsaws AND gravity?! You just blew my mind.
  • rooster
    Offline / Send Message
    rooster mod
    cars that have guns that shoot gravity chainsaws!
  • MoP
    Offline / Send Message
    MoP polycounter lvl 18
    that sounds like the most awesome thing ever

    ... or cars that have gravity guns that shoot chainsaws?

    ... or chainsaws that have guns that shoot gravity cars?!!1
  • rooster
    Offline / Send Message
    rooster mod
    chainsaw gravity car gun.. we need to pitch this to blurst cos' they'll totally make that sucker
  • Joshua Stubbles
    Offline / Send Message
    Joshua Stubbles polycounter lvl 19
    I'll just strap Jack Bauer to the hood of my car. I win.
  • flaagan
    Offline / Send Message
    flaagan polycounter lvl 18
    So does being killed by a machine gun drive-by count as a mark in both column A and B?
  • arrangemonk
    Offline / Send Message
    arrangemonk polycounter lvl 17
    whats the big deal, the most common cause of death is cancer nowadays
    i i would love to get hit by a car or bullet in an proper age, aproximately 2 hours of pain or dizzyness and you're gone or even sudden death against years of medication causes diareah, painful procedures and stuff like that, my gradfather hat a year of pain before he passed away
    and im suffering a cronical disease,
    dying is not a matter of how but if its dignified im matter of one self
    its not funny having to tell everyone that you cant go out or visit them because you feel sick every 3 weeks
  • Vailias
    Offline / Send Message
    Vailias polycounter lvl 18
    :) Second most common cause of death (in the us) is doctor error.
Sign In or Register to comment.