佛罗里达校园枪击案、为生命游行活动，都让我们畅想没有枪支的和平盛世。但倘若枪支从未存在于这个星球，世界上真的就没有战乱伤亡了吗？本期Quriosity 用数据带您走进无枪世界。
On 24 March 2018, more than two million people took to the streets in the US to protest gun violence. Some wish to repeal citizens’ rights to bear arms, while others want to arm even more people. Most Americans have opinions that fall somewhere in between.
2018年2月24日，超过两百万美国人涌上街头抗议枪支暴力。人们对于彻底废止携枪权还是武装更多的人持有不同意见，大部分美国人的态度落于两种极端之间。
Demonstrators participate in the March for Our Lives rally against gun violence in March 2018 in Washington, DC (Credit: Getty Images)
2018年3月枪支暴力的抗议者们在华盛顿组织了“为生命游行”运动。（来源：Getty Images）
But what would happen if that debate was suddenly and irrevocably put to rest – because there were no guns at all? What if all firearms in the world suddenly disappeared with no way to get them back?
但如果枪支在这个世界上从未存在过，也无从谈起关于禁枪的种种争议，如果世界上的所有武器忽然永远消失，世界又会发生怎样的变化？
No gun deaths再无枪击造成的死亡
01
The most obvious effect of such a disappearance is simple: no gun deaths. Approximately 500,000 people around the world are killed by guns each year. In terms of developed countries, the biggest losses are in the US, where citizens own 300 to 350 million guns in total. There, gun homicide rates are more than 25 times higher than the combined rate of other high-income nations.
枪支消失最显而易见的影响十分明了：再无枪击造成的死亡。每年全球约有五十万人死于枪击。美国公民持枪总量达3亿到3.5亿。在发达国家范围内，美国在枪击死亡方面损失最大，枪杀率比其他高收入国家的总和还高25倍。
Ranking at the top of that list would be lives otherwise lost to suicide. Around 60% of the 175,700 US firearm deaths from 2012 to 2016 were suicides, and half of the 44,000 Americans who killed themselves in 2015 used a gun.
没有枪支造成的变化中，首当其冲的应该是很多人就不会开枪自杀了。从2012年到2016年，美国有175700人死于枪击，约有60%的人是自杀;在2015年自杀的44000名美国人中，有一半是开枪自杀的。
More than 80% of attempted suicides with a gun end in death. “Some folks are determined to die and will find another way to do it. But others are impulsive one-timers who’d go on to have very happy and productive lives,” says Ted Miller, a principal research scientist at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation. “That’s especially true of a lot of kids.”
在使用枪支的企图自杀中，超过80%会以死亡收尾。泰德·米勒，太平洋研究所研究与评估的总负责人，说：“如果没有枪支，死意已决之人会换另一种方式自杀，但其他一时萌生自杀想法的冲动之人则会继续幸福地生活，尤其是青少年。”
Guns also make interactions with the police deadlier. In the US, nearly 1,000 citizens are annually killed by police. Of course, the reasons for officer-involved violence are complex and often involve racial bias against non-white citizens, including even among African-American police themselves. Still, many of those deaths would likely be prevented were guns not involved.
枪支也使警力致死问题恶化。在美国，每年有近1000个公民被警察杀死。当然，警察参与的暴力事件发生的原因复杂，常涉及对非白色人种公民的种族歧视，这种歧视甚至存在于非裔警察之间。但如果没有枪支，许多人的死亡本可以是可以避免的。
A demonstrator holds up a picture of 18-year-old Michael Brown, who was shot and killed by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri in 2014 (Credit: Getty Images)
2014年密苏里州弗格森，18岁的迈克尔·布朗被警察射杀，游行者举着他的照片。（来源：Getty Images）
Deadly mass attacks by domestic terrorists also would decline. A 2017 study of more than 2,800 attacks in the US, Canada, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand revealed that guns are by far the most lethal way to kill as many people as possible – even more than explosives or vehicular strikes. Guns were used in just 10% of attacks but accounted for 55% of deaths. In the US, terrorists also prefer guns: out of 16 lethal terrorism-associated attacks since 9/11, all but two involved firearms.
如果没有枪支，国内致命的大型恐怖袭击会减少。2017年，一份报告对美国、加拿大、西欧、澳大利亚和新西兰发生的超过2800次恐怖袭击进行了研究，研究显示：枪杀是目前最具致命性的杀人手段，杀害的人数甚至比爆炸和车辆袭击还多。只有10%的袭击中用到过枪支，但是枪支却导致了55%的死亡人数。美国的恐怖分子也更“偏爱”枪支，在911事件之后发生过的16起致命性恐怖袭击中，只有两起案件没有涉及到枪杀。
Improbable peace和平希望渺茫
02
History shows that violence is ingrained in human nature, however, and guns are by no means a prerequisite for conflict. “Think of the Rwandan genocide,” says David Yamane, a professor of sociology at Wake Forest University in North Carolina. “There was tremendous violence, much without firearms.”
历史表明，暴力在人性中是根深蒂固的，而枪支绝不是产生冲突的先决条件。大卫·亚马内，北卡罗莱纳州的维克森林大学的社会学博士，说：“想想卢旺达种族大屠杀吧，它充斥着可怕的暴力，但是大多不涉及火器。”
Even when we imagine all guns disappearing off the face of the Earth, war and civil strife would continue. But rather than revert to more primitive weaponry like spears, swords or bows and arrows, modern nations would likely shift to other forms of killing, including explosives, tanks, missiles and chemical and biological weapons.
即使世界上没有枪支，战争与国内冲突并不会停止。现代国家会转换杀戮方式，包括爆破、坦克、导弹和化学生物武器等，而不是使用矛、剑、弓箭等原始武器。
Nations also may invent new types of weapons to fill gaps left by guns, Brooks adds, with the wealthiest, most powerful states likely being the quickest to innovate the most effective new means of killing. So while warfare between states would change, “you wouldn’t necessarily change the balance of power,” Brooks says.
布鲁克斯补充道，国家会研制新型武器来填充枪支的位置，最富强的国家可能最快发明出最致命的新型杀器。所以，尽管地区之间的武力冲突可能有所变数，但是武装力量的平衡不一定会被改变。
Natural world 自然世界
03
Should guns disappear, there also would be mixed results for animals. On the one hand, the poaching and trophy hunting of endangered species would decline greatly. On the other, control of problem animals – whether rabid raccoons, stampeding elephants, venomous snakes or charging polar bears – would become more difficult.
如果枪支消失，对动物来说也是喜忧参半。一方面，偷猎和狩猎濒危物种的行为将大大减少。另一方面，对问题动物的控制，比如暴躁的浣熊、惊慌逃窜的大象、毒蛇还有极具攻击性的北极熊，都将变得更加困难。
If guns disappeared, there would be extra potential challenges for both hunting and agriculture (Credit: Getty Images)
如果枪支消失了，狩猎与农业都会面临着额外潜在的挑战。（来源：Getty Pictures）
Guns are also integral for invasive species management, he continues. Thousands of cats, pigs, goats, possums and other harmful non-native species are shot each year to try to preserve delicate ecosystems, especially on islands. Doing away with guns would make that already-steep uphill battle all the more difficult – and less humane. Mercy killings of injured livestock and other animals likewise would be made more brutal without guns.
他还说，枪支也是管理入侵物种不可缺少的一部分。每年人们都会射杀成千上万只猫、猪、山羊、负鼠和其他有害的非本地物种，来保护脆弱的、特别是在岛屿上的生态系统。如果不用枪，会使本来已经很艰难的斗争变得更加困难，也更不人道。而且不用枪的话，受伤牲畜与其他类似情况动物的安乐死也会变得更加残忍。
Money matters 经济方面
04
In terms of the economy, the US stands the most to lose if guns disappeared. The Firearms Industry Trade Association calculates that the firearms industry accounts for $20 billion (£15 billion) in direct contributions, plus another $30 billion (£20 billion) in other contributions. For the US economy, though, losing $50 billion (£35 billion) “wouldn’t even be a blip on the screen,” Spitzer says. “It’s not zero, but it’s just not very big compared to the economy as a whole.”
在经济上，如果枪支消失，美国将成为最大输家。枪支工业贸易协会估计枪支工业对美国经济的直接贡献占到200亿美元(150亿英镑),另外还有300亿美元(200亿英镑)的其他贡献。不过，对于美国经济来说,亏损500亿美元(350亿英镑)“在屏幕上也不过是一个光点”，斯皮策说，“这虽然并不是零，但与整体经济相比，也不是很大。”
In fact, there would likely be a modest net economic gain if guns disappeared. Gun death and injury-related expenses add up to direct losses of around $10.7 billion (£7 billion) per year, and more than $200 billion (£140 billion) when other factors are taken into account.
事实上，如果枪支消失，可能会带来适度的经济净收益。每年枪支造成的死伤带来的直接损失约为107亿美元（70亿英镑），如果加入上其他因素，损失将超过2000亿美元（1400亿英镑）。
Self-defence自我防卫
05
Americans of all ages are increasingly terrified of being attacked in a public place, Gabor adds, whether at school, a movie theatre, a nightclub or on the street. Even if such events are relatively rare, “this onslaught of mass shootings tears at the social fabric,” he says. “People’s sense of security and trust in each other is eroded, causing profound social and psychological effects.”
加博补充道，无论在学校、电影院、夜总会还是街头，所有年龄段的美国人都越来越害怕在公共场所受到攻击。即使这样的事件相对少见，“这次大规模枪击事件也撕裂了社会结构。”“人与人之间的安全感和信任受到侵蚀，造成了深刻的社会和心理影响。”
Whether guns actually help people stay safe and defend themselves is a controversial subject. But the limited research available on this topic tends to indicate that guns have the opposite effect. A 1993 study of 1,860 homicides found that the presence of guns in a home significantly increases the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance, for example. A 2014 meta-study likewise found that access to firearms is associated with homicide and completed suicide attempts.
枪支能否真正地帮助人们确保安全和自我防卫是一个有争议的话题。但是在这个话题上的现存的研究倾向于表明枪支具有与此相反的效果。一项针对于1993年1860起杀人案的研究发现，家庭枪支的存在显著增加了家人或熟人作案的概率。一项2014年的 Meta研究同样表明，枪支的使用动机与杀人和自杀有关。
Gun culture枪支文化
06
Gun culture also would be something that many firearm owners would miss. But Miller points out that recreational hunters could shift from rifles to other means of killing, such as bows and arrows. The same goes for those who visit shooting ranges for fun, or who collect guns as a hobby – they simply could find a replacement activity. Though for someone for whom guns are a passion, that is unlikely to be much comfort.
枪支文化会被许多枪支拥有者怀念。但米勒指出，业余猎人可以从步枪转向其他杀戮手段，例如弓箭狩猎。对于那些为了寻乐而参观射击场的人，或者收集枪支作为爱好的人来说也一样，他们也能找到替代活动。然而对于那些枪支狂热分子而言，这不太可能是一种安慰。
“They’d get a bit of loss of enjoyment because they wanted to buy a gun more than they wanted to buy a television set or whatever,” Miller says. “But on the other hand, a lot of people would still be alive. And I think that outweighs loss of enjoyment.”
“他们会失去一些乐趣，因为他们想买一把枪的欲望比买电视机或其他任何东西都要强烈，”Miller说。“但另一方面，很多人会因为枪支消失而活下来。我认为这比失去乐趣更重要。”
图片来源网络
信息来源：BBC news
推荐阅读：www.bbc.com/future/story/20180417-what-would-happen-if-all-guns-disappeared
编辑校对：曹羽晗
翻译：曹羽晗 糜琪琦 安然然 刘曼芳
