The problem with “if they don’t have guns, they’ll just use knives” is that knives aren’t as effective at mass killing from a distance.
Suppose you have two similar mass killing attempts. In one, the person has an AR-15. In the other, they have a knife.
The AR-15 killer can kill many people from across rooms. Depending on how much ammunition they have, they can reload quickly and kill many more. People trying to run away from the killer would be quickly killed.
Meanwhile, the knife killer would need to physically stab each victim. This means that they would need to be within arm’s length of their victims. If the person kept away from the killer, they would be safe (relatively speaking). People running away from the killer wouldn’t be killed.
Perhaps the knife wielder could throw the knife at the fleeing victim, but this would need good aim (vs spraying an area with bullets using the AR-15) and would require the knife to end up pointy side in. If it hit them on the handle side, it would hurt, but wouldn’t be fatal. Where they get stabbed would also matter. Then, there is the problem (for the killer) of having tossed away their only weapon. (Though they could have multiple knives.)
Could a knife wielding killer kill a lot of people? Yes, but it would be far less than an AR-15! wielding person.
Of course, the one thing this comparison does show is that more needs to be done besides gun control. We need to be better at identifying people likely to commit acts of violence and get them help before they snap. Any solution needs to address the gun problem AND the mental health problems that this country faces.
Frankly mass knifings do exist, canada recently had that one where like 13 people got stabbed, then there was another one in a private school in like korea iirc, and the infamous 30+ stabbed in the chinese subway station, but yeah typically to stab more people they spread it out over a number of days/weeks/months/years instead of doing it in one event, you’re correct. Not sure how much better that is when you’re the one being stabbed, and being stabbed fucking sucks if you haven’t had the chance to try it, but true, at least you can give your friends/peers a chance to leave you for dead instead of them also being in danger. I’d rather someone be able to shoot the would-be murderer before I’m dead though regardless of if he has a gun, a knife, or a candlestick in the kitchen.
The problem with “if they don’t have guns, they’ll just use knives” is that knives aren’t as effective at mass killing from a distance.
Suppose you have two similar mass killing attempts. In one, the person has an AR-15. In the other, they have a knife.
The AR-15 killer can kill many people from across rooms. Depending on how much ammunition they have, they can reload quickly and kill many more. People trying to run away from the killer would be quickly killed.
Meanwhile, the knife killer would need to physically stab each victim. This means that they would need to be within arm’s length of their victims. If the person kept away from the killer, they would be safe (relatively speaking). People running away from the killer wouldn’t be killed.
Perhaps the knife wielder could throw the knife at the fleeing victim, but this would need good aim (vs spraying an area with bullets using the AR-15) and would require the knife to end up pointy side in. If it hit them on the handle side, it would hurt, but wouldn’t be fatal. Where they get stabbed would also matter. Then, there is the problem (for the killer) of having tossed away their only weapon. (Though they could have multiple knives.)
Could a knife wielding killer kill a lot of people? Yes, but it would be far less than an AR-15! wielding person.
Of course, the one thing this comparison does show is that more needs to be done besides gun control. We need to be better at identifying people likely to commit acts of violence and get them help before they snap. Any solution needs to address the gun problem AND the mental health problems that this country faces.
That, and every other time guns were removed from the equation, people didn’t pick up knives instead – they just didn’t kill.
I know right fun fact no genocides ever happen before the invention of gunpowder
Correct, before the invention of gunpowder it was impossible for one person to commit genocide all on their own.
You left off the /s sarcasm tag. Cuz off the top of my head Genghis Khan didn’t have access to gunpowder.
https://www.zmescience.com/science/news-science/genghis-khan-environment-26052014/
Killed so many people it was good for the environment. Guns wish they killed as many people.
I love this retort. I had to say that
Frankly mass knifings do exist, canada recently had that one where like 13 people got stabbed, then there was another one in a private school in like korea iirc, and the infamous 30+ stabbed in the chinese subway station, but yeah typically to stab more people they spread it out over a number of days/weeks/months/years instead of doing it in one event, you’re correct. Not sure how much better that is when you’re the one being stabbed, and being stabbed fucking sucks if you haven’t had the chance to try it, but true, at least you can give your friends/peers a chance to leave you for dead instead of them also being in danger. I’d rather someone be able to shoot the would-be murderer before I’m dead though regardless of if he has a gun, a knife, or a candlestick in the kitchen.