And here we see the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” side of the argument. Sure you take away the gun related deaths, but are stabbings any better?
Either way, I hope the perp gets the chair. Unless they don’t have the death sentence in the UK, then ship him to Texas, we’ll cook him to a pile of ash.
Stabbings are significantly better. Chances of recovering from a stab wound are much higher than from a gunshot. Stabbings also have to be done at close range rather than from afar. The rate of stabbings in the UK did not increase and are at the same rate as they are in the US.
Per both 2018 and 2021 UK and US statistic reports, the UK has more than double the amount of knife/cutting instruments than the US per capita, so let’s just ftfy.
I’m not disagreeing, you are correct, guns are indiscriminate, blades are confrontational. But to reiterate from my previous point, it doesn’t matter WHAT weapon, people will still kill people. Ban guns? Stab em with a knife. Ban knives? Baseball bat. Ban blunt weapons? Sock full of nickles.
If somebody wants someone else dead, they’re gonna find a way. People are all sorts of fucked up.
Maybe my math is off but the UK is 4.31 per 1m people (285/66) murdered by a sharp object vs 4.88 per 1m for the US (1630/334).
If somebody wants someone else dead, they’re gonna find a way. People are all sorts of fucked up.
Not exactly. There is different risk vs reward in each weapon used. The risk is failing to kill the person and then likely being caught. The reward would be killing the person and possibly not being caught.
A gun can be used at range, is pretty concealable, and has a fairly high probability of killing someone. Being at range and concealable means it is hard to determine who did the shooting and also prevents the shooter from being attacked by the victim.
A knife has to be used up close, is very concealable, and has a medium chance of killing someone. While a knife being concealable works in a killer’s favor, the other two do not. A person being stabbed only has to look to the person right next to them to see who did it. And the lower likelihood that the victim will die means they can give a very good description of who did the stabbing. The stabber has a lower likelihood of killing the person and a higher probability of being caught.
A baseball bat has to be used up close, is not concealable, and has a medium-low chance of killing someone. Everyone is going to notice a person walking around with a baseball bat. If someone suddenly falls to the ground from a knock to the head, people are going to know exactly who did it.
A sock full of nickels is worse still.
Yes, people are all sorts of fucked up but people looking to commit premeditated murder are generally a bit rational in how they go about it. So when picking a weapon, they will go for one they can use at range, is concealable, and has the highest likelihood of killing their victim. That is a gun. Remove guns from the equation and the risk becomes much higher and the reward much lower.
And here we see the “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” side of the argument. Sure you take away the gun related deaths, but are stabbings any better?
Either way, I hope the perp gets the chair. Unless they don’t have the death sentence in the UK, then ship him to Texas, we’ll cook him to a pile of ash.
Stabbings are significantly better. Chances of recovering from a stab wound are much higher than from a gunshot. Stabbings also have to be done at close range rather than from afar. The rate of stabbings in the UK did not increase and are at the same rate as they are in the US.
Per both 2018 and 2021 UK and US statistic reports, the UK has more than double the amount of knife/cutting instruments than the US per capita, so let’s just ftfy.
I’m not disagreeing, you are correct, guns are indiscriminate, blades are confrontational. But to reiterate from my previous point, it doesn’t matter WHAT weapon, people will still kill people. Ban guns? Stab em with a knife. Ban knives? Baseball bat. Ban blunt weapons? Sock full of nickles.
If somebody wants someone else dead, they’re gonna find a way. People are all sorts of fucked up.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47156957
Maybe my math is off but the UK is 4.31 per 1m people (285/66) murdered by a sharp object vs 4.88 per 1m for the US (1630/334).
Not exactly. There is different risk vs reward in each weapon used. The risk is failing to kill the person and then likely being caught. The reward would be killing the person and possibly not being caught.
A gun can be used at range, is pretty concealable, and has a fairly high probability of killing someone. Being at range and concealable means it is hard to determine who did the shooting and also prevents the shooter from being attacked by the victim.
A knife has to be used up close, is very concealable, and has a medium chance of killing someone. While a knife being concealable works in a killer’s favor, the other two do not. A person being stabbed only has to look to the person right next to them to see who did it. And the lower likelihood that the victim will die means they can give a very good description of who did the stabbing. The stabber has a lower likelihood of killing the person and a higher probability of being caught.
A baseball bat has to be used up close, is not concealable, and has a medium-low chance of killing someone. Everyone is going to notice a person walking around with a baseball bat. If someone suddenly falls to the ground from a knock to the head, people are going to know exactly who did it.
A sock full of nickels is worse still.
Yes, people are all sorts of fucked up but people looking to commit premeditated murder are generally a bit rational in how they go about it. So when picking a weapon, they will go for one they can use at range, is concealable, and has the highest likelihood of killing their victim. That is a gun. Remove guns from the equation and the risk becomes much higher and the reward much lower.
deleted by creator