The video is about North Korea. Fortunately, I'm familiar with the incident that you meant to post. Did you hear about the student who expressed a wish that concealed carry were allowed on campus? Of course, being stabbed, but not fatally so, isn't sufficient justification in a gun control freak's mind to shoot the attacker.
People aren't issued licenses to carry a gun for the purpose of committing a crime. Someone who intends to attack multiple students will carry a knife or a gun or whatever without asking permission.
Right, Mike; because the only reason this guy decided to attempt murder with a knife was because he wasn't allowed to carry a gun there! Or maybe it was because his state had such strict gun controls that he couldn't get a gun. What's gun control like ... in ... Texas ...
This guy picked a knife because that's what he wanted to use, and the lack of deaths can be more attributed to his ignorance of what he was doing and his choice of a box cutter vs. a longer blade like even a kitchen knife.
The attacker demonstrated with his actions that he wasn't concerned about aggravated assault nor murder laws. Your suggestion that he would have been concerned about much less serious concealed carry laws is foolish.
Not true, Orlin. But I can recognize the difference between gun violence and knife violence, which you guys never did understand, or at least you pretend to not understand.
This case had no deaths. Other mass stabbings have had many. When you have an unarmed mass of people like this, the knife can be used to attack as many people or more than a gun, and if the guy stabs instead of slashing with a stubby blade, people are toast. If you look it up, you'll find that stabs to the heart are statistically more fatal than gunshots to the heart.
Both types of violence are problematic, so we need to address violence in general, not just gun violence. Doing the latter doesn't reduce violence or death, but does infringe rights.
Yeah, right, knives are more lethal than guns. You can find just about any ridiculous thing you want to support gun-rights if you look hard enough on the internet.
I wouldn't say knives are 'more lethal', but they certainly can be as lethal. Richard Speck knew that when he stabbed eight nurses to death in Chicago; Charles Manson knew that when his followers stabbed Sharon Tate and her friends to death and followed up the next night with the Bianco family; and even O.J. knew a knife was en effective way to off his ex and her friend. Does 'more lethal' somehow mean, more dead?
Actually, Mike, that statistical point I mentioned came from a medical study that a nurse friend of mine told me about. This friend told me because it surprised them that blades beat out bullets significantly. What beat out blades by a similar margin was blunt force trauma--a blunt blow to the chest hard enough to affect the heart.
The reason, given in the report, was that the different kinds of trauma tended to affect larger or smaller areas of the heart--knife tended to damage more chambers than bullets. Since I didn't see the report myself, I don't know if this was because of killers jiggling the knife, or the beating heart jiggling around it and cutting itself worse.
So again, my point is not that knifes are always more lethal than guns--depending on where you're hit and whether it's a stab or a slash, the damage could be more or less. My point is that both are lethal weapons--guns are not the magic death machines people perceive them as, and knives are not the ineffective murder weapons your side often makes them out to be (intentionally or unintentionally).
Both are serious, lethal weapons, and so we need to address violence in general, not attempt to control guns so that we'll be left with only non-lethal knife attacks, which is what your side seems to be promoting every time you point to a mass knife attack with low casualties.
Go back and look at my comment at 11:51. What I said then was the same as what I said in my follow up. It depends on the type of knife and how it's used. I didn't change my statement, I just added information to it.
You say "But, guns kill 30,000+ each year."
Yes...And? How does that relate to my point? I was pointing out that if we concentrate on gun control rather than violence reduction, we'll just see criminals switch to knife and club violence. Since these can be as lethal or more lethal than gun violence, merely getting criminals to switch to these weapons seems like sacrificing rights for minimal, if any, gain. Especially when we could, instead, keep our rights and work on reducing the level of violence as a whole.
That's the metric. That, and that you aren't allowed to count use in the kitchen, etc. as doing good; only defensive uses so that you can minimize the good they do.
No that's not the metric. Slicing bread or carving the turkey must also be considered "goods" when talking about knives. So I'm afraid, the harm does not outweigh the good, unlike firearms.
The attacker used an Exacto knife -- a tiny blade just over 1/2 inch long on a pencil sized handle. People use them for crafts and dissecting frogs and clams in high school biology classes.
The attacker didn't kill anyone because the "knife" was the equivalent of a slingshot shooting marbles. Had the attacker used a serious knife or short sword, there would have been deaths.
The attacker is an attention hound and simply did not want to actually kill anyone. Thus we cannot make claims that "knife" attacks are somehow much less dangerous than attacks with firearms based on this event.
Just imagine if someone had a gun he could have shot 2 or 3 people being stabbed, except in Right-Wing Gun Loon Universe were gun owners never miss a shot. And then imagine if multiple people had guns they could have shot each other mistaking one another for a gun maniac.
The video is about North Korea. Fortunately, I'm familiar with the incident that you meant to post. Did you hear about the student who expressed a wish that concealed carry were allowed on campus? Of course, being stabbed, but not fatally so, isn't sufficient justification in a gun control freak's mind to shoot the attacker.
ReplyDeleteIf concealed carry had been allowed the guy with the knife might have killed a bunch of people. Don't you get that it cuts both ways?
DeletePeople aren't issued licenses to carry a gun for the purpose of committing a crime. Someone who intends to attack multiple students will carry a knife or a gun or whatever without asking permission.
DeleteRight, Mike; because the only reason this guy decided to attempt murder with a knife was because he wasn't allowed to carry a gun there! Or maybe it was because his state had such strict gun controls that he couldn't get a gun. What's gun control like ... in ... Texas ...
DeleteThis guy picked a knife because that's what he wanted to use, and the lack of deaths can be more attributed to his ignorance of what he was doing and his choice of a box cutter vs. a longer blade like even a kitchen knife.
MikeB,
DeleteThe attacker demonstrated with his actions that he wasn't concerned about aggravated assault nor murder laws. Your suggestion that he would have been concerned about much less serious concealed carry laws is foolish.
- TruthBeTold
By Mikeb's title I think it is perfectly clear he doesn't give a shit about criminal violence - unless it involves a gun.
ReplyDeleteorlin sellers
Not true, Orlin. But I can recognize the difference between gun violence and knife violence, which you guys never did understand, or at least you pretend to not understand.
DeleteYour blog posts speak for themselves. You can say, 'not true' til the cows come home, but nobody's buying it.
Deleteorlin sellers
This case had no deaths. Other mass stabbings have had many. When you have an unarmed mass of people like this, the knife can be used to attack as many people or more than a gun, and if the guy stabs instead of slashing with a stubby blade, people are toast. If you look it up, you'll find that stabs to the heart are statistically more fatal than gunshots to the heart.
DeleteBoth types of violence are problematic, so we need to address violence in general, not just gun violence. Doing the latter doesn't reduce violence or death, but does infringe rights.
Yeah, right, knives are more lethal than guns. You can find just about any ridiculous thing you want to support gun-rights if you look hard enough on the internet.
DeleteI wouldn't say knives are 'more lethal', but they certainly can be as lethal. Richard Speck knew that when he stabbed eight nurses to death in Chicago; Charles Manson knew that when his followers stabbed Sharon Tate and her friends to death and followed up the next night with the Bianco family; and even O.J. knew a knife was en effective way to off his ex and her friend.
DeleteDoes 'more lethal' somehow mean, more dead?
orlin sellers
Actually, Mike, that statistical point I mentioned came from a medical study that a nurse friend of mine told me about. This friend told me because it surprised them that blades beat out bullets significantly. What beat out blades by a similar margin was blunt force trauma--a blunt blow to the chest hard enough to affect the heart.
DeleteThe reason, given in the report, was that the different kinds of trauma tended to affect larger or smaller areas of the heart--knife tended to damage more chambers than bullets. Since I didn't see the report myself, I don't know if this was because of killers jiggling the knife, or the beating heart jiggling around it and cutting itself worse.
So again, my point is not that knifes are always more lethal than guns--depending on where you're hit and whether it's a stab or a slash, the damage could be more or less. My point is that both are lethal weapons--guns are not the magic death machines people perceive them as, and knives are not the ineffective murder weapons your side often makes them out to be (intentionally or unintentionally).
Both are serious, lethal weapons, and so we need to address violence in general, not attempt to control guns so that we'll be left with only non-lethal knife attacks, which is what your side seems to be promoting every time you point to a mass knife attack with low casualties.
Now I get ya. Knives, under very specific circumstances, CAN be more lethal than guns. That's a little different than what you first said.
DeleteBut, guns kill 30,000+ each year.
Go back and look at my comment at 11:51. What I said then was the same as what I said in my follow up. It depends on the type of knife and how it's used. I didn't change my statement, I just added information to it.
DeleteYou say "But, guns kill 30,000+ each year."
Yes...And? How does that relate to my point? I was pointing out that if we concentrate on gun control rather than violence reduction, we'll just see criminals switch to knife and club violence. Since these can be as lethal or more lethal than gun violence, merely getting criminals to switch to these weapons seems like sacrificing rights for minimal, if any, gain. Especially when we could, instead, keep our rights and work on reducing the level of violence as a whole.
But knives still do more harm than good. The number of stabbings far outweighs the number of defensive knife uses. Isn't that the metric you use?
ReplyDeleteNicely done, TS.
DeleteThat's the metric. That, and that you aren't allowed to count use in the kitchen, etc. as doing good; only defensive uses so that you can minimize the good they do.
DeleteNo that's not the metric. Slicing bread or carving the turkey must also be considered "goods" when talking about knives. So I'm afraid, the harm does not outweigh the good, unlike firearms.
DeleteBut you don't allow that shooting a wild hog or wild turkey are "goods" when talking about guns.
DeleteNo, shooting animals is sick.
DeleteWould you prefer we eat them alive, herbivore? You do realize that we ain't turning into cud-chewers, don't you?
DeleteThe attacker used an Exacto knife -- a tiny blade just over 1/2 inch long on a pencil sized handle. People use them for crafts and dissecting frogs and clams in high school biology classes.
ReplyDeleteThe attacker didn't kill anyone because the "knife" was the equivalent of a slingshot shooting marbles. Had the attacker used a serious knife or short sword, there would have been deaths.
The attacker is an attention hound and simply did not want to actually kill anyone. Thus we cannot make claims that "knife" attacks are somehow much less dangerous than attacks with firearms based on this event.
- TruthBeTold
That, or he was just incompetent and we should thank God he didn't use it to take out jugulars and carotids.
DeleteJust imagine if someone had a gun he could have shot 2 or 3 people being stabbed, except in Right-Wing Gun Loon Universe were gun owners never miss a shot. And then imagine if multiple people had guns they could have shot each other mistaking one another for a gun maniac.
ReplyDeleteMore Guns is obviously the answer.