Could yesterday's tragedy have happened with a knife? I am just trying to understand the mentality that guns have no part in human destruction...that a human will kill with anything handy. Although I agree that a persoan can use anything as a weapon, don't guns have that 'special' advantage of being able to kill several people at once, from a distance?
2007-04-17 07:43:58 · 24 answers · asked by hichefheidi 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
lol, the box cutters didn't kill anyone...gravity did. But that is what I was thinking when I wrote the question. Thanks
2007-04-17 07:50:59 · update #1
You can't kill thirty people with a knife without geting beat down by someone.
2007-04-17 07:48:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Guns are more efficient than knives.
Although some ghoul recently killed a few people on the Staten Island Ferry with a machete, I think.
Actually, arson is an even more "efficient" way to kill people. Two gallons of gasoline, one or two blocked exits and and a match can kill many more, and more quickly, than this sick soul did. I hate to say it, but the information is out there already.
Sad but true. Some world we live in.
Of course, we have to weigh the dangers of each of these items against their perceived usefulness. Once again, the balancing test.
PS The hijacked planes (and their fuel, and high velocity) caused the damage, not the box-cutters, I agree.
2007-04-17 08:28:20 · answer #2 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You basically answered your own question with the fact that theres an advantage to kill several within less time using a gun.
So no, the outcome wouldnt have been as severe with only a knife, and it was obvious he wanted to make an impact. The guy was acting on a relationship gone bad, shows some major instability.
2007-04-17 07:51:54 · answer #3 · answered by Delia 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, guns have a great advantage at a distance. but for the good guys too.
this is why this kind of thing doesnt happen on military academies. it is not despite the access to guns it is because of it.
and yes, if no one had any guns (not even the police) a guy with a knife probably could kill a bunch of people with a knife.
the problem with gun control of any kind is that it only affects the good guys.
2007-04-17 07:58:06 · answer #4 · answered by karl k 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Heidi
I understand your point but he could have made a bomb, could have set a fire(either of which might have killed more people) even some sort of crude biological device(ricin, mustard gas) as there are recipes for lots of this on the web as you well know. He had obviously planned this out and thought long and hard about it. Do you really think he would have ditched the whole idea if he didn't have a gun?
2007-04-17 07:56:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guns can kill People by the Score. Knives- ONE at a Time. Ban guns- & there'll be LESS of a Chance of wiping out entire Classrooms of little Kids. Ban Knives, and Street Gangs will have to switch to guns. BIG Difference !! :o
2016-05-17 09:20:14 · answer #6 · answered by luz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Box cutters killed several of the people on those planes dear...they slit the throats of the pilots and some flight attendants...yes of course guns are a better/easier killing machine than knives...so what is your point? The guy was a psycho...had he locked the doors and went in and sprayed people with gasoline and lit them on fire would it have been any less horrible.
2007-04-17 07:55:08 · answer #7 · answered by Steelhead 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As a 30 year veteran of law enforcement and a training officer, statics show that if anyone with an edged weapon gets closer than 21 feet to you, you will be cut. Standard training for Police Officers is to meet an edged weapon with deadly force within the safety zone of 21 feet or less. I have seen homicides committed with every conceivable weapon. Sharpend beef bones to a bag of ice.
2007-04-17 17:13:17 · answer #8 · answered by ohbrother 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's why some ingenious man invented the bayonet 200 years ago. You stick it in front of a rifle and you can shoot and slash all at once. I don't know, why the American rifle associations doesn't make it into law, that every gun and rifle has a bowie knife attached in the front and a small grenade for all purposes inside the handle, to be used for mass killing if necessary ( if you have to defend yourself against two thieves)
2007-04-17 07:52:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know.. maybe he would have opted for home made explosives if not for the gun.. he didn't have to pick a knife.... we need to focus on how to find and help these people before they flip out.. and what in our society is causing this.. because our tools for destruction are just going to become MORE efficient as time moves on.
2007-04-17 07:49:25 · answer #10 · answered by pip 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You can never blame the tool only the user. While guns make it easier to kill more people, what do you consider the greater tragedy the death of one or the death of many. I say their is no difference to the quantity of death. One is as great a tragedy as many. We just don't hear about it on TV.
2007-04-17 07:49:55 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋