20 years of data show Austrailias gun control laws work

[Orrex]

61. As always, that question is a red herring

It fails on just about every level, and this is in fact so obvious that I can't believe that you ask it seriously.

Gun apologists endlessly cite the number of gun murders as a small percentage of the overall number gun of guns. Maybe so. But the the overall number of knife murders is much smaller than the number of gun murders, while the number of knives vastly outnumbers guns in the US, by at least several orders of magnitude. Therefore, by the gun apologists' own measurement, the number of knife murders is so infinitesimal as to be nonexistent.

Further, the number of fatal knifing sprees is far smaller than the number of fatal gun sprees. If you disagree, then please post a tally of the mass knifings so far in 2016 (and why not include 2015 while you're at it?)

In addition, it's much harder to kill someone with a knife than with a gun. If you dispute this, then please give me a list of armies worldwide that have abandoned firearms in favor of knives as the preferred field weapon.

Beyond that, knives has a great many functions beyond killing. Yes, guns can be used for target practice, but that's essentially a surrogate for killing. If you object, then please give me an analogous activity undertaken with knives, and tell me how common "stabbing practice" is by comparison. Or let's equate the two. That means guns have two purposes, while knives have dozens or hundreds.

As for your question, it matters whether the murder is committed with a gun or a knife because guns are used for murder far more commonly, are far easier to use for that purpose, are lethal far more often, are more conducive to multiple murders in one episode, and are much more likely to inflict collateral injury or death along the way.

Therefore I ask you a question in return: on what possible basis do you equate gun murders and knife murders?