Tired of this argument.Posted: January 3, 2013
I’ve heard it lately, even from some reasonably insightful people. Reasonably insightful, but disingenuous:
“You can kill someone with a knife. You can kill someone with a hammer. You can kill someone with a baseball bat.
Will Cutco be limited on how many knives they can make? Will Stanley be limited on how many hammers? Will Louisville Slugger be limited on how many baseball bats?”
False equivalencies annoy me, especially on this topic. My immediate response: Aw, get real fer crissake. You can’t win a reasoned debate with facts about guns, can you? No, you can’t, so you resort to trotting out anything and everything that was ever used as a weapon in all of history. G’wan, scram. Go back to your mom’s basement.
My more reasoned response, when I feel like dumpster-diving:
In “The Untouchables,” Sean Connery’s character points out that you don’t “bring a knife to a gun fight.” That was for a reason. You can run away from hammers and bats and knives. You cannot run away from nor “rush” an assailant using a gun with a high-magazine capacity. If someone comes at you with a blunt object, you might have a chance to run away or to fight back; not so with guns. How many people can be fatally wounded in a matter of seconds with a hammer, or a club, or a gun: that’s the big difference. Weapons that can injure and kills scores of people within a few seconds: that’s the problem.
Knives and baseball bats and hammers are not guns. Knives and baseball bats and hammers have a purpose other than to kill people.