# Availability and lethality of guns and body counts **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 24, 2018, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469 "2018-02-24T16:03:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/1 "2018-02-24T16:03:29Z")
I want to focus on a single aspect of the gun debate, represented by this post: > [@Sheriff officer resigns after Florida Shooting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sheriff-officer-resigns-after-florida-shooting/809373/93): > > The elephant in the room is violence in society. The gun is irrelevant. If we could magically make them all go away the actual problem would still exist. > > If the shooter didn’t have a gun he would killed the students some other way. I’ll respond the same way I did in that thread, though the poster thought it was a hijack, so I started a new one. This is a childish argument, IMO, and a repeated one. Guns aren’t the only issue, but they are part of it. Guns are more lethal than knives (and some kinds of guns are more lethal than other kinds of guns); knives are more lethal than bare hands; etc. Adults can recognize this while also recognizing that this is a complex issue that isn’t nearly as simple as “let’s ban guns” (which is both politically and, considering the amount of guns already here, probably physically impossible). If he had had access to a rocket launcher, C4, or nukes/chemical/biological weapons, he could have killed even more people – thankfully, government regulation has successfully made such weapons very difficult to acquire. If he’d had a fully automatic weapon, he might have killed more people – thankfully, government regulation has made full auto weapons difficult to acquire. It’s just silly and beneath reasonable adults to pretend that the fact that he could easily acquire very lethal firearms has nothing to do with the body count of this event. If this argument were true, then a Roman legion would have a chance to defeat a modern Marine battalion. It’s just silly and childish and this entire line of argument should be dispensed with. Guns aren’t the only issue here, but they are part of the issue. Guns are more effective at killing people than knives, and more effective at killing people in schools than cars or trucks. There shouldn’t be a debate about this. Anyone disagree? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/2 "2018-02-24T16:43:09Z")
I’ll re-post this from that thread so as to stop the hijack over there: > [@Sheriff officer resigns after Florida Shooting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sheriff-officer-resigns-after-florida-shooting/809373/93): > > The elephant in the room is violence in society. The gun is irrelevant. If we could magically make them all go away the actual problem would still exist. > > If the shooter didn’t have a gun he would killed the students some other way. The available evidence suggests that this notion is incorrect; availability of the tool has a lot to do with how often the tool is used. [Cite](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts) and [cite](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC478945/). ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/3 "2018-02-24T18:25:20Z")
Well, of course having guns enables a killer to kill more victims, and kill more of them more quickly. That’s what a gun is designed to do. That being said, if someone is truly determined to be a large-scale killer, then he or she may put a lot more homework and effort into researching how to build bombs, how to poison people on a large scale, etc. Eliminating all guns might reduce overall death tolls, but at a certain point, “where there’s a will, there’s a way.” ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/4 "2018-02-24T20:10:43Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > I’ll re-post this from that thread so as to stop the hijack over there: > The available evidence suggests that this notion is incorrect; availability of the tool has a lot to do with how often the tool is used. [Cite](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts) and [cite](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC478945/). You might have missed that I quoted this post in the OP… ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/5 "2018-02-24T20:44:25Z")
I posted this a week or two ago but it bears repeating. Study after study after study shows the same thing. There are ever fewer “but that doesn’t tell the whole story” excuses left for gun advocates to hide behind when faced with evidence that guns are at the root of the very high violence in the US. Of course there will still be violence and murder and mayhem even if every gun magically disappears but there will be a helluva lot less of it if guns were gone. If you do not want to read the whole thing the bottom line is the easy availability of guns in America increases violence and the death toll substantially. > [@](#): > > Perhaps, some speculate, it is because American society is unusually violent. Or its racial divisions have frayed the bonds of society. Or its citizens lack proper mental care under a health care system that draws frequent derision abroad. > > These explanations share one thing in common: Though seemingly sensible, all have been debunked by research on shootings elsewhere in the world. Instead, an ever-growing body of research consistently reaches the same conclusion. > > The only variable that can explain the high rate of mass shootings in America is its astronomical number of guns. > > \ > > Worldwide, Mr. Lankford found, a country’s rate of gun ownership correlated with the odds it would experience a mass shooting. This relationship held even when he excluded the United States, indicating that it could not be explained by some other factor particular to his home country. And it held when he controlled for homicide rates, suggesting that mass shootings were better explained by a society’s access to guns than by its baseline level of violence. > > \ > > More gun ownership corresponds with more gun murders across virtually every axis: among developed countries, among American states, among American towns and cities and when controlling for crime rates. And gun control legislation tends to reduce gun murders, according to a recent analysis of 130 studies from 10 countries. > > This suggests that the guns themselves cause the violence. > > \ > > Rather, they found, in data that has since been repeatedly confirmed, that American crime is simply more lethal. A New Yorker is just as likely to be robbed as a Londoner, for instance, but the New Yorker is 54 times more likely to be killed in the process. > > They concluded that the discrepancy, like so many other anomalies of American violence, came down to guns. > > SOURCE: [https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html) ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/6 "2018-02-24T22:23:03Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I want to focus on a single aspect of the gun debate, represented by this post: > > I’ll respond the same way I did in that thread, though the poster thought it was a hijack, so I started a new one. > > This is a childish argument, IMO, and a repeated one. Guns aren’t the only issue, but they are part of it. Guns are more lethal than knives (and some kinds of guns are more lethal than other kinds of guns); knives are more lethal than bare hands; etc. Adults can recognize this while also recognizing that this is a complex issue that isn’t nearly as simple as “let’s ban guns” (which is both politically and, considering the amount of guns already here, probably physically impossible). If he had had access to a rocket launcher, C4, or nukes/chemical/biological weapons, he could have killed even more people – thankfully, government regulation has successfully made such weapons very difficult to acquire. If he’d had a fully automatic weapon, he might have killed more people – thankfully, government regulation has made full auto weapons difficult to acquire. It’s just silly and beneath reasonable adults to pretend that the fact that he could easily acquire very lethal firearms has nothing to do with the body count of this event. > > If this argument were true, then a Roman legion would have a chance to defeat a modern Marine battalion. It’s just silly and childish and this entire line of argument should be dispensed with. Guns aren’t the only issue here, but they are part of the issue. Guns are more effective at killing people than knives, and more effective at killing people in schools than cars or trucks. There shouldn’t be a debate about this. > > Anyone disagree? I’ve lost a battleship to a galley in Civilization back in the day but I digress. Yes, guns make it easier. However, they aren’t the root cause. The root cause is a defective brain. Now, let’s say you get rid of all civilian owned guns. What’s the next step to further reduce homicide from the mentally ill? Remove vehicles, knives, and things that can be transformed into explosives or poisons? Anyways, you are correct. A gun is more efficient at killing when compared to a knife, a halberd, or a hammer. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/7 "2018-02-24T22:27:00Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I’ve lost a battleship to a galley in Civilization back in the day but I digress. Yes, guns make it easier. However, they aren’t the root cause. The root cause is a defective brain. > > Now, let’s say you get rid of all civilian owned guns. What’s the next step to further reduce homicide from the mentally ill? Remove vehicles, knives, and things that can be transformed into explosives or poisons? > > Anyways, you are correct. A gun is more efficient at killing when compared to a knife, a halberd, or a hammer. Okay, that’s the only purpose of this thread – we have lots of other threads to talk about all the non-gun-related factors. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/8 "2018-02-24T22:31:15Z")
The argument is so idiotic I really don’t know why you’d bother making a dedicated thread to discuss it. “Hey there was wars before guns and bombs, so what difference do guns and bombs make? Absolutely nothing!” ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/9 "2018-02-24T22:34:46Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > I’ve lost a battleship to a galley in Civilization back in the day but I digress. Yes, guns make it easier. However, they aren’t the root cause. The root cause is a defective brain. > > Now, let’s say you get rid of all civilian owned guns. What’s the next step to further reduce homicide from the mentally ill? Remove vehicles, knives, and things that can be transformed into explosives or poisons? > > Anyways, you are correct. A gun is more efficient at killing when compared to a knife, a halberd, or a hammer. If a person with a defective brain can only get ahold of items that kill or harm a few people, rather than dozens, that’s an improvement already. The idea that somehow or other, we are looking for a answer to all violence, and that we believe that we can get rid of all the guns, and never have any violence anymore is a strawman. If you have 100 people a day dying through something that you have influence over, and you use your influence to decrease that to 50, that’s good. It seems that you are insisting that unless we can prove that it saves all 100 forever from anything then it’s not worth doing anything. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2018, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/10 "2018-02-24T22:50:28Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > If you have 100 people a day dying through something that you have influence over, and you use your influence to decrease that to 50, that’s good. It seems that you are insisting that unless we can prove that it saves all 100 forever from anything then it’s not worth doing anything. This seems a common refrain among gun advocates. If a law cannot be 100% effective then why have the law? Banning guns will not stop murders so why ban guns? The perfect is the enemy of the good. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/11 "2018-02-25T00:13:09Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > The argument is so idiotic I really don’t know why you’d bother making a dedicated thread to discuss it. “Hey there was wars before guns and bombs, so what difference do guns and bombs make? Absolutely nothing!” Because I see it so often. Hopefully we can at least clearly demolish it on this board so we don’t have to waste time refuting it again. Of course, that’s probably a faint hope. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/12 "2018-02-25T00:25:04Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Because I see it so often. Hopefully we can at least clearly demolish it on this board so we don’t have to waste time refuting it again. Of course, that’s probably a faint hope. Well every time you see the argument you can just clearly demolish it with my above quote. Very little time wasted. No more time than linking to this thread instead. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/13 "2018-02-25T00:42:37Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Well every time you see the argument you can just clearly demolish it with my above quote. Very little time wasted. No more time than linking to this thread instead. Okay, got it. You don’t think this thread is necessary. Thanks for letting me know. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/14 "2018-02-25T01:00:05Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Okay, got it. You don’t think this thread is necessary. Thanks for letting me know. I sense you don’t really appreciate it. Are you really under the impression that once we demolish the argument in this thread, we won’t see it here again? That linking to this thread the next time someone brings it up will save you time? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/15 "2018-02-25T01:03:15Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I sense you don’t really appreciate it. Are you really under the impression that once we demolish the argument in this thread, we won’t see it here again? That linking to this thread the next time someone brings it up will save you time? Not interested in discussing this further with you. Thanks for participating. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/16 "2018-02-25T01:11:28Z")
I have often seen the contention that tits on a bull are useless, but are they really? Please discuss. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/17 "2018-02-25T02:24:32Z")
I wouldn’t go so far as to call it silly and childish, but I will say the logic is pretty sketchy: People are violent, so any laws to try to mitigate the effects of that violence won’t work. The slippery slope fallacy of “If they ban one gun, they’ll ban all guns” is also weak. There are limitations to every right. Freedom of religion doesn’t give me the right to sacrifice virgins on my front lawn (or anywhere else). But the fear of many gun-owners is very real. I once tried to reassure a group of alt-right gun advocates that the Second Amendment was in no danger of repeal, and they practically instantly on me. According to them, anyone who doesn’t see the Second Amendment is in daily danger of repeal is a goddam lib’ral. The argument that someone who wants to take out a lot of people will find a way is a little misguided. Those ways–poison, bombs, etc.–exist now. Shooters want the satisfaction and power of being there to deliver death in person. Dump poison into the school ventilation system, and you’re not going to be around to see people die. Furthermore, they won’t know it’s YOU. If you’re going to become death, the destroyer of worlds, you want people to recognize your status. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/18 "2018-02-25T20:30:00Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I want to focus on a single aspect of the gun debate, represented by this post: > > I’ll respond the same way I did in that thread, though the poster thought it was a hijack, so I started a new one. > > This is a childish argument, IMO, and a repeated one. Guns aren’t the only issue, but they are part of it. Guns are more lethal than knives (and some kinds of guns are more lethal than other kinds of guns); knives are more lethal than bare hands; etc. Adults can recognize this while also recognizing that this is a complex issue that isn’t nearly as simple as “let’s ban guns” (which is both politically and, considering the amount of guns already here, probably physically impossible). If he had had access to a rocket launcher, C4, or nukes/chemical/biological weapons, he could have killed even more people – thankfully, government regulation has successfully made such weapons very difficult to acquire. If he’d had a fully automatic weapon, he might have killed more people – thankfully, government regulation has made full auto weapons difficult to acquire. It’s just silly and beneath reasonable adults to pretend that the fact that he could easily acquire very lethal firearms has nothing to do with the body count of this event. > > If this argument were true, then a Roman legion would have a chance to defeat a modern Marine battalion. It’s just silly and childish and this entire line of argument should be dispensed with. Guns aren’t the only issue here, but they are part of the issue. Guns are more effective at killing people than knives, and more effective at killing people in schools than cars or trucks. There shouldn’t be a debate about this. > > Anyone disagree? Actually, yeah…I disagree to a point. If your point is that gun violence happens in the US more than in countries without guns because of the availability of guns, well duh…of course that’s true. Just like the availability of alcohol or tobacco are going to increase the number of deaths due to those compared to societies that ban those things. However, if we look at non-gun related murders in the US, they are still far, far higher than in most of the countries used to compare with the US. If you took away all of the guns by some magic tomorrow then the US murder rate in raw numbers as well as per capita are going to be far higher than the UK, France, the Scandinavian countries, Japan and most of the rest. So, while guns bump our numbers up, it doesn’t account for the fact that the US is still higher in per capita murders than just about every other western nation. Which points to something other than guns as being the root issue that we have and they don’t…guns simply enable more murders than non-guns, but at a guess if you took away the guns you’d simply have more murders using non-guns. Perhaps you’d save some lives…say, going from 11k murders by guns and 5k by non-guns to 8-9k in the new reality. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/19 "2018-02-25T21:46:11Z")
> **[America’s unique gun violence problem, explained in 16 maps and charts](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/america-mass-shooting-gun-violence-statistics-charts)** > > In the developed world, these levels of gun violence are a uniquely American problem. Here’s why. Chart 11 and chart 14 at that link seem to indicate that your guess is off base. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2018, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469/20 "2018-02-25T21:59:55Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > [America’s gun violence rates, in 16 maps and charts - Vox](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/us-gun-violence-statistics-maps-charts) > > Chart 11 and chart 14 at that link seem to indicate that your guess is off base. Who is this in response too? I’m not seeing how it relates to any of the posts above yours but perhaps I’m missing something? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/availability-and-lethality-of-guns-and-body-counts/809469.md?page=2)