Did the victims die? The Celevand crime would have probably been worse if a gun was used.
Guns, especially automatic weapons, are much more dangerous than knives. That is the current debate. Do we need stricter gun laws because they are so dangerous?
Flora and George are both right. IMHO, one of the reasons that guns are more lethal than knives in such situations is that they’re not as directed. What I mean is that, if I’m trying to stab you, the chances are that I won’t accidentally stab the the guy sitting next to you (and if I’m that clumsy, I probably won’t do any harm anyway). But with guns, especially automatic weapons, you can injure or kill an awful lot of people without being real specific about it. So I can hurt or kill a lot of people when I try to shoot you.
Just for the record, this is a non-specific “you”; I wouldn’t dream of harming anyone on this message board.
My point is this: if you’re bent on murder and mayhem, you’re going to use whatever means are available. I don’t know the details of the situation, but let’s assume that Mr Killer was barred from owning a gun. Didn’t stop him one bit. Yes, with a gun, the body count might have been higher, but a person hell-bent on inflicting damage will do so. Is it just a question of numbers?
In his urban-legend book * The Baby Train, * Jan Harold Brunvand included the legend about a member of an organization that dresses in medieval costumes. The man was wearing an ordinary overcoat over his medieval garb when a mugger approached and sneered,
“I have six inches of steel that says you’re going to give me all your money.”
The man in the overcoat said,
“I’ll see your six inches…[draws his sword] and raise you thirty.” (The mugger fled!)
Then Brunvand mentioned the similar scene in * Crocodile Dundee. * G’Day!