Remix.run Logo
cultofmetatron 3 days ago

guns democratize mass murder. With a gun, I can kill a bunch of people before police can stop me. A knife? At best I can kill one or two in a public place before people run away and eventually a different group is going to stop me pretty quickly.

dole 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Killers are going to kill. Guns don't democratize it, just makes it easier. Maybe at best YOU could kill one or two:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/16/china/china-stabbing-yixing-c... (8 stabbed to death) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenpeng_Village_Primary_Schoo... (1 killed, 24 injured)

So they should stop you from 3d-printing knives too.

nitwit005 3 days ago | parent [-]

Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare. Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you.

Traditionally, arson was the means of mass killing, as it didn't have either problem. That's gotten much more difficult due to fire safety.

subhobroto 3 days ago | parent [-]

> Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you

I won't argue this as this sounds entirely hypothetical but let me ask you this: if you saw someone stabbing people, would you volunteer to tackle them or would you choose to delegate?

One, a knife never runs out of bullets and never needs to reload. Second, a knife doesn't make a sound. I'm unsure of what training you have but a knife is absolutely the tool of choice up close even if you had a gun on you. One can fatally stab dozens of people in a concert without even being noticed or detected.

I can't make those assertions about a gun.

The point is, a gun in the U.S. has been a weapon of choice but in other countries where a gun is very hard to get, stabbings are equally dangerous and widespread. I have been reading about fatal stabbings in the U.K for a decade now.

It's almost as if evil people will use whichever tool they have at their disposal to hurt people and we are just making it more difficult for good people to defend themselves against the evil.

> Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare

I mention 5 myself below but there are more. What I find surprising is how the term "mass murder" seems to be applied almost exclusively when a gun is used, but rarely a knife.

If you look for "mass murder due to stabbing", the media almost never frames it with that terminology, whereas they would immediately use it if a firearm was involved for the exact same number of victims.

When people hear "mass murder", they likely think of hundreds of people dying instantaneously to a volley of bullets, but that's a distortion of what "mass murder" actually looks like in the U.S:

By standard definitions, a mass killing involves 4 or more fatalities. While "mass murders" using a gun get wall-to-wall media coverage, mass murders with a knife rarely make it past local news. If you think these devastating knife attacks are just a myth, here are a few recent ones you can look up right now:

- February 24, 2026: A 32-year-old man fatally stabbed four people at a residence in the Purdy/Gig Harbor area. Responding deputies shot and killed the suspect at the scene.

- July 19, 2024: A grandmother, a mother, and two children (ages 4 and 5) were fatally stabbed in their Bensonhurst apartment. A 24-year-old family member was arrested.

- March 27, 2024: A 22-year-old man went on a "frenzied" spree, killing four people and injuring seven others. The attack involved a knife, an aluminum bat and a vehicle.

- March 10, 2024: In a domestic murder-suicide, a father fatally stabbed his wife and three children (ages 10, 12, and 17) before killing himself. It was the deadliest mass killing in Hawaii since 1999.

- December 3, 2023: A 38-year-old man used a kitchen knife to kill four relatives, two children and two adults, and injured three others (including two police officers) before being shot by police.

Mashimo 2 days ago | parent [-]

If you can only find 5 mass killings with knifes in 3 years, does that not proof his point? That it's rare.

Just like knife kills in the UK, which is less then knife kills in the US AFAIK.

subhobroto 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

- can you build bombs to blow up an apartment complex full of 1000s of people?

- can you poison the water supply of an apartment complex full of 1000s of people?

- can you drop a harmful substance using a $50 drone onto an open area where of 1000s of people have congregated?

nemomarx 3 days ago | parent [-]

We also restrict the components of those pretty heavily, though. Try buying too much fertilizer without a farm and see who shows up.

This isn't a judgement on your general point, but I think bombs and bioweapons and etc are very bad examples for you here.

jandrewrogers 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Explosives are a weird case because Americans can just buy industrially manufactured high explosives. Attempting to DIY an explosive that is almost certainly inferior to what you can buy commercially is a red flag.

Before 9/11 caused them to tighten up the rules, buying high explosives in the US was cash-and-carry. You could walk in and select different kinds of high explosives from a giant menu. If you wanted something unusual they could special order it. The only real requirement was that you had a non-sparking container for it (basically, no exposed metal) when you carried it away. Most people aren't familiar with this because most regions of the US don't have much need for these types of stores.

It still isn't difficult today from my understanding, there is just more paperwork. The more practical hurdle is complying with safe storage regulations since they want some distance between where you store it and the neighbors. You can't just stash a few hundred pounds in your suburban garage.

cucumber3732842 3 days ago | parent [-]

>before 9/11 caused them to tighten up the rules,

You mean "before the Weather Underground blew up a bunch of random shit with hardware store dynamite in the 1970s".

>It still isn't difficult today from my understanding, there is just more paperwork.

The paperwork and compliance is enough of an expensive PITA it precludes everyone who isn't a regular commercial user, which is exactly the point.

It used to be that farmers just cleared forest and blew stumps and rocks up. This might sound absurd but when you start looking at the cost of doing that job with equipment it's preferable if you're rural enough to not endanger anything.

jandrewrogers 3 days ago | parent [-]

It worked how I described in the late 1990s. I know someone who went through the new process and it didn't seem that onerous. As I recall it isn't that different from the process for getting Global Entry on your passport.

Explosives are still heavily used in mining and construction. Many of those operations are just a couple individuals, not any kind of real company.

cucumber3732842 3 days ago | parent [-]

> I know someone who went through the new process and it didn't seem that onerous

My understanding is that it's nigh on impossible as an individual now but I may be wrong.

>Many of those operations are just a couple individuals, not any kind of real company.

In my limited experience the guys who do the explosives have typically made a business out of it and get subcontracted to many mines and jobsites to blow this or that up.

antonymoose 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The “Oklahoma City Fertilizer Bomb” style bomb is heavily watched. ANFO just isn’t a good vector for a lone wolf anymore. With that said, any GWOT veteran with explosives training could make enough HME to make a mass casualty event à la OKC all over again. Maybe not all at once, right this second, but it’s a real threat vector. Worse, these training manuals available open-source and easy to replicate.

My neighbor is retired EOD, he has all Federal licenses manufactures explosives for the purpose of stump removal, if you can believe it, I’ve seen the process. It’s so easy a caveman could do it. Thankfully, no one really seems to do so. Mostly because manufactured firearms are easier to get ahold of. Or in Europe, smuggled weapons.

We cannot forget what insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan did. It’s hubris to say “can’t happen here.”

mothballed 3 days ago | parent [-]

I don't think the licenses are hard to get anyway. The hardest part is satisfying the storage requirements.

As a bit of trivia, when congress defunded the ability for felons to restore their firearm rights, they actually forgot part of it. By an accident of history, felons can still get an explosives license.

cjbgkagh 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

While quasi regulated they just raise the bar of expertise required. Poisons, bioweapons, and explosives are pretty easy to make at scale without using suspicious inputs.

At the moment the 3D printing crowd are pretty savvy I’m sure many could hook up a new controller or flash their existing one.

subhobroto 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

OK, then what's my plan when coyotes and mountain lions attack my child and I on our regular walks on rural property? As we build more housing and cities close in, these wild animals are being run out of their natural habitat.

Is the answer "dont be on rural property!" or are there real practical solutions?

> but I think bombs and bioweapons and etc are very bad examples for you here

Are there better examples?

Also, I for one don't undermine the drive and tenacity of an evil person and to what extent they are willing to cause harm.

themafia 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

As a citizen with a gun I can shoot you before the police arrive.

cucumber3732842 3 days ago | parent [-]

The powers that be are far more concerned with you shooting the police before more police arrive.

cindyllm 3 days ago | parent [-]

[dead]