Judging by the crowing from some pro-gun advocates about the implications of Tuesday's stabbing rampage at a Texas community college, you'd think Wayne LaPierre hit the street number or something.
The truth is, the April 9 attack that left 14 Lone Star College students wounded was not a boon to the anti-gun-control crowd. It wasn't vindication for those who oppose "weapons-free zones" and universal background checks. It didn't prove that guns are any less lethal, didn't prove we need more guns in schools and didn't undermine, as Raven Clabough suggestrs at The New American, the effort to impose sensible restrictions on gun owners and didn't prove that we need more guns in our schools.
Did the attack, which came a few months after three Lone Star students were shot during a dispute between two men, remind us that knives are dangerous? Sure. But it also reminds us that mass knife attacks, while horrific and unacceptable, are generally preferable to shooting sprees. After all, 14 people were attacked. None of them died. Add a gun to that equation and there's a much stronger chance of a campus closed today to mourn dead students.
Outlining six reasons why guns are deadlier than knives, Nolan Kraszkiewicz at policymic.com gets at the comparative lethality of the two weapons:
Should people be free to own both firearms and knives in the United States? Yes. But the inherent danger attached to firearms, when used purposely for malice, outweigh any comparable effect that a knife may offer. I almost always have my pocketknife with me. I can use it as a screwdriver, to open boxes, and nearly any possibility I can imagine. Guns are not capable of achieving this universal utility. That is why the potential owners of firearms must face a higher level of scrutiny when attempting to own one. A weapon is not just a weapon; firearms are special. The Founding Fathers certainly knew this and that is why firearms got their own amendment.
So while tasteless cracks about "knife control" and bans on blades may be easier to lob at would-be gun-law reformers in the wake of the stabbing rampage, they do nothing to strengthen the position of those who argue that America doesn't need stronger gun laws.
No, the attack doesn't automatically make all proposed gun restrictions sensible or fair either. As someone who believes in the right to bear arms, I still can't get behind an assault-rifle prohibition, and I still have questions about the seemingly arbitrary nature of suggested bans on high-capacity magazines.
But these are issues that should be debated on their merits. They are neither inherently debunked nor proven to be truth absolute merely because we've endured another bloody reminder that crazy people shouldn't wield sharp objects.
Guns don't kill people. But they tend to make killing easier than knives do. And one blade-toting crazy in Texas isn't going to change that -- and shouldn't alter a nation's commitment to sensible gun safeguards.
