3 ms·

> My pocketknife gets used literally every day, for one thing or another. Am I supposed to go knap some flint? Or will they outlaw rocks, next? In most countri

> My pocketknife gets used literally every day, for one thing or another. Am I supposed to go knap some flint? Or will they outlaw rocks, next? In most countries the rules seem mostly reasonable (on paper atleast) - In the UK you can carry a pocketknife if the blade is less than 3" (and its not a flick/quick open knife) and larger knives if you have "good reason" - a chef going to work, carpenter, workman etc. but not for defence when going to a night club in the city at night. > Or will they outlaw rocks, next? If there was an increasing spate of rock attacks on city streets, they would probably be outlawed unless you had good reason to be carrying them with you.

Brian_K_White 2y ago
If you lock 1000 people in a building with nothing but bananas and hammers, no guns or knives, there would still be murders and they would all be by hammer. There is always a most-selected tool or means, regardless what objects you try to control, regardless what the menu of available tools is. Removing the top of the list today does not change the murders. It's completely stupid and only disadvantages the victims and good bystanders, and does not disadvantage the violent.
- defrost 2y ago
  So why do violent murder rates vary so much then? > Removing the top of the list today does not change the murders. The UK has .99 homicides recorded per hundred thousand population. The US has 6.4 homicides recorded per hundred thousand population. Your assertion doesn't match reality.
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    I once asked a friend of a friend (who did graphics for the local birdseed press) to produce a map of homicides committed by children (up to the age of 5?), broken down by local political division. She presented me the expected map full of blanks (along with a comment that luckily 0 is the same even without correcting for population, which would've been the proper way) and asked why I'd want such a silly thing. Then I showed her the same map of the US by state, complete with non-0 data.

Brian_K_White 2y ago

If you lock 1000 people in a building with nothing but bananas and hammers, no guns or knives, there would still be murders and they would all be by hammer. There is always a most-selected tool or means, regardless what objects you try to control, regardless what the menu of available tools is. Removing the top of the list today does not change the murders. It's completely stupid and only disadvantages the victims and good bystanders, and does not disadvantage the violent.

defrost 2y ago
So why do violent murder rates vary so much then? > Removing the top of the list today does not change the murders. The UK has .99 homicides recorded per hundred thousand population. The US has 6.4 homicides recorded per hundred thousand population. Your assertion doesn't match reality.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  I once asked a friend of a friend (who did graphics for the local birdseed press) to produce a map of homicides committed by children (up to the age of 5?), broken down by local political division. She presented me the expected map full of blanks (along with a comment that luckily 0 is the same even without correcting for population, which would've been the proper way) and asked why I'd want such a silly thing. Then I showed her the same map of the US by state, complete with non-0 data.