The Gun Stands almost alone in its Ability to Facilitate Mass Murders

   In the industry of mass murder, the gun does not stand alone -- but almost alone. I can think of only one other partner it has that suits mass murders so well: arson. Bombs, they take effort to make. You can't stop off at Walmart and buy a bomb on your way home.
   Arson is the only other way of inflicting mass murder so convenient as is use of the gun.
   The argument goes, that if we banned guns, people would simply use knives, and ropes, and scissors. Not so. They might use them to murder, but they would not be able to kill so many at once as are killed with the gun.
   The industry of mass murder relies on the gun. To kill 50 at a time? You will need a gun. Or a fire. Or a bomb. Whatever other tools there are that can kill so many people at once, I am not certain.
   Do not say that banning guns will do no good. Say that we can't ban guns for this reason or for that. Say, there remains reason for not banning them. But, would it do some good? Would it reduce the severity of mass murders?
   Yes.