Ronn wrote:
> I think the point was that two killers in Colorado armed with multiple
> firearms and explosives killed 13 and injured 23, while one man in Japan
> armed with a knife killed 8 and injured 15, i.e., _two_ people with
> firearms caused about 1 1/2 times as many casualties as _one_ man with a
> knife, which does _not_ support the hypothesis that a person armed with
> modern firearms is necessarily likely to kill many more people than a
> person in the same situation armed with a knife, since in this case the
> number of victims per killer was smaller for the killers using firearms
> than for that one using a knife.
>
> Of course, the sample size is too small to draw any general
> conclusions. And I for one hope we don't get a larger sample.
It's really apples and oranges - the knife killer in Japan was an adult in
an elementary school, while the Columbine killers were in a large high
school. I'm with you, though - I'd rather we didn't get an opportunity to
extrapolate from a larger sample.
Adam C. Lipscomb
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
