Add to the list baseball bats, crowbars, frying pans, bare hands (must cut off all hands, too, right?)....

Drano, steak knives...

You guys forgot rocks and sticks! Let us not forget Cain and Able!

I seriously doubt that the National Crossbow Association will be popping up anytime soon.

If you're going to knock someone off in a public place, a silenced gun would be just as effective, and probably be a bit less visible than a FREAKING CROSSBOW!

Umm I think this shows that they do work and work well.
Without gun control this person would now be dead! I don't think a phone would have stopped bullet, do you?
Bring on gun control so if the worst a criminal has to attack me with are sticks and rocks the world would be a better place.

Open your mind a little...

Your missing the whole point! Gun control does NOT work! Get it right! The criminals DO NOT care "how" many laws they break! And if they attck you with rocks and sticks, you'll be just as dead! It's ALL about the crooks! Even gettiing rid of guns entirely does NOT work! Look at Great Britan and Australia. Their murder rate went through the roof!

Want to quote some sources on "Through the roof"?
Australia only got strick gun control after one gun toting nut job killed 35 people (kind of a world record at the time)
The police etc still have guns and so do some crims, butit is now harder for them to get them and for the average mental case almost impossible. How is this a bad thing? Why should guns be avaliable to the average person?

As you have stated I could protect my house with rocks and sticks - no need for a gun plus there is less chance, much much less chance that I'd kill anyone.

Our murder rate has been in decline over the last decade, and gun-related deaths have plummeted dramatically, as have all incidence of armed crime. Guns were outlawed in Australia to reduce the incidence of massacres and not so much as a block to crime. Since the Port Arthur incident there have been no massacres of innocents in Australia. That sounds effective to me.

Also many criminals have signature weapons - many choose crossbows or wristbows because they're silent, cheap and easier to excuse if caught (I was going to the Renaissance Fair - honest!).

Banning guns won't prevent violent crime, but it will greatly limit the possibility of the most apalling excesses by keeping guns out of the hands of nuts.

EDIT: Looks like Bill and Ted got in first. Meh.

Banning guns also keeps the most effective personal defense option out of the hands of non-criminals. It's worthwhile to note that the violent crime rate in the US, especially in areas where concealed-carry has been liberalized, has been declining also. Focusing on gun-banning as a panacea in wrong-headed, as the availability of firearms in not a root cause (nor even a symptom).

It's also worthwhile to note all the "massacers" in the US that have been prevented by the presense of an armed civilian who has displayed and/or used his firearms to defend the rest...

drmiler,
you said to look at the murder rate in Great Britian. In 1996 (first result in a quick dsearch) in the UK 36 people died in gun related deaths. In the US this was 9,390. In 1992 (next results found) it was 33 to 13,429. How can you possibly suggest that gun control doesn't work?

Paul.

As for murders irrespective of means (just in case someome tries to argue that the UK is still as violent despite no guns)

US 8.4 per 100,000
UK 1.97 per 100,000

Paul.

Guns just make it too easy to kill. Gun control works. That's why police chiefs around the world remain staunchly in favour of gun control. Very few (if any) countries ever revoke gun control. Why? Because it's effective, it works, and the populace comes to pretty much whole-hearted support of it.

The NRA should tell the truth about themselves - they're the biggest brainwashing agency, ever.

JW

Bill and Ted????? Hummmmm....... Sounds like two gay liberals to me.
Ims sure theit motto is "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but if we take your guns, no one can ever hurt me".

And Jay Walker, tell that to the people of Cambodia, and the slaves of China and the Jews that were disarmed in Germany.

Umm I think this shows that they do work and work well. Without gun control this person would now be dead! I don't think a phone would have stopped bullet, do you? Bring on gun control so if the worst a criminal has to attack me with are sticks and rocks the world would be a better place.

Umm, the guy can thank god (or allah or yahweh) it wasn't a Compound Bow or he would be dead right now, Crossbows lack the penetration power of their bigger cousins such as Compound Bow, Recurve, etc. I have seen a compound bow arrow go through a bucket of sand, while a high-powered rifle bullet did not, also you can find video, like watching the hunting channel a man with a Compound bow dropped a Grizzly with one shot to the forehead right between the eyes.

US 8.4 per 100,000 UK 1.97 per 100,000

Though it still is a bad comparison, the U.S. is larger, has more people, and has more violent criminals period, due to a larger population. Last time I checked people have been killing other people way before guns, Jack the Ripper, I guess you can say, is a criminal who advocates that he is against gun violence. Question though is how will the citizenry revolt or resist against the Government if it ever takes a turn for the worse? Well with no guns than you won't mind martial law and curfews, or going into boxcars to be carted off to camps. Yes, supposedly taking guns off the street reduce crime, and it evidently works in the U.K., but the whole reason somebody stuck that in there so if the Government became an Oppressive regime that the people would not be defenseless, look into the U.S. history behind that Amendment, you can see that the British was trying to institute a no-gun policy on the people of Boston, which is the big reason why we have it, no you can have better Gun Control Laws, but taking away the guns is just not the right decision for the U.S., are you forgetting that most guns in the U.S. are not used for Crime but for Hunting, and Skill Shooting, so we should just take away somebody's pursuit of freedom just because we want to control the guns, I for one am against this, the United States Founding Fathers put that Amendment there for a reason, and the Supreme Court would be hard-pressed to repeal it, after all what in the Constitution goes against it.

Solitair,

You can't say that gun control is the only reason that the UK has less murders than the US.  How many gangs to you have roaming the streets of London?  How many cities do you have that are as large as even Detroit?

People will kill people if they want to.  Murders are committed all the time using other weapons than guns.  Knives are a huge problem.  Maybe we should outlaw knives?  The problem is that there isn't big enough punishment for killing people.  Most places in the US do not have the death penalty, and Jail is better than the streets for a lot of these people (at least they get 3 meals a day and a place to sleep).