No, because nothing else requires as much fine motor control and timing. If I need to do a k2tog tbl, I can take my time and work it slowly. If I screw it up, I can tink it and redo it. But if you put molten glass in the wrong place, or don't do it quickly enough, the whole piece you've been working on is quite possibly ruined. And it can take hours to make just one bead, depending on the difficulty.

(Note: I am not a statistician or mathematician, so anything I'm saying here may be incorrect. It's what I see when I look at the numbers out there, however. If I'm wrong and someone wants to go to the effort of showing me where, I'd welcome it.)

First, bbarrigar, let me quote you from one of your previous posts: "You realize that in the 50's they had shooting ranges in schools and gun shooting clubs? I don't think they eliminated them until the 80's. Yet you did not see school shootings." Now it's hard to know exactly what you're trying to say with this statement. Are you trying to say that there were no school shootings? If that's the case, then whatever quibbles you may have with the list I linked, it still proves this statement wrong. Are you trying to say that there wasn't as much media coverage of school shootings, so we did not "see" them? If that's the case, then you're agreeing with my statement about increased media coverage bringing school shootings more to the forefront.

More quotes from you, and my responses:

-Well I looked over the link. Which may not be 100% accurate because anyone can add to it.

Yes, that's how Wikipedia works. However you did see that the vast majority of incidents were footnoted to include the documentation of the stories in newspapers, yes?

-There were incidents of native Americans shooting children during colonial times. There were children being killed during war time. That doesn't all count. Also many of them were incidents of people not even children at the school. 

Ok, how about you lay out the criteria. What, exactly, should be included in the statistics for what you're claiming?

-Then you get to the 90's and the incidents triple over what they were.

I did a rough count. In the 1960s there were 17 incidents. In the 1970s, there were 22 incidents (I eliminated Kent State for what I believe are obvious reasons.) In the 1980s, 30 incidents. In the 1990s, there were 40 incidents. 40 is not triple 30. 40 is definitely an increase, but how much of an increase? The percentage changes from one decade to the next are as follows:

1960s to 1970s - 29% increase

1970s to 1980s - 36% increase

1980s to 1990s - 33% increase

The percentage change in school shootings was actually lower from the 80s to the 90s than it was from the 70s to the 80s.

In the 2000s, there were 48 listed shootings. That's 8 more than in the 1990s, for a 20% increase. And so far, in the 2010s, there have been 87 shootings. That's the first significant spike in the series starting with the 1960s. (I'd still blame media attention for the increase due to copycat issues, but I'm too tired at the moment to look into any data on that.)

- So I would something different happened then just technology letting people kill multiple people at a time. So I would say something else is going on here.

Here's a graph of the number of casualties per incident of school shootings in the US. Do you see a trend?

After seeing the numbers above, what specifically do you think is going on? I think there's evidence that proves that there are more people being killed per incident. Also, consider this: The number of school shootings has gone up over the years, that's true. Can you think of anything else that's gone up over the years? How about the population of the US? And, while I have no proof of this at the moment, how about the number of guns in private hands in the US? I suspect that's risen as well. It would be very interesting to compare the rate of change in the population and gun ownership to the numbers of school shootings, don't you think?

- Also there have been cases where an armed person stopped deaths from happening yet you don't see it much on the news.

Citations, please. How many times has that happened? Not counting police officers, how many times over the years have armed citizens prevented someone's death? That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Let's see how many people have been saved by guns versus how many people have been killed or injured by them.

- Also Detroit and NYC have made guns illegal. Have you murder rates and crime rates there. D.C. is the murder capitol of the world guess what is illegal there? So I am saying making them all illegal will not help.

I've never said that all guns should be made illegal. However, you seem to be making an argument that once upon a time, gun violence wasn't an issue and that it's much worse now. From the information I've seen, those statements aren't borne out.

While I will argue that gun violence is no worse than it's been once you control for population, etc. I won't argue that the United States has a terrible problem with gun violence in comparison to the rest of the world. Here's a sad little graphic:

(graph from Business Insider)

 Lastly I'd like to thank you for the discussion, sincerely. My curiosity about my own positions and whether I could find evidence that supported them led me down some interesting rabbit holes, and I learned some very interesting things.

White Dove, I can see why you feel as you do. In Britain, a dislike of any other than shot guns for farmers or rifles for competitions is very deeply embedded in our psyche. Even our police are not routlinely armed. So maybe th fact that very, very few shootings of police happen shows that even our criminals are not regular gun carriers. It may change, but I hope not!

Guns such as rifles can only be held by people vetted, thoroughly checked on an annual basis by the police ho inspect the house to make sur guns at kept in a locked cabinet at all times. They have to have a very strong reason, fear would not count. Would have to be something like a farmer needing it for crows. People wanting to use handguns have to keep thm at a licenced shooting range, not at home. 

We do get shootings, of course, but they really are unusual and even a single wounding makes national headlines. We also do get gne occasional madman, probably genuinely described as insane, who carries out mass shootings. I can remember three in my lifetime. But nothing will stop people like that. After the worst incident, at Dunblane, somewhere round 20 + years ago, gun ownership of handguns became totally illegal. I think almost everyone in the UK supports this. Ther a illegal ones out there, but possession of a firearm carries an automatic prison sentence. 

There is no wish at all in Britqin to,change things.

They also have varying degrees of style.  

Plus they can go all out on swim wear if men are not allowed near the pool.

It's actually a neat invention despite the funny name... It means Muslim moms can take their kids to the pool and go swimming with them!