In December 2012, a crazed man entered an elementary school and attacked several staff members and students. He used a kitchen knife and while there were 24 injuries, there were zero deaths:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenpeng_Village_Primary_Schoo...

A little while later, another crazed man entered a second elementary school and also attacked staff and students. He used an XM15 and Glock 20SF; there were 2 injuries and 28 deaths:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_s...

> It's the violence that matters, not the weapon.

I'm guessing you have never read Marshal McLuhan. The tools (communication or otherwise) that humans have available shape society and our perception of the world. There are daily examples (both negligent and purposeful) of people acting in a way that they probably would not have if they only had knives or just their fists:

* https://twitter.com/well_regulated_

The effects of different tools are... different. The "Garlic shooter" was able to kill 3 people and injure many more before he was taken out in under 60 seconds:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilroy_Garlic_Festival_shootin...

That kind of carnage is difficult to achieve with a baseball bat or a knife.

And the effort required to kill a number of people with a gun is significantly less--like, to the point where the "but but what about that?" verges on ludicrous--than knife crime or acid attacks. Gun violence requires less specialized knowledge and provides fewer opportunities to catch a criminal before their plan goes off than bombings. And vehicles have overwhelmingly more legitimate use than guns that present a meaningful and socially valid argument against their restriction where guns have no such value.

Which is why this is low-hanging fruit to deal with and long past due.