Well, no, That's terrible logic because I never stated that those things were used in homicides. I said they would be deterrents to rape. Several of them are expressly non-lethal deterrents so why you'd say "We'd have no homicides if we banned Mace" is beyond me. The whole "But you can kill someone with a stick!" canard is moronic anyway since, if you're going to equivocate a gun with a pointy stick, you're essentially saying "We don't need guns because sticks are just as effective". Or you admit that guns are much more effective at making people dead which trivializes the "But they'll just kill with pointy sticks" argument. It's just a bad argument no matter how you slice it.
Chicago's gun laws were crippled by the
ready supply of firearms from suburban Cook County and Indiana. Banning the purchase of an item is unfortunately ineffective when you can travel literally five miles south and purchase it legally. It would be interesting to see how it would have worked out had the entire multi-state region carried the same restrictions but it's a moot point anyway since the relevant laws were struck down. Incidentally, I'm aware of the unlikelihood of the region having the same laws (barring a federal ban) but just making the point that you can't compare gun laws in Chicago and their effectiveness to those in places where you
don't have the ability to take ten steps and legally buy a gun anyway.