Huh...
Because 18 kids being killed over the course of a year due to accidents is somehow better than 18 kids being killed over the course of a year in 3 separate massacres?
If you believe having guns everywhere will prevent massacres, that's fine. I'm just saying that you need to factor an increase in accidental discharge death and injury. Not a big deal, just has to be assessed.
For instance, with current ownership numbers, what is the accidental death rate with firearms?
What's the current number of people killed in massacres?
How many massacres would be prevented/reduced in severity with a doubling of firearm ownership numbers?
How many additional deaths from accidents would occur with a doubling of firear ownership numbers?
Which of those two numbers is bigger?
I haven't bothered to look it up, but I can guarantee you that both sides of the issue ONLY use one of the two numbers when pushing their respective agenda.
victor809 wrote: