@PTT
Show me any other study done like the Kellerman study. Kellerman, who is an ER doctor, had his infamous study funded by gun control advocates and then received several multi-million dollar grants from the Center for Disease Control for the sole purpose of re-categorizing gun crime as a health problem to open a new front for the gun control lobby's war on the Second Amendment.
That alone makes anything that comes out biased. Period. Much like the vast majority of 'climate' science. Follow the money. But I digress...
The fact that he used the same statistical analysis to originally claim that you are 43 times more likely to die with a gun in the house as he later revised down to 2.7 times means he either can't figure out his own numbers or, alternatively, he's manipulating the data to suit his outcomes. Follow the money.
But don't believe just little old me. After all, I'm only smart enough to fly planes...and barely at that. I'm certainly no doctor. And these were just on the first two pages of google. There is nothing else that supports or corroborates Kellerman's 'study' although there's plenty of pages citing it.
note: some of these are cached pages on google
Kellermann-Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home
Kellerman Debunked!
Federal Observer Articles - Federal Observer
Editorial: Deconstructing Kellermann | The Truth About Guns
The Gun Zone RKBA -- Suter "Outs" Kellerman
I can cut & paste article upon article and study upon study showing causality contrary to Kellerman. You can find only one study that supports that view - Kellerman's.
And you, like Kellerman, completely ignored the times when guns save lives. Which, I admit, is a difficult statistic to map. Nevertheless, you cannot dismiss it. If you do not measure that which is important, you will ascribe undue importance to that which you can measure.
The crime rate data I provided was from 2011, which you seemed to dismiss, so for grins, I pulled the stats from the FBI for the three counties in question for 1992. King Co (Seattle) 357/100,000 violent crimes and 3.1/100,000 murders. Shelby Co (Memphis) 1552 and 28 and Cleveland 604 and 11.1. National averages for '92 757 and 9.3. And just like today, in 1992 I'd rather live in Seattle than Memphis or Cleveland. So while you completely dismissed my 2011 data because it wasn't 1992 data, my point is that the relativity is largely the same.
You also disregarded my point about the continual decrease in both violent crime and murder rates and the correlation of the increase in concealed carry in all of the states. There are fewer deaths with guns this year than last despite there being more guns in households this year. So you cannot possibly correlate guns in households with increased gun deaths. And while I concede correlation does not equal causation, in this instance, it flies in the face of your 'common sense'.
Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control. While that's a nice sound bite, there's a lot of truth in it.
I'm glad you find your own gun control history a yawn. I suppose that's because you lot all just laid down and went to sleep. It is precisely this characteristic subtle erosion of liberty and rights that is assuaged by the passage of time that makes it all feel okie-dokie. That won't happen here.