@ HrkDrvr
Not one of the 5 articles you linked attempts anything different to the one you previously linked which I showed to be flawed.
Show me any other study done like the Kellerman study.
A case control study can be carried out by anyone who cares to do so. and has been done. Has your google-fu, so face-value strong when trying to find debunks of the study, failed you here? For example, there is a case control study which looks at
firearms and adolescent suicide, or a
national case control study on suicide and homicide risk associated with firearms in the home, and that after another 20 seconds of my precious time.
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.
As shown, not true. And as you say, follow the money: your articles have thus far been solely on pro-gun sites, making them overtly biased. Kellerman's is available on a universities' website and funded by CDC, while the last two are on the US National Library of Medicine and National Institutes of Health website.
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.
Clearly not. While your previous "point" was that all of those areas close to or well above the national average in 2011, the data shows that in 1992 two were below the national average, which pretty much invalidates your original point regarding the data bot being representative. Sure, I'd rather not live in Memphis either, but that's no big surprise, nor does it counter anything I've said so far.
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.
You've failed to provide any data at all. What needs addressing?
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'.
That's a chuckle - I've never claimed "common sense" as a support for my argument at all. And if the data shows a correlation then there
is highly likely to be (I can even tell you how likely, of you like!) a correlation.
Here's some more data:
Gun Deaths vs. Gun Ownership ← Inductio Ex Machina
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.
It's not the history I find a yawn, it's the continual use of anecdotal "evidence" as some sort of crutch. It's pointless lantern-swinging which doesn't actually counter any data at all; it merely proves that there are statistical outliers no matter where you look.
@ 500N
A well known tactic of the vocal minority.
What makes you think those who want gun control are a minority?
Poll: Majority of Americans back stricter gun laws - CBS News