Regardless of the stats, I'm still uncomfortable around amateurs with guns. Comfort and rationality are not always aligned.

I didn't really expect to change your view. Education, familiarity, and practice often dispel the sense of anxiety someone feels around something they are not comfortable with. Learning to drive a car is one example of this.

It's my hope that through reaching out to people who don't feel comfortable around guns and dispelling misconceptions in an even keeled way helps show that we aren't a bunch of reckless crazy rednecks engaging in sophistry to prove a point. I think it's important for everyone to reevaluate their assumptions regularly.

Guns are dangerous, But if you are following the rules[1], it's nearly impossible to have an accident. The vast majority of legal gun owners follow these rules.

[1] http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Catego...

Imagine having that conversation with someone who lost someone dear due to getting struck by lightning, and who is now demanding that we install lightning rods every twenty feet and legally mandate nonconductive clothing. Obviously you'd sympathize with them, but you can't base national policy on emotion. You have to look at the facts.

Value propositions are all ultimately rooted in emotional responses to propositions which cannot be objectively supported, and all policy is ultimately rooted in value propositions; you can't not base policy (national or otherwise) on emotion.

Regardless of that, some arguments are more rational/illogical than others.

As if the majority of the pro-gun ownership arguments aren't based on emotion.

People hunt (some for game, some for sport) and need guns. People get robbed and would like a gun to keep in the home for self-defense. Some people live in criminal ridden areas where being mugged is a relatively common occurrence, having a gun helps there too.