what I said was
"gun owners and their families are far, far more likely to be injured or killed by said firearm (accidentally, or intentionally) than they are to ever actually have the opportunity to use the gun for defence"
There's really no need to muddy the waters with politics. The raw data speaks for itself :
- violent home invasions leading to murder are exceedingly rare
- accidental gun injury or death is sadly commonplace
I've already supplied many sources, so i won't repeat the stats that plainly lay out this reality
what I said was...
The raw data speaks for itself
accidental gun injury or death is sadly commonplace
The data I've presented:
- Nationwide (USA), there are about 100 burglary-homicides every year.
- In 2010, unintentional firearm injuries caused the deaths of 606 people
Feel free to confirm the figures for yourself.
Nationwide, there are about 100 burglary-homicides every year.
Here it is for you:
From the FBI[1]:
2013: Total Murders 12,253, during burglary: 94
From the CDC[2]:
2013: 505 deaths due to accidental/negligent discharge of a firearm + 281 deaths due to firearms-use with "undetermined intent"
[1]https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-...
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_Sta...
That false claim is often quoted from the Kellerman study, but an examination of his data (it took years for him to release it) revealed that in almost all such homicides, it was a gun that the intruder brought with him (predominantly male) and not one the victim owned. (Kates, 2001) The residents' gun could have been locked up in the basement, and Kellerman counted it anyway.
Or, do you have different research in mind that supports that claim?