You brought up the Kellermann studies, which was debunked as a shill study. He origionally claimed that it was forty something, then seven, then twice. When he attracted the attention of criminologists because his claims was far out of the mainstream of their studies. When asked for his data and methods for peer review, he refused for several years. When he finally did, the flaws were obvious and published. Since then, he adjusted his numbers based on the same flawed data and still failed any kind of peer review.
The same study also showed that illegal drug use, using alcohol, and renting were higher risk factors than guns.
http://guncite.com/gun-control-kellermann-3times.html
BTW, Kellerman is an MD who didn't follow the scientific method.
Defensive gun use rarely leads to death of bad guy. There are about three hundred per year. Most of the time the gun is a "mind changer".
Guns only offer the illusion of safety (remembering that as many people die at the end of a gun per month in America as died on 9/11) and MULTIPLE studies have shown that guns in your home are a large threat to your family..
Almost all of which are in the twenty worst cities and in the drug trade or member of a gang. Sixty percent of all gun deaths are suicides. The Homicides don't come close to that number. If you are not a member of a gang in the twenty worst cities, you have a lower chance of being murdered than you do in Germany. Since heroin deaths outnumber murders regardless of weapons, perhaps we should ban heroin? Oh wait. Drug overdoses out number all gun deaths combined.
Come back when you have a collection of peer reviewed studies that were published in CRIMINOLOGY journals. Everything else is agiprop. The consensus of criminologists is that gun laws have zero effect on crime.
Why do you assume I have it for protection? They have always been there growing up, most people own them, and the last gun homicide was two decades ago. The last homicide was last year, killed with bare hands.
= new reply since forum marked as read