I can't continue because they are dedicated to twisting these types of statistics and presenting them as if they were real. They leave out important data that you can't tell unless you do voluminous research and then they tie you up with an endless series of deconstructions of every word and sentence you write. When you return with a truthfull stat to contradict one of their points they search out a weakness in one of your sentences and focus on some trivial meaningless stat while disregarding the real picture. The process has a name; it's called "dissembling".
Like the creationists do; presuming that science is undecided on Darwin then pushing stats that are essentially meaningless but take up all your time to refute. Then they find some sympathetic science proffessor to qoute from and you never get to find out that that guys theories and papers have no weight in the scientific community.
It's a con game and a shell game and it isn't worth spending the hours they spend doing; disregarding the litter of the dead from gunshot wounds. I suggest you speak to an emergency room trauma nurse in a big city; thats real information.

You cant take away all the hand cuns from criminals. You cant take away the long guns, which will take the place of the short gun.
to get back to your 2 points about gun control. The countries with gun control dont have less gunshots because there are less guns. I believe it is a different way of thinking in Europe and other countires. There is different thinking going on in those societies. It's not the US. the trash that litters our streets selling drugs, robbing and killing is the problem. For your second point strong laws are great if someone will make them. Too many mamby pambies in office these days. I'll buy you dinner when laws like you suggest get passed.
What about the middle east, a place where the presance of a young lad perhaps 12 or 14 is toating about an AK? Lots of them. most everyone is armed. Lots of violance too. I dont think theres too many hand guns and if you take away the assault weapons they would use a muzzle loader. take away that and those folks would be carrying a bat with a rusty nail. What about the Romans? often prtraid as bloody society. true or not there's a lot knifing in the movies. no guns, they all carried swords and killed each other on a whim if so felt.
It's the people, not the weapons.

I think Bill said it best, "What's the percentage of the gun killings that are done with registered handguns, vs, an illegal weapon?" I bet it's close to zero

• http://audioroundtable.com/Dungeon/messages/3157.html

Seems to me that genocide is usually suffered by populations that have had strict gun laws imposed upon them. It's a little harder to murder those that are as armed as you are. I think that is what was meant by having an "armed militia".

Surely, you don't want lawlessness, and that's what we see in the troubled regions of the world. But I don't think going too far the other way and being overly intrusive is good either. Punish a man for what he does, not what you think he might do. That's what I think is the best policy.