MORRISVILLE — I commented on another blog and thought this deserved a thread of its own. With Obama about to take over the Executive branch, there has been a lot of sensationalism about stricter gun laws. Much of this debate goes back to the classic (and flawed) argument of self-defense. With that being said, I thought to bring some logic to the debate.
The argument of gun rights based on the premise of "self defense" has always caught me as a ludicrous one given the realities of statistics. People residing in households containing a firearm are >300% more likely to die from gun related deaths than gun-free households. What's that tell you? Here's the real kicker: (This is from the FBI Homicidal report 1997, most recent data available) Of all gun related incidents (death or injury) 2.3% were used in seld defense! Let me repeat, 2.3%. 33.2% were accidental shootings. You can live out your Dirty Harry vigilante fantasies, but it simply is not reality. As for gun control and only "bad guys" having guns? Let's look at another statistic. Japan has staunch gun laws. Even police officers tend not to carry them. England's gun laws are also pretty strict. So, in 2001 (most recent available) per 100,000 population, Japan had 0.02 gun deaths, England had 0.1 gun deaths, and America with very weak gun laws had 10.27. Do the math.
