"Dave Bugg" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> "gloria.p" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> argus tuft wrote:
>>>>> * 10,177 guns were used in murders in the U.S. in 2006 while in
>>>>> the same year, Canada reported 190. That's over 5 times a higher
>>>>> rate in the US. * Around 32,000 people have been shot in America so
>>>>> far this year.
>>>>>
>>>>> * 300 Americans are shot, on average, every day.
>>>>>
>>>>> * For adults, keeping a gun in the home quadruples the risk of
>>>>> dying of an accidental gunshot wound.
>>>>>
>>>>> * In 2008, 17,215 people in the U.S. were wounded in unintentional
>>>>> shootings
>>>>> but survived.
>>>>>
>>>>> * For kids ages up to four years old, the mortality rate is 17
>>>>> times higher in states with high number of guns, versus states
>>>>> with a low number of firearms.
>>>>>
>>>>> * 33% of U.S. households contain a gun, and half reportedly don't
>>>>> lock up their weapons.
>>>>>
>>>>> * A gun in the home is four times more likely to be used in an
>>>>> unintentional
>>>>> shooting than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For some of us, you're preaching tot he choir. For others, those
>>>> are fighting words.
>>>>
>>>> gloria p
>>>
>>> <lol> Too true!
>>>
>>> According to statistics, guns save 20 times as many lives as they
>>> take:
>>
>>
>> That takes a huge leap in logic. Given that the US has five times the
>> per capita rate of firearms homicides, you have to ask how they could
>> have saved 20 times as many lives. Gun use (against humans is not as
>> prevalent here as in the US. By your logic, we should have had a lot
>> more people murdered.
>
> You didn't read the entire post, Dave. I fail to see where the leap in
> logic exists. BTW, on a per capita basis, do you know which country has
> the highest level of violent crime?
>

Since you two are having a dialogue, why not take it to email?