> Okay... that doesn't change a thing though. People still have the right to defend themselves. The numbers seem to indicate that having a gun is actually more

> Okay... that doesn't change a thing though. People still have the right to defend themselves. The numbers seem to indicate that having a gun is actually more detrimental, on a 'net' basis, to one's well-being than not having a gun. Having a gun is more dangerous for you and yours: > But about 30 careful studies show more guns are linked to more crimes: murders, rapes, and others. Far less research shows that guns help. * https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-... > We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid. * https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-thr... > Results. We found no robust, statistically significant correlation between gun ownership and stranger firearm homicide rates. However, we found a positive and significant association between gun ownership and nonstranger firearm homicide rates. The incidence rate ratio for nonstranger firearm homicide rate associated with gun ownership was 1.014 (95% confidence interval = 1.009, 1.019). * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC4167105/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC4167105/