This is so amusing to me when this comes up.
I am not a gun nut and don't even own a gun.
But folks always do this and I am not sure why. They are either ignorant of the facts, trying to muddy the argument (move it to another point), or they have an agenda.
I didn't read the article. But I assume the point is--- when the bad guys have guns the good guys have a better chance of stopping them if they also have guns---as opposed to baseball bats. You absolutely can't dispute that this is correct.
I get that if nobody had a gun at all, including the bad guys, that nobody would get shot. You can't dispute that either.
But to distort facts and numbers to try to make the argument you want, while ignoring the facts and numbers that flat-out disprove your argument is ludicrous.
Obviously, in states where guns are more restricted (New York and Illinois) the gun crime is higher than in states where they are not restricted (like Texas).
That far more people are killed in the US by other means than guns is indisputable. So, certainly, people would choose something other than a gun if a gun were not available. For sure, a gun is easy and quick if available.
That when guns have been restricted in areas crime has gone up is reflected in studies is indisputable.
Around the world there are many places where the homicide rate is higher in the US---with methods other than guns.
That violent crime with guns has actually been trending down while other violent crime has been steady or trending up is another valid point.
The issue raised here is very valid. If a bad guy wants to kill someone he can be stopped easier by a good guy with a gun than a good guy with a baseball bat.
To compare the US and other developed countries murder rate using guns, while ignoring just simply the murder rate itself is duplicitous as well. The US simply has a violent crime and a murder problem compared to a lot of those places period. No one is pushing to get rid of baseball bats here---and you are far more likely to get killed by a baseball bat than a gun.
Does it matter that much what the actual method is? The question should be why living in the US subjects you to a higher chance of being murdered than other developed countries.
Obviously many, many other points can be brought into play here. But never understand the reason people try to out-argue an obvious fact with dubious logic.
But to each his own I guess.