> > My question: Do you know whether these statistics include _all_ guns, or only those
> > that are privately owned? If the statistics include those owned by gov't agents,
> > used in their enforcement duties, then the argument seems much weaker than if it
> > includes only guns owned by private citizens.
> >
> > If the statistics do refer to all guns, is there further data available so that
> > statistics for privately owned guns may be derived?
>
> I'm not sure, but here's another stat that might help out: A police officer is 5 times
> more likely to kill an innocent person at any given crime scene than would an armed
> private citizen in the same situation. So, I would say that if government agents are
> included, they are merely dampening the stats down. Excluding them and they should be
> higher.
>
> Mike Lorrey
Thanks. I understand (and agree). However, one can argue this statistic occurs because officers are generally not present to witness the initial violence (a private citizen involved probably was a witness), and will perhaps have hair-triggers because they're entering situations known to be violent, and know they wear uniforms that may attract bullets. I was indeed hoping that the statistics you provided did exclude gov't officers, because it makes for a stronger argument.