Hlbly- Why is it that world-renowned economists can look at a set of statistics and come up with almost opposite conclusions? Why do some think the stimulus was good or even too small, while others think that it only served to hurt the economy? Why do some think more government spending is the solution, while others think less? These people are university professors, some Nobel Prize winners, who come up with wildly different conclusions.
There are hundreds of books and papers on both sides of the issue of gun control, well researched, backed up with statistics and facts. And yet they come up with wildly different soutions. My point is that you cannot, for the sake of intellectual honesty, just look at one or two papers that support your side and call it a day. If you want to start posting papers that "prove" your position, then don't be surprised when I post a couple of papers that "prove" my assertion. Gun politics would be a lot different if the statistics were as one-sided as you seem to believe.