The answer is that many of those 25 were suicides, etc. And, the threat of a gun has prevented untold crimes.

But, darnit, if "safety" is the issue, is a family safer with a gun around, or without? With losses like that? (When you were a kid, was there anything in the house you didn't know about, where the keys were, and so on?)

How rational is it to keep a gun around which has only 10 times more of a chance of killing your kid than a robber? Now, the bad guys don't know if you have one or not. You could put an NRA sticker in the window, and not have a gun. The chance you might have a gun is there whether you do or not.

Seems a slam dunk.

And, if "safety" is the issue, does anyone need an Uzi, for instance, to be "safe"?

So "safety" isn't the issue.

What might the real issue of gun ownership? What do those heavier light arms do for the holders?

Respect - makes 'em polite.

We need to be a society in one large standoff, each with a gun pointed at the other, and will get along very well.

Interesting thesis. Weak, but stronger than the "safety" issue.

I really don't care if folks have a gun, or an arsenal. Don't want them to have fully auto weapons, with large magazines, or be around 'em when they, the people, are as loaded as the guns.

Arf (bArf)