Quote:
|
Originally Posted by joepole
>How can you say fewer lives would have been lost when only 1 man had a gun as opposed to 100 people having a gun, when our own nations history tells the exact opposite story?
Because it's a reasonable assumption that none of the other likely-to-be-armed students wanted to go on a murderous rampage and it's a logical conclusion that if any other student had killed Cho before he could finish fewer lives would have been lost.
|
Homicide is the 14th leading cause of death in America today.
Accident is the 3rd leading cause of death, of the accident category, firearm accidents are the 8th leading cause of death.
....and your contention is because there are NOT enough guns on the street.
I'm glad you admitted this was total assumption....I can't find death stats for the 1800's when most men carried a firearm, but I'll be sure to let you knwo when I do
