by exploited » Mon Jan 11, 2016 1:21 pm
I didn't say anything about who buys guns - or, rather, I didn't attribute blame based on those numbers. I said that the pure number of guns can't be used statistically unless it accounts for multiple gun ownership, which his rebuttal does not. Which is absolutely true. Whether existing gun owners account for the increased number of guns is an unknown - this means it can't be properly factored into any statistic. That's the extent of my statement - this other stuff about thieves and lax gun laws and who causes the crime is irrelevant, but what can we expect from our resident denialist?