Why the U.S. is No. 1 – in mass shootings
latimes.com
latimes.com
That said -- mass shootings are a tiny fraction of all shootings in the USA. And the real question should be: if you take away the guns, do MURDERS and ASSAULTS go down significantly, or only the gun murders and assaults? I keep hearing about the latter, from gun control activists. However, in China and Britain, there have been a spate of knife attacks in which perpetrators somehow (how?? I can't understand it) also killed and wounded many people. If murders don't go down then why bother going door to door to confiscate guns in an era where people are able to 3d print their own?
Where does NationMaster get its data? And where is the data on assaults (eg by knife)
NOW the real question is, can you find murder and assault statistics in the UK before and after the ban on guns a few decades ago?
In areas where teens are given proper sex education, unwanted pregnancies are lower than areas that teach abstinence only.
Likewise, countries with stricter gun laws certainly have fewer mass shootings than the US. Unless you can say for sure that proper gun education would reduce outbreaks of violence, then I'm left to believe your solution is poor.
There aren't enough studies on guns to draw any reliable conclusions, largely because the gun lobby has done a very good job of blocking Federal funding for such research.
Shooting people is bad, it's something we don't want people to do. You can argue that guns are for hunting, but that applies mostly to people in the countryside buying hunting rifles - handguns are for shooting people.
I don't really see the contradiction in "sex is good, but do it safely. Shooting people is bad, we should do everything we can to prevent this."
You're mischaracterizing gun ownership to support your view point.