>I can't believe your stance. So arguing that the numbers of non-gun deaths is substantial is a legitimate reason to ignore the gun deaths?? If half of those gun death did not happen because there was no gun at hand, we could have prevented about 6,000 homocides each year, and reduced the number of homicides by a a 4th to a 3rd.
>
>Don't you see the point ????
>

No. It is illogical to assume that simply by eliminating a particular instrument that homicide rates will automagically decrease. You are dismissing too many influencing variables and focusing solely on the tool used to perform the homicide, which I find unrealistic.

Pick any homicide case. WHY was murder committed? An act of passion, a bungled burglary, gang warfare? Who was it performed by - male, female, black, white, poor, rich, young, old, someone with a criminal background? By looking only at the weapon, you - and other gun-control advocates - are taking the easy way out. Blame the gun, not the person. SOMEBODY STILL HAD TO PULL THE TRIGGER.

What's happening in Toronto bears this out. Why is there a sudden spike in homicides there? Simply because guns are easier to get, all of a sudden? Bzzt, wrong answer. There are societal reasons in play there that if the Canadian government doesn't address simply will not get fixed.