>I love it when someone like you calls facts 'kindergarten logic'.

Glad to brighten your day. But even on the risk of dampening the emotion,
I was not even commenting on the part I could consider to be more on the "facts" side:
(roughly corresponding to the "numbers" part), as neither accuracy nor completeness
of the samples being cited was mentioned.

kindergarten logic described the IMHO only possible way to get from the "numbers" part to the conclusion

>>>exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

where others already have questioned gun control being the sole possible cause for the cited number.

The "someone like you" part I cannot parse at the moment, as I have no big problem
with gun owning citizens killing intruders - if you think that such "arguments" further
the cause of not forbidding private gun ownership, perhaps you are more of a cynic than me.

>You can't offer a reasonable debate so you resort to insults.

I did not offer "reasonable debate" - true, as I have clearly written by myself.
It might be true that I "cannot offer" such a debate, but *concluding* this to be the case
from myself just not doing it might be considered not the only possible explanation -
But you seem to consider it to be QED - or is this one of the skills of "reasonable debate" I don't have ?

As there are people paying me money to gather information from data,
I guess I actually am better prepared than the average excel-wielding person
to have an idea of

factors contributing to the distribution of numbers, percentages an means

side effects,

error quotients

probabiltity spreads

the nonequality of correlation and causality -
just to name a few, even if I know myself that humbleness is not one of my prime character features.

my 0.02 EUR (that is more than 0.02$...)

thomas