Another Anti-Gun Study

Yes I called it an Anti-Gun study. Not a study of the affects of guns.

Now there is an actuary showing us proof that guns are bad. The article wants you to believe that an actuary can prove this. And we should believe this when criminologists proved the opposite?

I'd really have to read the report and see the data. He's basing it on insurance and life expectancy data, and I'm very suspicious. More playing with numbers?

His paper is based "on facts. It's an exact calculation designed to bring some more light into the debate.... I am providing figures that no one can disagree with," he says, acknowledging, however, that people "can certainly disagree about what we do with these figures."

The article discusses some results, but I don't see anything new here. These types of statistics have been floating around for a while.