- Joined
- Jan 23, 2015
- Messages
- 56,693
- Reaction score
- 28,325
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Firearm prevalence as the agent of injury has always demanded determination of accessible firearms (often approximated merely by households with firearms) and "total" firearms has always been a crudely incorrect approximation. This has all be explained to you repeatedly.
How can the bold be valid when you earlier said that firearms in storage don't count towards prevalence?
Your argument is rejected on the basis of incoherence.