I believe that’s rifles specifically, not all guns.
The Daily Mail article is still mistaken and/or dishonest on any number of points.
OK, that makes sense as well, since most firearms deaths are inner-city criminal actions, and people committing crimes in the cities are mostly using cheap concealed handguns.
The injury postulate I think would still hold. According to the CDC, in 2009 there were 774 unintentional deaths by being “struck by or against”. Ok, that doesn’t have to include just hammers. But there were only 564 unintentional firearm deaths in that year.
There were 31,000 unintentional poisonings. We could save a lot of lives it we just put child locks on all our poisons. :-)
It is rifles that they are trying to ban.