No statistics can never ever justify anti-gun laws given the millions and millions of deaths caused by anti-gun laws just during the 20th century. They arrive to the opposite conclusion only by denying massive and irrefutable facts using the worst tactics of history revisionism and blatant lies.
So those “studies and statistics” are window dressing typical of post-modernist pseudo-scientific taxpayers funded academia. They have zero value and zero common sense. Their aim is not to bring knowledge or insight but to brainwash suckers into supporting the anti-gun propaganda.
Agreed, I recall firearms prohibitionists in years past arguing how New York City and even Washington, DC (with 1977 handgun ban) were apparently safer than living with the violent yahoos and rednecks in the South or West.
Truth!
They always want to sweep the millions murdered by various socialist regimes be they national socialists or state socialists under the rug. “Well......that was war.....you can’t count that”. The hell we can’t! Not only can we, we MUST! Defense against tyrannical government was the whole reason for having a second amendment. All it takes is one tyrant to come to power and suddenly their utopian vision of perfect peace and harmony with no guns falls apart.
>> So those “studies and statistics” are window dressing typical of post-modernist pseudo-scientific taxpayers funded academia. They have zero value and zero common sense. <<
Not necessarily, because a careful scholar and statistician like John Lott can and does take the statistics used by the folks in Boston and show how, with a proper analysis, those statistics in fact show exactly the opposite of what the Boston folks set out to prove.