Gun Control & RKBA

beevul: In the very next sentence, you changed MY premise, since when I say 99.9 percent as in my sig, I'm measuring people, not time.
So actually its YOUR false premise, not mine.

You are wrong again, I was speaking of gun owners as people, as I clearly stated; you clearly didn't comprehend English here:
I previously wrote: I was referring to the 80 million gun owners in general who, according to your false premise: do not kill or shoot someone 99.9% of the time.

First, you don't just get to factor out new gun ownership, or even assume that its not 10 times higher in number than the number of gun deaths annually.

I'm not factoring out new gun ownership; I'm using the 99.9% figure you provided for gun owners over one year not shooting or killing anyone. Over a 75 year time period, the 99.9% figure translates, per capita, into approx. 5.5% that a gun owner would have shot or gun-killed someone. This holds true for any size American population sample using your 99.9% figure, so I do not 'factor out new gun ownership'.
I noted 80 million gun owners since that is that current estimate & I used the figure to provide a 'snapshot', since the 'rolling estimate' today would be that ~5.5% of American gun owners have shot or killed someone, using pure statistics based on your 99.9%.
You need that book statistics for dummies.

beevul: Second, you don't just get to count 75 years worth of those who did against 1 year of those who didn't. Heres your math, genius: 79,970,000 x 75 = 5,997,750,000

This is just utterly stupid math, be ashamed. YOU set the one year parameter, not I.
If 0.1% of drivers get into a major car death accident over the course of one year, you think the overall 0.1% driver accident death rate will hold true for all drivers over the course of their driving, whether 50 years or 75 years? It can only go UP, as more and more drivers will have been involved in an accidental car death - it just won't be the same drivers every year getting into accidents. New drivers added to the pool would also be subject to the same yearly (approx.) 0.1% rate.

beevul: You've done the impossible. I expected less than nothing from you in terms of a response, and the bullshit you're piously trying to peddle qualifies as less than less-than-nothing.

It's not impossible to refute you, it's actually quite simple & pleasurable. You haven't refuted anything whatsoever, & your rebuttal is something a middle school arithmetic student might proffer. The only BS comes from beevul.
You. are. out. of. your. league.
You could have pieced it together better had you bothered to read & study what I reposted previously on this thread; note I changed 'use' to 'misuse' in para 2, from original. Note beevul's sig line laughably contends only 0.1% of gun owners 'misuse' or have 'misused' guns:

here is beevul's signature line: 99.9 percent of gun owners do not shoot or kill anyone. Focus on the .1 percent who misuse guns, and leave the rest of us who don't, and our guns, the hell alone. Member of the 99.9 percent.

My previous repost: You do realize that is for one year don't you? When you take your 99.9% over the course of a gun owner's lifetime of 75 years, the pure percentage of gun owner's per capita who would shoot or kill someone rises to near 5.5%. But then this doesn't account for multiple shootings by one individual so the 5% would be lower, perhaps 2% - 3%. Not that high but dramatically higher than your 0.1% figure. http://www.rapidtables.com/calc/math/Exponent_Calculator.htm

Considering 'illicit' misuse of firearms, over the course of a gun owner's life this percentage would increase dramatically, due to accident shootings whether with or without consequence; shooting at property like stop signs & lights; brandishing; reported & unreported violent crimes with guns; myriad of misdemeanor offenses; - the percentage would likely be from 20 to 40% of gun owners illicitly using any of their firearms over the course of their lifetimes.
So beevul, is it the 20% to 40% (imo) of those gun owners who illicitly will use firearms over the course of their lifetimes that we should focus on with preventative laws? or should we leave them 'the hell alone'?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=181601