Again, [the] assumptions [made in the post] make that percentage much higher than it actually is since (a) undoubtedly more households have firearms but don’t report them, (b) households with firearms will typically have more than just one, and may have several, (c) one firearm likely accounted for more than one of the 8,775 murders, and (d) the vast majority of the murders were likely committed with firearms that were illegally possessed!Read the whole post here: http://www.conservativecommune.com/2012/08/perspective-are-firearm-murders-a-significant-statistic/
Even so, slightly more than one one-thousandth of one percent of gun owners is the highest amount you are going to be able to implicate in murder by firearm, despite all the generous assumptions made in favor of the gun control side.
That does not speak to a winning argument IMHO.
According to Gary Kleck, Ph.D. one of the foremost authorities on firearms statistics, "depending on which figures you prefer to use, anywhere from 800,000 on up to 2.4, 2.5 million defensive uses of guns against human beings -- not against animals -- by civilians each year." Full interview available here. Even using the lowest defensive use figure of 800,000 per year, that means for each murder committed with a firearm, over 90 people protected themselves from predatory criminals by defensive presentation of a firearm, often without a shot being fired. That's 90 good guys preventing a rape, murder or robbery for every bad guy killing someone. Given those numbers, mandating training and lawful carry of a personal firearm makes far more sense than gun control.