Please raise your hand if you think legally owning a firearm absolves you of ALL criminal liability.

[Scootaloo]

52. Just some issues with your numbers

One, it hinges on conviction. In Texas. Not to bash your state, but the topic of the thread the OP links to is about a Texas man who guns down his neighbor, in the neighbor's driveway, and is using Texas' fast-and-loose "castle" legislation to defend himself. I have to assume there's precedent for that sort of thing working in Texas, else his attorney might have tried a different angle.

While I do understand the reason to sticking by convictions, you surely understand that in reality there's still a lot of wriggle room there; if nothing else, there's certainly crimes for which the suspect has not been captured or even identified. it would srrm to me that it's the homicides themselves that bear looking at, and not just hte convictions.

Two, CHL holders are not the be-all end-all of legal gun owners. Are you trying to say that out of 580 homicides that resulted in criminal conviction, only that one was committed with a legally-owned firearm?

Now, don't mistake me, I'm not trying to demonize anyone here. I just don't care much for the sort of logic you appear to be giving me that says, out of all those convictions, every single one of them - save one - was perpetrated with an illegally-obtained firearm, and thus the perpetrator was not a "gun owner."