Reply #1: that is some of the most faulty reasoning I've ever seen

[harmonicon]

Guns obviously are a large PART of the problem. All of these killings listed involved guns. In some cases, one person with a gun can kill another person with a gun, but that doesn't mean that if more people had guns there would be fewer killings. Take this for example: "A killer's spree was derailed when an off-duty officer who had his gun and the courage to use it went into harms way at Trolley Square Mall in Utah. Tragically, five innocents were killed. Taking his attack into a posted 'gun-free' zone, this predator was stopped from killing many more by an armed sheepdog." Wouldn't the total number of casualties have been 0 if no guns had been involved?