In gun debate, both sides have evidence to back them up

"There are still fewer gun deaths in India than the States, as far as I know. Am I wrong on that?"

Only if you go by the official figures. Most of the crime related figures in India (especially the rural parts) are fudged so no using comparing the 2 countries.

Most gun deaths in the US are suicides so leave that out.

Moreover, the blanket figures of gun deaths does not cover the rest of the crimes (like robbery, rapes, election related crimes and usurping of property) where guns are involved.

On the whole, an average American is safer than an average Indian, because US citizens can legally buy guns for defending themselves and their families.

"Which country is that? I only ask because Japan has "some of the strictest gun laws" and there is no "proliferation of illegal guns and a flourishing illegal gun manufacturing industry"

Obviously I am not talking about Japan.

"Please back up your assertions with some data, otherwise they’re just empty statements."

Oh I have data to back up my statements all right. My country has the second highest number of guns in the hands of civilians after the US in absolute terms, inspite of having some of the strictest gun laws. More than 90% of these guns are illegally manufactured and procured. Some parts of my country where gun culture thrives would resemble the Wild West where guns are used to settle disputes, usurp land, project power and win elections by indulging in 'booth capturing'.

EvilBuddha

My country has some of the strictest gun laws (on paper) so that it is almost impossible for an average person to own a firearm. This has only led to a proliferation of illegal guns and a flourishing illegal gun manufacturing industry. Strict gun laws don't always work, and the places where they have worked have other factors like low population and efficient police and justice system to back up the gun legislation.

Which country is that? I only ask because Japan has "some of the strictest gun laws" and there is no "proliferation of illegal guns and a flourishing illegal gun manufacturing industry".

A very balanced article.

My country has some of the strictest gun laws (on paper) so that it is almost impossible for an average person to own a firearm. This has only led to a proliferation of illegal guns and a flourishing illegal gun manufacturing industry. Strict gun laws don't always work, and the places where they have worked have other factors like low population and efficient police and justice system to back up the gun legislation.

"I don't understand the focus on only mass shootings. Wouldn't it be good to reduce the number of all shootings, including suicides?"

Yeah, and on socalled assault rifles because not many murders are done with rifles and not even all mass shootings. The recent ones in Atlanta and colorado used handguns.

Even by their very restrictive definition they found 112 mass shootings. In the UK over the same period where there were strict gun control measures in place there were 3. One of those responsible for bringing in the very strict measures currently in place. All the other factors they purport are more causative are also to be found in places in the UK.

Statistically, mass shootings tend to occur in large, densely populated states with higher income and education levels per capita.

Well, that makes the solution obvious, doesn't it? Reductions in income and education will solve the problem.

Strangely, statistics comparing the US with other countries are not taken into account.

I wonder if the authors are entirely unbiased. Could they themselves be gun owners? Could they be members of the NRA? That would be far more relevant than their university qualifications.

I don't understand the focus on only mass shootings. Wouldn't it be good to reduce the number of all shootings, including suicides?