i believe in the legalisation of guns but i dont think you should use them to kill only lame. i also believe the licenses should be much more difficult to get so only trustworthy people are able to get them. i also believe if someone is injured by a gun in defence they shouldnt be able to sue.

Guns kept in the home for protecting a family are 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an assailant.

...Need I say more?

Why yes, you do. Here's the list of things needed in order to "unpack" the statistic you want us to buy.

1. On what sample is this statistic based? Is it a random sample across all of America?

2. If not a random sample, what was the crime rate in the target community?

3. What was the time period for sampling? When was this data collected, and for how long?

4. What is the sample size? Are we trying to generalize from a tiny group?

5. How many of the "family member" gun deaths were due to suicide?

6. How many of the "family member" gun deaths were intentional murder?

7. How many potential intruders were deterred by the threat of a gun in the house?

8. How many acts of self defense did not result in the death of the intruder? How many intruders were injured, escaped, or otherwise thwarted by gun owners?

9. How many potential "family member" deaths were avoided by this deterrent?

10. Are people who are likely to have guns in the house also more likely to die from gun-related violence, whether or not they own the gun? Does slim fast "cause" obesity because it is found in greater proportion in obese households?

I think if you take these factors into account your telling statistic will tell you a much different story.

Seriously if the US government wanted to suppress its population t would use its (very large) selection of special weapons and survellience equipment.
Look at Iraq - the population were just as well armed and militariezed under Saddam as them are not, its not acccess to weapons that allows populations to rise against oppressive regimes but a nesscessary driving force and an ability to organise.

Does your definition of everyone being allowed a gun also apply to potential terrorist, child molsetors, mentally unstable people....etc.
And before you argue if everyone had guns they'd be dealt with - one well trained motivated individual can overcome several untrained panicked ones.

Do I advocate banning guns? No
But it makes sense that if you have to get a driving licence you should have to aget a gun licence.

It makes sense that if you buy a gun you should learn how to use it, I agree 100%. But with your statement,

Maybe we should first make people get ladder licences, swimming licenses, and househould cleaning supply licenses, because each of these cause more accidental deaths each year than do guns.

Also, how many accidental gun deaths do you suppose are due to use by the owner of the gun (the one who would be licensed)? By getting a driver's license, do I reduce the risk that my 8-year son will jump into the car and kill himself?

Possibly then we should let anyone drive - make a it right to be able to buy and drive a car without any idea how to drive.
Would you agree that your roads are safer without unlicenceed drivers on the roads?

Plus there is a diffrence between guns and ladders.

Yeah. The difference is, I'm afraid of ladders.

I'm not sure of the details of this statistic; my dad told me - he's a retired cop. Besides, does it really matter?

Accidental or non-accidental, high crime rate or not, whatever the answers 43x is far more than it should be, don't you agree? Even if these statistcs were taken from an LA ghetto it would still be far more deaths than there ever should have been of innocent people because one member of the family chooses to have a loaded weapon in their house.

the difference being a schoolchild is unlikely to steal his parents ladder, carry it concealled into school and use it to mow down his class.

Why would you want to do this?
Yes, and I suppose the roads are probably safest when there are no drivers on the road.

You're missing the point of my argument, so let me make it abundantly clear:

Premise 1: Only the gun owner would have to get licensed
Premise 2: The majority of accidental deaths due to guns are not caused by the owner of the gun (I'm not including hunting accidents because most states require hunters to take a gun safety course in order to obtain a hunting license).
Argument: Therefore, the majority of accidental deaths due to guns would not be influenced by mandatory licensing.

Since the majority of accidental deaths due to cars are caused by the vehicle owner (and car accidents accounted for 55 times as many deaths last year than firearms accidents), it makes sense to license drivers.