Basically, Anytime that gov't funding has been proposed for researching anything related to gun violence, the NRA runs a campaign, and gets the funding blocked.
And you doubt that there's folk and organisations that do the opposite? I think you're being one-sided. Few folk in America get killed by not being allowed to own a gun, since the great majority is allowed to. A whole bunch get killed by killers who are allowed to own guns, and like you said, 1/6 shootings are accidental, so wouldn't you think that there'd be a whole bunch more string-pulling from the other side?
I'm in favor of banning guns to reduce accidental shootings and deaths, as 1/6 of shootings are accidental, and 3/40 of deaths related to gun violence are accidental.
There are roughly 80k accidental shootings in America, and 11k deaths from shooting murder and accidental shootings each year, affecting less than 0.003% folk. To put it in perspect, less than 3 out of 100k folk are affected. Then take out how many folk would die since they could not shield themselves from a violent crime of some kind. And then ask, is it worth it? Far more folk are killed by heart illness, so should we gaol folk who essentially poison folk by putting cholesterol and other unhealthy stuff in foods, and illegalise foods too much in cholesterol? Or cars, or other things that bring about illness? Draw a line in a sensible mark.
