Terry,
Will this help explain?....
THE "43 TIMES" FALLACY
We have all head that "a gunowner is 43 times more likely to 
kill  a family member than intruder."  How did this  fallacy 
start?   In  a 1985 article in the New  England  Journal  of 
Medicine,  Drs. Kellerman and Reay described the proper  way 
to  calculate how many people are saved by guns compared  to 
how many are hurt by guns.  The benefits should include,  in 
the authors' own words, "cased in which burglars or  intrud-
ers are wounded or frightened away by the use or display  of 
a  firearm [and] cases in which would-be intruders may  have 
purposely avoided a house known to be armed..."
However,  when Kellerman and Reay calculated their  compari-
son, they did NOT include those cases, they only counted the 
times a homeowner KILLED the criminal.  Because only 0.1% (1 
in a 1,000) of defensive gun usage involves the death of the 
criminal,  KELLERMAN  AND REAY  UNDERSTATED  THE  PROTECTIVE 
BENEFITS OF FIREARMS BY A FACTOR OF 1,000!  They turned  the 
truth  on its head!  Why?  Kellerman  emotionally  confessed 
his anti-gun prejudice at the 1993 HELP Conference.
Honest analysis, even by Kellerman and Reay's own standards, 
shows the "43 times" comparison to be superficially  appeal-
ing, but actually a deceitful contrivance - unfortunately, a 
lie  that  is parroted by  the  well-funded  gun-prohibition 
lobby and by gullible and biased journalists.
Kevin
--- Telegard v3.09.g1/mL
---------------