I have only scanned the paper Dependence of the Firearm-Related Homicide Rate on Gun Availability: A Mathematical Analysis but I suspect I see several invalid assumptions missed by the 11 people that supposedly did the peer reviews.
- It appears they only consider cases where the defender shoots and kills the attacker. They don’t include cases where the display of a gun by the defender prevents the attack or is sufficient to stop the attack.
- It appears they only consider case where the attacker has a gun and do not include attackers that use a different weapon or no weapon.
- It may be that they include the death of the attacker in the total homicide rate they model and desire the minimization of.
- The right to keep and bear arms defends against the possibility of a tyrannical government. They do not account for the lives lost in tyrannical government scenarios when the people do not have guns.
Regardless of how the number come out people have a specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms. That is not subject to infringement no matter what the model says the homicide rate would benefit from restrictions. Would a projected lower homicide rate be sufficient justification to infringe on the 13th Amendment? The answer is not just “no”, but “HELL NO!” And the same applies to the 2nd Amendment.