Man you got me I'm a minority hillbilly who follows the NRA and watches faux news. Got me.

You apparently have an issue with reading comprehension, what part of fuck the NRA did you not get?

The studies from Harvard are well known flawed. Their DGU study assumed that for a DGU to happen a shot had to be fired, this is just single example of shit data. Most DGUs the firearm is never even drawn, usually it's shown and that's enough to de-escalate the situation.

I'll ask you, how do you plan on banning and getting rid of 450+ million firearms? You going to collect them all?

The CDC used to do legit studies, but since the whole "we're going to make a link that proves guns are bad" a lot of their shit has gone down hill. The level of pressure from Bloomberg "stop and frisk" and his ilk create a lot of bullshit studies that are designed to say one thing.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

During 2000--2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, "shall issue" concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.(Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) This report briefly describes how the reviews were conducted, summarizes the Task Force findings, and provides information regarding needs for future research.

Additionally, firearms studies often fail to note potential biases associated with measurement of outcomes not directly associated with the law in question (e.g., using victims rather than agents of violence in the assessment of CAP laws). In conclusion, the application of imperfect methods to imperfect data has commonly resulted in inconsistent and otherwise insufficient evidence with which to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws in modifying violent outcomes.

The ivory tower you sit in is so bright no one is able to look at it...