I can’t even see where they listed the states and ranked them in order. Did I miss it?
No.
State 1 has 100 guns and 10 mass shootings.
State 2 has 10 guns and 1 mass shooting.
In both states 10% of the guns were used for mass shootings but the state with more guns had more mass shootings.
State 1 has 100 guns and 20 mass shootings.
State 2 has 10 guns and 1 mass shooting.
State 1 had a higher percentage of guns used in mass shootings and more mass shootings.
You could find that a lower percentage of guns was used but you CAN’T know that unless you know the actual numbers.
It’s okay Samm, math is hard for a lot of people.
Nope, you didn’t miss anything … he was just ramblin. 
That was fun. Now try real numbers instead of making ■■■■ up.
Like I said Samm, show your work. You can’t just make an assumption like you did without seeing the actual numbers.
It’s okay man, math is hard.
Notice the study cited that a “A 10% increase in gun ownership was associated with an approximately 35% higher rate of mass shootings after adjusting for key factors,”.
Putting into question even further your bogus claim without actual numbers.
That just goes to demonstrate the silliness of the study. Correlation is not causation. They did not consider any other factors in association with the shootings. It’s fake science.
lol - like you know what was considered. 
Don’t let it stop you though from just throwing out these chestnuts.
Tell us, what were the “key factors” they adjusted for in arriving at that number Samm? As long as you looked so deeply into this and all.
Quote from the study:
“WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THIS TOPIC
More permissive state gun laws and higher levels of gun ownership are associated with higher levels of gun homicide and gun suicide in the US”
Lol what a joke.
You told us what was considered … the number of guns and the number of shootings. Nothing else. You’re not holding out on us are you?
Not at all.
More guns = More mass shootings. The lies of the gun huggers are crumbling around you.
Repeating over and over doesn’t make the study valid.
You and the others are in denial. It’s okay, I understand.
As always, it was in a gun free zone, so all the victims were defenseless, NO LAW ON EARTH would have prevented it, with the exception of having a police state so oppressive nobody dared violate the law, with informants including your own children, which is exactly what we will get if the left gets their way!
You may be being unreasonable. Any reasonable person could easily see …
Clearly you do not understand. There is no denial, just the ability to see that a biased study is faulty.
I know a large number of people who collectively own several thousand guns. Not one of those guns has been used to commit a single murder, let alone a mass shooting. The study is bunk and has no place in the discussion if you are serious about wanting to do something about reducing the number of mass shootings.
I live in Ohio and according to the report posted my wife and I own enough firearms for 1500 people…lol
lol - Yeah, nothing faulty about your idea that personally knowing people with guns who haven’t killed anyone debunks the study. 
Well, the percent of households in America that own a gun is about 30% so it’s pretty clear that of those with them some have quite a few. I’m sure that some here own way more than you.
No, the lack of objectivity debunks the study. It’s pseudo science.
The actual number polled is 43% … the same as it was in 1972. And that’s the percentage of households that admit to owning guns, not the percentage that actually do.
