The media publicity following the recent Connecticut Massacre may be pithily summarized as “how many more murders before guns are more restricted?”. Because of the way cumulative arithmetic works, the total number of people killed will only ever increase (unless we master reincarnation technology). Every new attack that occurs can only increase the volume of the shriek.

The phrasing appeals to emotion, but it is a deviously misleading framing of the situation. It conceals the fact that people with guns also do a lot of good.

The exact number are hard to come by, but something like a hundred thousand events per year may occur in the USA where guns were used defensively. (That does not mean someone had to shoot – brandishing can be enough.) Some huge number of times, people felt in enough danger to threaten lethal force. In some fraction of those, a robbery, a murder, a rape was prevented. And because of the laws of cumulative arithmetic, the total number of people saved will also only ever increase.

Which “body count” is greater? Beats me. But to pretend that the positive side doesn’t exist grotesquely distorts the topic. (If your news reporting has only covered one set of the numbers, consider going around your information gatekeepers.)