32,000 people dying in car accidents is a stat but people defending themselves with guns 118 times a day isn't? How does that work?
I haven't found the source saying that people defend themselves as much without guns as with. Do you have a link?
No, the stats are that guns don't help. And you have seen the source, I've linked to it multiple time already, and you only ever ignore it. If you want the direct study for clarity:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743515001188If you want the highlights:
Of over 14,000 incidents in which the victim was present, 127 (0.9%) involved a SDGU (Self-defense gun use).
After any protective action, 4.2% of victims were injured; after SDGU, 4.1% of victims were injured.
In property crimes, 55.9% of victims who took protective action lost property, 38.5 of SDGU victims lost property, and 34.9% of victims who used a weapon other than a gun lost property.
Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that SDGU is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.
And the whole things covers both at and away from home incidents.
Ok, here's the sources.
https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/34837-
http://louderwithcrowder.com/australian-gun-ownership-rises-gun-crime-remains-low-america-still-at-fault/
First of those is just a link spam, most of which seems to be things we've already covered. Second link doesn't seem to understand how stats work. First graph's too poorly defined to be of use, second cuts off everything before the gun control legislation and so is useless for comparison, and the third shows the opposite of what they're claiming. Immediately after the ban there's a decrease. Yes, there's an upwards spike later, but there always is (just like there are before): any stats have uneven lines like that. indeed, the largest spike is 2001, long after the ban, and since then it's plummeted. What matters is the average, and I recall seeing another source which pointed out that the rate of change after gun control is actually a much steeper decrease, which I think I've linked to before.
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2016/06/26/gun-control-did-it-reduce-suicides-and-homocides-in-australia/Not the source I was thinking of, and biased, but you don't have to read it: just scroll down to the charts resulting from plain, unbiased stats. There's no increase, and no sign of people relying on other means to do harm: and it's a much more reliable form of graph too, plotting simply the data points rather than taking the freedom to imagine whatever curves you want between them.