Because I'm lazy, here also are the conclusions Linoge comes to:
1. The hypothesis of "more guns = more deaths" is demonstrably false over the past 28 years of documented American history. The number of firearms in civilian circulation have been steadily increasing over that time period, and the number of firearm-related fatalities has not been equivalently increasing. However, again, since there seems to be some confusion on the concept, proving "more guns = more deaths" to be false does not prove "more guns = fewer deaths" to be true. Doing so would require accounting for far more variables than I did, and involve far more interesting math than I employed, and require controlling for far more variables than I care to.
2. When comparing raw numbers, there is a weak, negative correlation between the number of firearms in America and the number of firearm-related fatalities, and that correlation seems to become more negative with additional data.
3. When comparing rates, there is a strong, negative correlation between the number of firearms per person in America and the number of firearm-related fatalities per person, and that correlation seems to become more negative with additional data.
"More guns" causes "more gun deaths"? That's what the lying liars at the Brady Campaign keep saying. But when you consider what an idiotic and insensitive concept "Gun Death" is to begin with (why is a woman killed by her ex-boyfriend with a gun more important than if he killed her with his bare hands?), and how often it is that what Anti-rights cultists paint as a "good boy who just snapped" is actually a repeat offender with a long list of felonies to his name, who is out on the street (again) as a plea bargain when he should be locked up for life, you have to wonder why those who push for more gun control are trying to take away my rights.
Come and get them. I dare ya'.