Gun Control will not make a meaningful difference in the US

"Can you confirm my inferences, and correct me if I missed anything?" There is one correction I would like to make, while you make sure to understand my point so that we are on the same page(which I greatly admire) there is one thing you have misinterpreted. You state that I claim: "You claim that gun violence does not matter because..." This was not my message, the title of this debate should have been better written and I regret not thinking about the title longer. It should not state "Gun Control will not make a meaningful difference in the US" it should state "Stricter Gun Control will not make a meaningful difference in the US". A better way to phrase it would be "Gun violence does not matter currently, the death toll because of it is low and there are larger issues presents which require our immediate attention, when gun violence rises it will need attention" (meanwhile gun deaths are going down which can be seen at the FBI.gov link) Everything else correlates with what I believe and I am glad that my point got across with a small amount of misunderstanding. Please keep in mind that my views are subject to change if and when tangible evidence can be provided to refute my point. This is taken from what you understood of my point, but I'd like to expand on it a bit because it is both blunt and harsh "gun-law advocates who claim their goal is to save lives are liars. They are liars because they are"t focusing on bigger problems." The reason this controversial statement has validity in my mind is simple. If one is concerned with human lives they should look objectively at how to save the most amount of lives, people who support gun control and invest resources into it couldn't have done the research because if they did they would realize something like heart disease or medical malpractice is a far more urgent problem in America. "Theoretically, how high would the numbers have to be for you to recognize gun control as a system worth reforming?" Truth is this is a very difficult question. I am not sure about exact numbers but I would start worrying about it once it became significant i.e started rivaling other major death causes. As I look back at my last statement I find it would help put things into perspective with a little math. As stated, 7000ish deaths divided by 40 is 0.57% of all deaths. I did however state that medical malpractice takes 500 a day, 7000ish divided by 500= 14%. It is astonishing that of all the deaths in America one thing is responsible for 14% of them and it is completely preventable, I think gun violence should become significant before we try and correct it, for now all we are doing is fighting back and forth on something that is so clearly insignificant. "Finally, are we debating the problems with the current gun laws in American, or rather focusing on whether it"s even worth debating?" I would say these are the two sides of the debate, should we debate current gun laws in America? Or is it too insignificant. The debates title is a statement we must agree or disagree with, I agree that stricter gun control will not make a meaningful difference in the US. The other point being that Stricter gun control would have a meaningful difference. "I ask, considering your opening statement makes you an apparent proponent of doing something more productive than talking about gun laws, "gun issues in America are talked about a lot, but that doesn't mean they are important."" This statement was created to fit my argument against the media. Truth is it is important to make sure people know it is unimportant, seeing as the media will never do it for us.