To a certain extend it makes sense that more readily available guns cause more shootings, but I highly doubt that it's a simple linear relationship.
If I don't have access to a gun I can't go on a rampage shooting. If a friend of mine has a gun I could go on a rampage shooting, but I'm probably less likely to do it on impulse. If anybody in my household owns a gun I can likely go on a rampage shooting whenever I like. But if I own 10 guns I don't see how that makes a rampage shooting any more likely.
The proper statistic would be rampage shooting per household with at least one gun. But even that's probably still very flawed (are dangerous people more likely to own guns?)
If I don't have access to a gun I can't go on a rampage shooting. If a friend of mine has a gun I could go on a rampage shooting, but I'm probably less likely to do it on impulse. If anybody in my household owns a gun I can likely go on a rampage shooting whenever I like. But if I own 10 guns I don't see how that makes a rampage shooting any more likely.
The proper statistic would be rampage shooting per household with at least one gun. But even that's probably still very flawed (are dangerous people more likely to own guns?)