The letter writer from Pine River (April 11, Echo Journal) wrote, "Despite all the attacks by gun-control advocates, no one has ever been able to refute (John) Lott's simple, startling conclusion that 'more guns mean less crime.'"
The real question is, "Has the link between more guns and less crime been proven beyond a reasonable doubt?" A search on the internet certainly reveals diverse opinions on the question.
The conclusion is, however, much too simple. If all the gun owners in Pine River buy another shotgun, would crime in Pine River go down? Or, if all the people in Pine River who didn't own a shotgun were induced to buy one, would crime be reduced to zero? Or, as the number of people who bought a shotgun increased, would crime level off at some point where more guns did not reduce crime? If every person in the country owned a gun, would horrific crimes committed using a gun cease?
"More guns means less crime" is simply an unrealistic, simplistic solution to a very complex problem.