[WS:] I do not think the stats that you quote supports the point you are trying to make. The 20k suicides arguably would have been committed by other means if guns were unavailable, so we are left with 11k homicides and a rather small number of accidents. Accidents are obviously regrettable but they are bound to happen, so you would need to confiscate all guns in private hands to prevent them - which I do not think is a reasonable stance. Therefore, the only bone of contention is the 11k homicides. BTW, latest numbers are lower, in the vicinity of 8.6k http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8 but still guns account for over two thirds (67%) of all homicides. Of these about 12 % are estimated to be gang related and thus unlikely to be affected by any any gun regulation or even total ban on private guns. This leaves us with about 7.4 gun related homicides - or about 2,4 per 100,000 population.
Again, the number is regrettable, but before we jump to any conclusions, let us answer this simple question - what would it take to significantly reduce this number? Obviously, a total confiscation of all privat eguns would probably do the trick, but this solution is not feasible - both legally and practically. So we are left with some kind of regulations.
Table 8 in the FBI stats that I just quoted says that 6.2k (about 72%) of all firearm related homicides are committed with handguns and only 323 with rifles - which makes it quire obvious that attempts to regulate rifles military style or otherwise, will not do the trick. It is simply smoke and mirror. We need to regulate handguns - and that is an uphill battle, both legally and practically. The only sensible regulation in this area is a thorough background check - which is feasible politically and practically - and perhaps gun ownership registration program to make it easier to prevent legally owned guns to fall into the wrong hands - which is still feasible but a much harder sell politically.
So the bottom line is that the most we can do is to introduce thorough background checks and - if we are very lucky - gun registration program.
Now what do you think will be the effect of these regulations on homicide rates? Before you answer consider that there is the estimated number of over 300 million guns in private hands. These guns will not go away. So even if we accept your claim that there is a definitive link between gun ownership and homicide rates - gun regulations are unlikely to make any dent in homicides, at least in the near future.
So if I were concerned with bring down violent crime rates, I would look elsewhere e..g. try to get rid of the culture of violence that thoroughly permeates the American society.
Disclaimer: I do not have a gun, never had one, and I am not planning to buy one either. I despise the NRA and fellow travelers, and most gun rights advocates I met in my life were right wing assholes whom I tried to avoid as a plague. So I am not arguing from the position of self-interest or "motivated cognition" as it is called in psychology - I am just trying to be rational.
-- Wojtek
"An anarchist is a neoliberal without money."