That's a neat statistic.  Problem is, it's just a statistic and doesn't mean anything.  Stats can be used to support any argument.  

The lawless and governments (forgive the redundancy) will always have weapons.  The lawful must always have access to the equivalent weapons to defend themselves from said lawless, else they will be trampled upon.  If guns didn't exist, this discussion would be about swords, because swords are designed to kill.

Guns also serve another purpose regularly overlooked by the anti-gun crowd.  They are an effective deterrent against crime.  Using the Bob and George scenario, if Bob knew George was armed, he'd think twice about coming over.  If he still decided he was going to go "visit" George, the sound of George's 12-gauge cocking might deter him still.  If that still wasn't enough, seeing the said 12-gauge pointed at him might change his mind.  George's chances of survival are significantly improved by him being able to legally and lawfully own and use a gun.

The same can be said if all Bob was interested in was George's bitcoins.  Aside from an encrypted wallet, without a gun, all George could do when facing Bob and his illegal gun is beg and plead to please not take his hard mined bitcoins.

Guns are not the problem.  The lawless are.  The solution is to correct the lawlessness.  Then the day would come that guns are not needed for self defense and would only be used for recreation.

M