I read this, and a couple of things bothered me. One is that, once again, they're citing numbers from the anti-gunners. The other is that the whole article just "felt" anti to me. I'm not sure what it was, but while the original article seemed impartial, I finished reading this one with a bad taste in my mouth.
I guess I need to get off my butt, re-research that whole gun death thing, and deliver a scathing letter to the editor. Sigh.