The basic premise that “violent crime is violent crime regardless of weapon” is simply untrue.
barb dybwad

Nice cherry pick, 160 incidents with an “active shooter” and less than 5 incidents of civilian involvement…..then how does that account for over 1800 plus civilians killing perps who are armed and dangerous and not being charged; they shoot first when confronted and and do not wait for the perp to shoot them, hence no active shooter and your statistics although accurate, become rather meaningless if you let the perp go active. The FBI also documents every year actual incidents where firearms STOP violent crimes as they are happening or before they happen with a firearm by a civilian, that number varies year to year , but stays in the 200,000 to 250,000 range which makes your analysis approximately one tenth of a percent of the bigger picture of “Are guns good or bad in the hands of legitimate citizens?” They seem to stop more crimes than they perpetrate, especially for those who are not physically robust as in women and older folks; they tend to be great equalizers. As an aside the FBI notes in their report that they believe they are only seeing 10 to 15% of the incidents, since local law enforcement does not report many of these incidents and many are also not reported to law enforcement by people, since the perps were scared off. They estimate the total to be closer to 2 million!

Go to England where violent crime has risen to the point where home invasions are conducted with the residents at home during dinner as the perps sledge the door down, beat & rape the folks inside, take what they will and go their merry way. All because there are few firearms to stop this BS. They are a far more violent society then us in total violent crime, and ask the Germans how they like what is going on over there with no protection for their families……NO THANK YOU.