Exactly - the margin of error for any of these stats could be 99% or 1% and we just don't have a good way to parse it. A lot is self report surveys, or dodgy guesstimates from activists from either side, so yeah - sensible discussion is difficult. I find it useful to look at it from a min max perspective - given an extreme from either end, what is reasonable in protecting safety, liberty, and other interests, and what would a proactive vs reactive policy look like, and so on.
If situation A,B,C...Z, what does the range of appropriate policies look like, and how can you translate that to different regions, cultures, population densities. One size doesn't fit all, but maybe there's a broad, dynamic way to work with these things that is really boring and sensible that won't leave people feeling their rights or safety are being trampled.
