The argument is saying:
# of People killed by GB = # of People killed by lightning on Golf Courses = # of People killed by Blenders
So, the conclusion is GB is as dangerous as Golf Courses or Blenders.
Author is assuming the amount of quantity used in each case is the same. Let's break this.
Option E clearly says Blenders are used in very big quantity than Golf Courses, which in turn are used more than GB. Hence, A weakener.
(A) Although the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses each year is very small, the total number of lightning fatalities is many times greater.
: We need to compare GB with others. No comparison here, so incorrect(B) Electric blenders are among the safest household appliances; were the author to compare fatalities from electrical appliances in general, she would get a much higher figure.
Same as A.(C) Most people would rather take their chances with blenders and golf games than with grizzly bears.
: What people would do is irrelevant as it is not telling us which is more dangerous.(D) Bears in general—including black, brown, and cinnamon bears, as well as grizzly bears—kill many more people than do electric blenders.
: Bears other than GB are OFS.(E) Statistics show that the number of times people use electric blenders each year exceeds the number of times people play golf each year, which in turn far exceeds the number of contacts people have with grizzly bears each year.
Correct, for the reasons outlined above.