Quote Originally Posted by daviddem View Post
You could start by not teaching kids that guns are "cool" or the standard mean of protecting oneself, but rather that using one against somebody should be a last resort necessary evil in totally extreme situations. And also teach them that deciding to use one in defense puts them at increased risk of getting shot themselves. And that their approach should be to be reluctant to owe one, but they can make that very serious choice after reviewing and balancing the risks and benefits of ownership. And that it is perfectly normal for someone making that choice to have to be carefully scrutinized and investigated and attend intensive training not only in gun handling but also in situation/people handling.

We do have home burglaries and car theft, but I'd bet proportionally many less end up in a bloodbath. We probably have less home burglaries and car theft than America because we have less people who get to the point they have no other choice than stealing for a living. The reason we have less people getting to that point is because social policies are generally more developed in Europe (what some derisively call communism and welfare US-side). There are countries in the world where nobody is poor and they hardly have any crime at all.
Here's the thing though. U.S. politics are rather draconian at times. Whether or not gays should be able to get married is actually a hot topic right now.

I can say with a high level of confidence that social welfare and gun rights laws are not going to significantly swing towards the European model for a very long time, if ever. Indeed, they are going in the other direction.

I am personally more concerned with finding the optimal play within a relatively more violent culture, where criminals are much much much more likely to have guns, than I am about comparing cultures. That is probably the best way to put it.


I may not be a firearm specialist, but I know enough to figure that an AR15 has no place in the hands of a school teacher mother of a mentally disturbed kid. Hell, it has no place in the hands of almost any civilian whatsoever. If it was not clear, I was referring to the term in the sense "military style rifles that can be (and are) turned into fully automatic rifles pending minor modifications".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
Many gun enthusiasts only consider a firearm with full auto or burst capability to be an assault weapon. Personally I don't like to scoff at or degrade people for arguable misuse over a very ambiguous term. Just be aware of it.

About conceal carry or open carry, if somebody thinks they should carry a gun everywhere they go, I would work from the default assumption that something is not quite right with them and not grant any such permit unless there are truly compelling reasons to.
just providing this for informational purposes only: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceal..._United_States

cliffs notes: in at least 40 out of 50 U.S. states civilians can concealed carry a handgun in public (typically with classes/training), estimated 8,000,000 active permits in the country, which comes out to less than 3% of the population.

Most people are prone to making extremely poor decisions even in mildly stressful or unusual situations unless properly trained. Just look at the stupid shit fishes do at the poker tables when you raise. Also someone does not need to be chronically drunk/hotheaded to do dumb shit, he only needs to be drunk/hotheaded once.

Just take a stroll around the gun nuts forums. Those guys who get a hard on stroking their M16 with laser sight and grenade launcher, or when they look at pictures of special forces, or fantasying on how they would do the bad guys in different hypothetical scenarios are precisely some of the people who should not be let anywhere near a gun.
I've alluded to this a few times here but there are definitely people out there who take the 'right to bear arms way too far. You mentioned a [m203] grenade launcher. I might be wrong about some of this but the launchers themselves are very tightly regulated (NFA), and as I understand it, explosive grenades themselves are even harder to get a hold of. This is a good thing. There is obviously no need for a civilian to be launching grenades around. I only make that seemingly obvious point because there are some people out there who think that anything the military owns, civilians should be able to own too. Think grenade launchers and full auto machine guns on the low end but don't restrict your thought process to small arms only. Keep in mind that this is only a tiny minority and in no way reflects on us somewhat reasonable types.

You may not take us seriously, but from our side we watch in disbelief as you keep hanging on to your unrestricted gun rights as if your life depended on them, while you and your kids keep getting shot over and over again.

If it was not so sad it would be laughable.
I can understand that. If I lived in a much more peaceful society I would have much less of a desire to own a firearm. As you have astutely noted, there are a lot of other factors at play including the overall politics and standing of people in the country.