That would require some level of imagination 
A talent many seem to lack.
And I agree, the self defence/home defence argument for fire arms is nonsense. And Iâm sure it drives some of it.
I just meant plain dumb machismo seemed to out way actual fear. Put into the same category as motorcyclists who donât wear helmets/leathers.
I agree, a lot of macho egoâs canât stand the reality of human frailty (Powerlessness). Instead they play out their GI Joe fantasies to afford their ego the delusion of power (Strength / invincibility and other comic book schtick). Fear is quite the motivator though, the âwhat ifâ scenario is used to âsellâ everything from an automatic assault riffle to insurance. Ironically they call it âthe land of the freeâ, where is the freedom in fear or being driven to the delusion of âheroâ in death scenario extremesâ?
When I was out there it was reported 1 in 3 households had guns. thatâs 40 million households. You cant boil all that down into simple arguments.
I know how many deaths are caused by firearms there, its sickening. some 30,000+. (20,000 suicides 
) The only take away is out of a country with so many gun owners, they have decided that is acceptable. For now anyway.
Accepting the unacceptable, overriding the conscience is a great way to go nuts -as an individual or a nation.
Everything is a balance of risk vs reward. You would lose you mind worrying about everything, there is that fear again.
Imagining for a moment that 1 in 3 households here in the UK held firearms poses the question:
âWould I need a gun then?â
A tough call and one I hope we donât have to face (import) along with tainted chicken, monetized health and ice cream potatoes.
You have to look at the historical context though. The Wild West wasnât that long ago, just over 100 years. A lot of the States was not really bound by the rule of law. I imagine that guns were used for subsistence hunting as well.
When the fear of a violent intruder onto your land was real, guns were a rational choice. Then the law enforcement had guns, everyone had them.
In Europe none of this was ever a thing. Weâve had effective law enforcement for much longer, and little to no subsistence hunting for centuries. Guns never made sense here.
Once you have most people with guns, how do you get rid of them? Who wants to be the only unarmed person when it turns ugly?
It would take some really imaginative policies to reduce gun ownership by much, and it would cost a progressive government a lot of political capital. Itâs no surprise that they see affordable care as a better target, it will save more people.
Itâs the future
You still seem to be assuming all gun purchases/ownership are driven by self defence/intent on violence/delusions of heroism.
I just donât see it like that, Iâm a total pacifist, yet I still enjoyed shooting at the range. I still rather admire the craftsmanship and construction of many of them.
I did archery for a few years here is that ok because itâs less lethal? Where do you draw that line? Many people still shoot and own firearms here, is that driven by fear?
Iâm going to be boring and play whataboutism.
I like drinking alcohol. I enjoy it. Alcohol is hugely damaging. Some 7000 related deaths a year here (11 per 100k). Plus the societal cost, cost to the health system etc.
Do I need to drink alcohol? No. I just want to. Should it be banned? Restrict its sale even more? What about all the people who are employed in the industry?
Why is the pleasure I derive from drinking alcohol any different to the pleasure people derive from owning and collecting firearms? How many deaths due to alcohol are acceptable? Or drink drivers? Or violent assaults? To have alcohol available means accepting a level of that.
When I lived out there I canât say it was much of a concern either, or with my parents still out there itâs not much of a concern now.
Iâd love to see some of the laws changed there, but I realise how hard that is. If you want to just carry on assuming itâs because they are all scared violent fantasists you go ahead.
In the end it comes down to this. The analogy between guns and alcohol isnât great - I think hardly anyone drinks alcohol to enable their criminal activities, or on grounds of self-protection. And the type of pleasure that alcohol gives is hard to achieve any other legal way, whereas the joy of range-shooting with a gun isnât radically different from the joy of range-shooting with, say, a bow, or an air rifle.
But the bottom line is whether the majority of voters are prepared to enforce change. And if theyâre OK with the status quo then, well, they are. It is their country, after all. We donât have to go there and we donât let them bring their guns here.
VB
I wasnât trying to make a direct analogy. Just how as a society we accept a level of harm from these things.
I agree though, like I said above, limit ammo capacity to 1-3 shots in everything. For recreation like hunting or shooting at the range it would have minimal impact on enjoyment. Open carry of any gun, let alone assault rifles at things like protests is horrifying. Fingers crossed Biden gets in and at least a step in the right direction is taken.
On this I actually think there is, like the majority of voters voted for Clinton. I do think other things override it though, like abortion, there is a good chunk that vote republican purely on the basis of that.
Donât kid yourself.
There is no chance there will be any major gun law changes.
They believe it is a right/duty, to own a gun
They are not going to give away a RIGHT!
The whole American culture is built around guns.
Every law enforcement officer, at any level, carries a gun, even private security guards.
They are everywhere, everyday.
Their favourite bumper sticker is,
âOutlaw guns, and only outlaws will have gunsâ
That scares them to death. They do not trust the fully armed and numerous police officers to protect them. They must have the right to protect themselves.
And they do believe killing things is a recreation.
I can hope. But yes I realise its not going to happen.
After the arrests last week regarding the plot to kidnap Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, there was chat on CNN about the fact that it was legal for people to carry assault rifles into state buildings! That has to make protecting the governor somewhat more challenging.
I enjoy target shooting with an air rifle and clay pigeon shooting.
I honestly canât see the point of anything else in the general publics hands.
Thatâs my personal feelings on the matter.
The curse of the Second AmendmentâŚ
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Like so much of history, itâs been wilfully misinterpreted and decontextualised for the last 100 years.
Framed in the mid-C18th, its only intent was to make the rapid mobilisation of public militias to defend the nascent States from plunderous European empires an easy matter - in a time of muzzle-loading flintlocks.
ALL the rest of the issue is down to a very rich and very influential gun-lobby who has obvious vested-interests in keeping paranoid rednecks tooled-up forevermoreâŚ
Interesting that you only buy a gun in Norway to kill yourself
And a symbol of rights and an indicator of some rather uncivilized thought.
How many guns are designed for the range? (ie non lethal, excluding air rifles) I do get what you are saying about engineering / workmanship certainly - but I can still do that without a firing pin.