It's because they are more civilized than most Americans, and their attitudes about gun ownership demonstrate that.
America is very civilized, it certainly isn't the wild west. Especially for the amount of firearms in circulation, statistically speaking it's almost a non-issue.
The decision to own a gun affects not only the gun owner but those around him, because a gun is a deadly weapon. Every gun-toting American adds a millisecond of insecurity to my day and my life. By their exercising their ill-granted freedom, they are diminishing mine to feel confident.
Chances are more than likely, in your neighborhood 1 out of every 2 home owners is also a firearm owner. Unless you live in a city where private ownership is banned(chicago, new york, DC, detroit, ect) in which case--only the people who break the law(criminals) have firearms. Your fears aren't based on a threat, but on your
perception of a threat. You or someone in your family is more likely to die from an aspirin overdose than from a firearm.
If I meet a speeder with road rage, for example, I have to think, "Is this person just a nut? Or is he a nut with a gun?"
And my quality of life is diminished by the fact that people with anger management problems....or alcoholism....or mental illness....can own guns and be a threat to themselves and others, including me.
It's not the gun that is the threat, it's the nut. A nut with a knife is just as bad as a nut with a car, or a nut with a gun, or a nut with a bomb. But that's aside the point. The cliche incidents of road rage and then a gun is produced is virtually non-existent. Does it happen? Sure. But it's so statistically rare it's not even worth mentioning. You're more likely to be a victim of a serial killer(10-100 people killed yearly) than a road rage incident with a firearm being produced by a nut.
Florida is often testing ground for these kinds of things. New laws are passed and people assume the sky will fall. They are wrong every time. In 2005 for instance, on October 1st--there was a
stand your ground law passed in Florida. In a nutshell, it meant that if you were attacked or felt threatened--you could
stand your ground and use deadly force(a gun). Furthermore, you were immune to prosecution and civil liability if your actions were deemed justifiable.
Well, suffice to say the gun control nuts went wild. Saying that Florida was going to be come the wild west, shootouts, skyrocketing murder rates and more. It didn't happen. As a matter of fact, less than a month after that law was passed--on October 24th 2005 Hurricane Wilma struck south Florida(the heavily dense reagons of north miami and broward county where I live). Power was out for a week, emergency crews were virtually unavailable. Gas shortages and more. The perfect situation for anarchy to break out, and it just didn't happen. Today, years later--we're doing just fine. Florida isn't the wild west, and the violent crime rate is far lower than other areas with very harsh gun control laws.
That is such revisionist BS. There was no real cause and effect in that situation. Full gun control was not established until 1938 (which was extending prior Weimar Republic law from a decade earlier) - long after the Nazis were in power and the Wehrmacht under their thumb. The Jews never had the base even if armed to prevent what happened. Gun control from the 1928 Law was actually aimed at the Nazis and the Communists to prevent them from having private armies.
I'm not anti-gun but don't use bogus fact challenged arguments.
Actually his claims are true. If you study other genocides and other atrocities committed by various governments throughout history--there is always one characteristic that is present:
The citizens are
always disarmed by the government beforehand. Always.
A disarmed population is a population of potential victims. This phenomena is also seen on a smaller scale. If you look into the characteristics of mass murders incidents, you will find that they invariably only occur in areas where the victims are disarmed by law.