Let me start by apologizing for the "wordiness" of the response to follow. . . I cannot understand why Americans want to keep their "pistol permit" so badly. It's a dead given that in a country in which everyone aged 16 and above can get rights to hold a gun easily, more kills will happen. That is absolutely untrue. In Chicago, the year after handguns were outlawed. Chicago became the murder capital of the US. There will be unstable people, and there will be people with criminal intents. In a country in which a criminal actually needs to find a gun illegally, the chance of him actually turning to crime would be significantly smaller. After all, the criminal would have to first aquire a gun to be able to use it and perform a criminal act. I can obtain an firearm illegally one hell of a lot faster than I can get one legally.
In the US, on the other hand, you can simply go into a gun store and say "I want a gun". After three days or so, you'll hold it in your hand, along with a permit. Another misconception on your part. It took me a full 7 months to get my pistol permit. Each and every time I want to buy another pistol. I must submit paperwork to the County Clerk. If it has been more than 18 months since my last background check, they perform another one. It is not as easy as you would think.
Most people want to keep their guns "to protect themselves". But how much protection do the guns in reality offer, as they will be used more for "bad stuff" than protection? (How many times have you heard of someone protecting themselves successfully with said gun, compared to how many times guns have been illegally fired and/or killed random people?)I could turn this post into a novel listing instances where guns have succesfully defended their legal owner. The amount of guns used illegally are overwhelmingly illegal guns. If you own a gun illegally, a gun ban will have no affect on you.
I remember a story about a Norwegian visiting the US. He got mugged and threatened with a gun (of course, he got beat repeatedly by the man with the gun during the mugging). He then ran to a house and cried for help, banging at the door and ringing the doorbell. Did the homeowner know the guy was Norwegian?
What did the man inside the house do? He shot the man outside the door with his gun, because "the noise made by the man on the door seemed threatening", and the guy with the gun felt like enforcing his right to protect himself. If true, this is the exception, not the rule. I would be interested in reading this.
This man had just been mugged and beat into a bloody mess. Now he got gunned down because he desperately seeked help.
Of course, you can get guns in Norway as well. Unless you're a police officer (who even need special permits to even wear their guns during raids), you have to pass a hunting test, undergo firearm training and get thoroughly checked out before even aquiring said gun. If you have a history of violence, the chances of you aquiring a gun are very low. Before you are given a license to hunt in New York, you must undergo a 6 hour Hunters Safety Course. Also, as I stated above, background checks are standard before buying a concealed weapon.
This permit won't grant you the right to walk around with a .45 cal. though. It grants you the rights to wear a weapon designed for hunting. So, you can get a shotgun, a rifle or something of the likes, but you can't buy an AK47 (just an example), because it is obviously not used for hunting.
Would you feel safer in a country in which everyone had guns, including yourself (and every single weird person you've ever met on the streets), or would you feel safer in a country in which guns are as rare as white elephants?I would and I do. Criminals are much less likely to invade your home or rob you if they think you may have a gun. That is a proven fact.
Compare the killrate of USA to the killrate of Canada or Norway. True, USA holds more inhabitants, but compare the "people ratio" to the "kill ratio".
Most crimes in Norway are committed by immigrants (even though they can easily get work and welfare), when comparing the amount of people to the amount of criminal acts (5 mill Norwegians commit 3/5 of the criminal acts, while a few hundred thousand immigrants commit 2/5.) This kind of shows how Norwegians aren't "used to" say, finding a gun and shooting people, because a gun is used for hunting, not for personal protection.
When guns all of a sudden get "normal", and you can buy an AG-3 for your own personal protection, people will have a more "laid-back" attitude towards said guns. Are you trying to say that Canada has less gun violence per-capita than the US? I would be interested in seeing these statistics. I would bet my paycheck that the gun statistics include illegal firearms.
Basically, most people aren't suited/fit to enforce their own rights/lives with serious means, because most people won't be responsible enough to even hold a gun. In a country with hundreds of millions of people (and a state like Texas, to make a nice, generalizing assumption), gun-enforced protection seems to be the least favourable kind of protection, as gun-and-Captain America-loving patriots will shoot any stranger man knocking on the door, because he is invading their personal property, disturbing their peace and interfering in an aggressive way. It's their right to shoot him, as he might be dangerous. You have never been a victim of violence. I have often said that Liberals are just Republicans who have never been robbed. If you aren't going to protect yourself, who will? You want the gov't to do everything for you?
There is a huge reason why New York is tenfolds more dangerous than Oslo. Everyone can get guns (i.e. easily conceiled firearms), so crime can be committed more easily. The chances of a stranger getting robbed on the streets would be sufficiently smaller if the mugger only had the choice of using a shotgun or a big rifle, after being thoroughly examined and checked for any criminal behaviour, compared to a man getting a Glock with 2-3 clips of ammo after waiting for his permit for a couple of days and buying his gun at the local gun-store.You seem to have this delusion that if guns are outlawed, criminals will abide by this law. Making small arms illegal does not mean people will suddenly not have the means to get them. You are also making the mistake of trying to legislate the object and not the behavior. PEOPLE kill people. Guns are just the tool they use to do it. Blaming a gun for someone dying is like a fat person blaming a spoon for getting them fat. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
Basically, not a good idea unless it's the only weapon you have access to, in which case the choice between your life and theirs is obvious.
