From Australia

Yes, politicians are craven and the NRA is a terrorist group, we all know this, and corporate America including the gun industry runs the country. Yes, even in Australia, we know all this.
But when we had our one mass shooting in Australia, we decided to make gun possession illegal, and set up a surrender-your-gun program, and everybody went along with it. The society immediately recognized that having guns around was too dangerous, and got rid of them, and people readily accepted the commonsense of that, and there hasn’t been another mass shooting.
But in America after every mass shooting (which seems to be daily) people rush out (or sit at their computers) and buy more guns.
Why is the psychology of ORDINARY PEOPLE (forget the politicians and corporations) so different in the two countries? I cannot explain it. Working people’s lives in both countries are pretty similar - we all have coffee in the morning, drive the same Japanese cars, have the same number of children, work roughly the same hours (though with much more vacation in Australia), get roughly the same amount of sleep, watch the same movies, have access to the same awful video games, drink the same wines, play similarly violent forms of football, and have similar ethnic backgrounds and immigration histories.
So what gives?
How would you answer this question?

This is a good question.
One thing is, we didn’t do the gun buy back program here yet.(on a nationally enforced level)
So there is no way of knowing. It could be that surprisingly Americans would turn in the majority of their guns,
despite what polls or rhetoric says. Who knows?
Guns are still legal in Australia. They are just probably very expensive and heavily regulated.
So short of the government taking action on this now insanely disgusting scourge we have,
the people turn to what protection they can think of-guns!!
If the government is not going to protect it’s own citizens, they will feel compelled to protect themselves.
I don’t know…obviously there are other factors involved. The massive availability, the relatively low cost, the next to nothing registration.
The Hollywood, violent, fantasy world culture we have here.
The massive number of criminals we have. On the streets and in jail.
The fact that we are always at war.

In the U.S there is a strong suspicion of government in many quarters. Whether this is an outgrowth of our rural society or our history as subjects of England who had to resort to violent revolt to gain our freedom is hard to say. Those are probably contributing factors but I suspect its more complicated than that. The bottom line is that the general mistrust of government by many Americans combined with a culture of independence and strong individualism means that many Americans conclude that the right of gun ownership is integral to maintaining our freedoms, protecting our families, and keeping government in its place.
I don’t agree with this conclusion. If we have to resort to armed resistance then we have already lost our way of life and the idea that a band of citizens armed with individual weapons could hold their own against a world power and its armed forces (like the U.S. government) is seemingly very naive.
The problem we have getting gun control legislation passed is that we are trying to keep guns out of the hands of people who would do harm with those weapons such as criminals and terrorists but the line dividing those who think they are protecting our rights and way of life from those who are terrorists is a very nebulous one. Timothy McVeigh thought of himself as a patriot but most of the rest of us see him as a terrorist. There are militias around the country that drill in secret for the day when the government collapses or for the day when they need to bring it down with the idea that they will be the ones to save the American way of life. In fact most of them are more of a threat to our way of life than ISIS is.
So who gets to decide who can own a gun? The gun fanatics of this country don’t want the government making that decision because in their minds the government is the entity that guns are there to protect us from. In their minds the government is the enemy. To them it would be like letting Russia decide whether the U.S. can have fighter planes, submarines, and nuclear missiles.
Obviously not all American gun owners are preppers and militia members but there is a spectrum from those who believe in bringing down the government to those who use their guns primarily for sports hunting but feel more comfortable with a gun in their home to protect themselves if society ever did collapse. I suspect this is more of a rural view of guns. In the suburbs and the cities I think people see guns more as protection from criminals than the government.
This is a really complex issue. I think the only hope we have is to push the legislation forward a little bit each time public awareness is increased when one of these tragic shootings occurs with the hope that someday we can change the national attitude toward guns.

I don't agree with this conclusion. If we have to resort to armed resistance then we have already lost our way of life and the idea that a band of citizens armed with individual weapons could hold their own against a world power and its armed forces (like the U.S. government) is seemingly very naive.
Great post! Very prescient. In regards to this particular quote^ Yeah and this attitude is growing. The advent of the internet did not help in this regard IMHO. Massive polarization and disenfranchisement either real or imagined.

No matter how you look at it, every gun that ever killed anyone in the US was taken from the vast stockpile of guns in the US.
There are 112 guns for every 100 people in the US. The US tops the list. the next country on the list is Serbia with 69.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country
Makes you proud to live among a rational population, doesn’t it?
Don’t you go to bed every night feeling warm and safe? Doesn’t it make you feel warm and safe sending your kids to school or anywhere, or going anywhere yourself?

The difference is Americans are more violent and rebellious than Australians.

Americans are more violent and rebelious than any civilized culture in the world.
Saying the government can’t be trusted to protect us is a lie spread by idiots who insist that they must own guns. There is no other reason for it. Tha US protects its citizens as well as any country’s government does. There is only one excuse for any citizen of a Western democracy to arm himself to protect himself and that is to support the lie that a citizen should own and carry guns. The citizens of civilized countries don’t embrace this asinine excuse. Why should the citizens of the US? Because too many citizens of the US are stupid, ignorant and violent. It’s the dog chasing its tail.

Laws passed in NY and other municipalities are a good start.
A very good start is to begin outlawing any firearm, of any caliber or gauge, that is semi-automatic and has a magazine capacity of over 10 rounds.
That includes handguns, rifles and shotguns. The three categories of firearms that are still legal in the US.
This can be achieved. It already has. These laws have held up against challenges in the courts already.
Everybody needs to inform their local politicians that this is what you want…for starters.
The next thing you go after is the outlawing of detachable magazines-sometimes referred to as clips. This includes box magazines, drums, rotary magazines,
sleeves, tubes, or hoppers. In effect any ammunition storage device that can be attached to the firearm for the purposes of feeding ammunition directly into the firearm’s firing cycle automatically through the means of springs or gravity.
This will leave internal, non-detachable magazines that can still be found on semi-automatic firearms. They usually have capacities that range between four and seven rounds.
The next thing to do is outlaw all semi-automatic firearms(shotguns, rifles and handguns.)
A semi-automatic firearm is one which fires, retracts the bolt(by means of kinetic energy from the recoil, or by gasses from the bullets firing or a combination of both) ,ejects the spent casing, grabs a new casing from the magazine, seats that casing(bullet) in the bolt, moves the bolt forward into firing position(cocking).
That completes the full cycle of fire for a firearm. By repeatedly pulling the trigger the firearm will shoot bullets until the firearm has a stoppage(jams) or the magazine runs out of ammo.
The only difference between this and an illegal fully automatic firearm(machine gun, sub-machine gun) is that one has to repeatedly pull the trigger, whereas with a machine gun, one has to keep the trigger in the depressed position. Not much of a difference. There is one difference though!!
A machine gun has a higher rate of fire. More bullets per minute fired.
But that’s the crux!!! In tactical situations involving accurately shooting multiple targets, semi-automatic fire is preferred.
This is the doctrine of every police and military force around the world. In other words, military assault rifles commonly have selective fire.
This means the weapon can be switched from semi-automatic fire to fully automatic fire.
In every situation the training involved instructs the use of selecting semi-automatic for efficient, accurate killing or wounding of multiple targets.
Machine guns with high rates of fire serve more as suppression weapons to keep large numbers of people from moving effectively in a tactical situation.
In other words to keep people down behind cover while your own forces can find better positions.
Press your lawmakers to outlaw these weapons and magazines.
This will still leave a whole host of rational firearms(shotguns, handguns and rifles) for people to enjoy hunting and shooting sports with.
And yes, even firearms with which a person could protect their homes, families and persons with.

Laws passed in NY and other municipalities are a good start.
A very good start is to begin outlawing any firearm, of any caliber or gauge, that is semi-automatic and has a magazine capacity of over 10 rounds.
That includes handguns, rifles and shotguns. The three categories of firearms that are still legal in the US.
This can be achieved. It already has. These laws have held up against challenges in the courts already.
Everybody needs to inform their local politicians that this is what you want…for starters.
The next thing you go after is the outlawing of detachable magazines-sometimes referred to as clips. This includes box magazines, drums, rotary magazines,
sleeves, tubes, or hoppers. In effect any ammunition storage device that can be attached to the firearm for the purposes of feeding ammunition directly into the firearm’s firing cycle automatically through the means of springs or gravity.
This will leave internal, non-detachable magazines that can still be found on semi-automatic firearms. They usually have capacities that range between four and seven rounds.
The next thing to do is outlaw all semi-automatic firearms(shotguns, rifles and handguns.)
A semi-automatic firearm is one which when the trigger is pulled- fires, retracts the bolt(by means of kinetic energy from the recoil, or by gasses from the bullets firing or a combination of both) ,ejects the spent casing, grabs a new casing from the magazine, seats that casing(bullet) in the bolt, moves the bolt forward into firing position(cocking).
That completes the full cycle of fire for a firearm. By repeatedly pulling the trigger the firearm will shoot bullets until the firearm has a stoppage(jams) or the magazine runs out of ammo.
The only difference between this and an illegal fully automatic firearm(machine gun, sub-machine gun) is that one has to repeatedly pull the trigger, whereas with a machine gun, one has to keep the trigger in the depressed position. Not much of a difference. There is one difference though!!
A machine gun has a higher rate of fire. More bullets per minute fired.
But that’s the crux!!! In tactical situations involving accurately shooting multiple targets, semi-automatic fire is preferred.
This is the doctrine of every police and military force around the world. In other words, military/police assault rifles commonly have selective fire.
This means the weapon can be switched from semi-automatic fire to fully automatic fire.
In every situation the training involved instructs the use of selecting semi-automatic for efficient, accurate killing or wounding of multiple targets.
Machine guns with high rates of fire serve more as suppression weapons to keep large numbers of people from moving effectively in a tactical situation.
In other words to keep people down behind cover while your own forces can find better positions.
Press your lawmakers to outlaw these weapons and magazines.
This will still leave a whole host of rational firearms(shotguns, handguns and rifles) for people to enjoy hunting and shooting sports with.
And yes, even firearms with which a person could protect their homes, families and persons with.

Laws passed in NY and other municipalities are a good start. A very good start is to begin outlawing any firearm, of any caliber or gauge, that is semi-automatic and has a magazine capacity of over 10 rounds. That includes handguns, rifles and shotguns. The three categories of firearms that are still legal in the US. This can be achieved. It already has. These laws have held up against challenges in the courts already. Everybody needs to inform their local politicians that this is what you want...for starters. The next thing you go after is the outlawing of detachable magazines-sometimes referred to as clips. This includes box magazines, drums, rotary magazines, sleeves, tubes, or hoppers. In effect any ammunition storage device that can be attached to the firearm for the purposes of feeding ammunition directly into the firearm's firing cycle automatically through the means of springs or gravity. This will leave internal, non-detachable magazines that can still be found on semi-automatic firearms. They usually have capacities that range between four and seven rounds. The next thing to do is outlaw all semi-automatic firearms(shotguns, rifles and handguns.) A semi-automatic firearm is one which when the trigger is pulled- fires, retracts the bolt(by means of kinetic energy from the recoil, or by gasses from the bullets firing or a combination of both) ,ejects the spent casing, grabs a new casing from the magazine, seats that casing(bullet) in the bolt, moves the bolt forward into firing position(cocking). That completes the full cycle of fire for a firearm. By repeatedly pulling the trigger the firearm will shoot bullets until the firearm has a stoppage(jams) or the magazine runs out of ammo. The only difference between this and an illegal fully automatic firearm(machine gun, sub-machine gun) is that one has to repeatedly pull the trigger, whereas with a machine gun, one has to keep the trigger in the depressed position. Not much of a difference. There is one difference though!! A machine gun has a higher rate of fire. More bullets per minute fired. But that's the crux!!!! In tactical situations involving accurately shooting multiple targets, semi-automatic fire is preferred. This is the doctrine of every police and military force around the world. In other words, military/police assault rifles commonly have selective fire. This means the weapon can be switched from semi-automatic fire to fully automatic fire. In every situation the training involved instructs the use of selecting semi-automatic for efficient, accurate killing or wounding of multiple targets. Machine guns with high rates of fire serve more as suppression weapons to keep large numbers of people from moving effectively in a tactical situation. In other words to keep people down behind cover while your own forces can find better positions. Press your lawmakers to outlaw these weapons and magazines. This will still leave a whole host of rational firearms(shotguns, handguns and rifles) for people to enjoy hunting and shooting sports with. And yes, even firearms with which a person could protect their homes, families and persons with.
Or commit terrorist acts, or just shoot someone or a school full of schoolchildren. They MUST have their RIGHTS to do those things.
Or commit terrorist acts, or just shoot someone or a school full of schoolchildren. They MUST have their RIGHTS to do those things.
Lois these gun "rights" are going to have to be dismantled slowly...law by law. There's no need to be hysterical about it. That's why I posted this information above. The gun nuts have a good advantage when the people pushing for reform have no idea what they are talking about. If they own the information, then they can own the legislation. Getting all hysterical about it and screaming "ban all guns" is going to get people nowhere. People need to know the types of guns that are out there and why ordinary citizens have no use owning them.
Or commit terrorist acts, or just shoot someone or a school full of schoolchildren. They MUST have their RIGHTS to do those things.
Lois these gun "rights" are going to have to be dismantled slowly...law by law. There's no need to be hysterical about it. That's why I posted this information above. The gun nuts have a good advantage when the people pushing for reform have no idea what they are talking about. If they own the information, then they can own the legislation. Getting all hysterical about it and screaming "ban all guns" is going to get people nowhere. People need to know the types of guns that are out there and why ordinary citizens have no use owning them. Where did I say "Ban all guns"? All I said is that Americans' love affair with guns is not doing us any good, and is, in fact, a detriment to our reputation. it sounds more like it's you who's being hysterical. Mention "gun control" and you and the gun nuts start running around in circles like Chicken Liitle, crying, "Help, the sky is falling! The sky is falling! They're going to confiscate our guns!!!"

Lois you’re letting too much emotion fog your replies.
I don’t think you are reading the posts thoroughly enough.
Why must you constantly engage in attacks and baseless accusations?
Pump the friggin’ brakes for once! Please.

Or commit terrorist acts, or just shoot someone or a school full of schoolchildren. They MUST have their RIGHTS to do those things.
Lois these gun "rights" are going to have to be dismantled slowly...law by law. There's no need to be hysterical about it. That's why I posted this information above. The gun nuts have a good advantage when the people pushing for reform have no idea what they are talking about. If they own the information, then they can own the legislation. Getting all hysterical about it and screaming "ban all guns" is going to get people nowhere. People need to know the types of guns that are out there and why ordinary citizens have no use owning them. Speak for yourself. You are the one who implied that I "screamed" "ban all guns." I did no such thing. You said it in so many words. I made no such suggestion. This is what you wrote: a direct quote: "Getting all hysterical about it and screaming “ban all guns" is going to get people nowhere." I neither said nor implied any such thing. The only person in this discussion who said, "ban all guns," was you. Must you constantly engage in baseless accusations? If anyone is exhibiting signs of hysteria, it's you.

I touched on this in my post in the thread about Jindal and violence in the U.S.
I believe the American culture is set apart from many other countries in that it typically doesn’t have a mentality of, “if it’s for the greater good, I’ll do it.” In fact, it seems if you say something should be done for the greater good, it’s viewed as “socialism” and Americans get really angry and start to do the exact opposite in some odd attempt to assert their individuality and autonomy.

I touched on this in my post in the thread about Jindal and violence in the U.S. I believe the American culture is set apart from many other countries in that it typically doesn't have a mentality of, "if it's for the greater good, I'll do it." In fact, it seems if you say something should be done for the greater good, it's viewed as "socialism" and Americans get really angry and start to do the exact opposite in some odd attempt to assert their individuality and autonomy.
Yes, Americans are independent and we think for ourselves: All together, now "I pledge alegiance to the flag . . . "
I touched on this in my post in the thread about Jindal and violence in the U.S. I believe the American culture is set apart from many other countries in that it typically doesn't have a mentality of, "if it's for the greater good, I'll do it." In fact, it seems if you say something should be done for the greater good, it's viewed as "socialism" and Americans get really angry and start to do the exact opposite in some odd attempt to assert their individuality and autonomy.
Yes, Americans are independent and we think for ourselves: All together, now "I pledge alegiance to the flag . . . " I didn't say they were smart about it. :) They "think" that they're very independent I suppose would be more accurate.