John,

>My intention was to show an example where gun control is not the answer- because the problem doesn't exist. There is a reason why some nations have a much larger violent crime problem than others. Find that reason and you're on the road to fixing the problem rather than the blame. So, what is different between the Swiss and US to explain such a difference? For example, healthcare funding is a big difference between the US and other first-world nations. I wouldn't, but on logical grounds you could mount a credible argument that this sort of difference explains violent crime in the US. Switzerland also has a clique of extremely wealthy people like the US and with relatively open borders, poor illegals can sneak in quite easily. So what else could be the difference? Maybe it's because most Swiss are multi-lingual and have traveled? Anyway, people proposing gun control are at least taking a crack at the issue, so those who want to block it should be proposing a more credible explanation and solution.

there are enormous differences between the swiss and the americans, like I've explained earlier. In short it has to do with cultural, economic and social differences. But getting a handle on that is impossible as its what makes americans... americans. Getting the a handle on the widespread availability of guns, esspecially to the ones who should not own a gun, however is much more doable.

I've given the example of a kid in a candy store. The swiss child is disciplined, raised with with good manners and authority and above all has been trained how to behave in a candy store (Swiss are trained in using the automatic rifles for militia purposes in military camps)

its american cousin has a very different economic, social and cultural background. It has more problems in accepting authority, more frequently has emotional problems that are not recognised and treated, are more often not well raised, due to hard social and economic circumstances. How would you fix that ????

If you know your children can behave itself in a candy store, you as a parent would not have a problem in leaving him alone in the candy store. If you know that some of your children have problems in behaving themselves, wouldn't you set up rules for all of your children in what circumstances they can enter the candy store?? I certainly would.


>Also FWIW, "gun control" covers a wide range of initiatives. Many nations require police approval before you can hold a firearm. Even US states require a cooling down period before you can take away a newly purchased handgun. Some jurisdictions allow all sorts of weapons, but require them to be properly secured, e.g. in a gun safe. Some require ammo to be secured in a different location from the firearm. Some places allow semi-automatic weapons, but disallow handguns unless for competitive shooting as a member of an approved gun club who has attended sufficient training and competitive events in the last year. Most of these places have lower violent crime rates than the US.
>
>Some people may present control as an infringement on rights, but we all wear seatbelts when we get into our cars and accept the higher cost of airbags and other safety features (including for pedestrians) in a new vehicle whether we like it or not. So infringement on rights should not be the main focus: the issue is whether gun control is what is needed to prevent innocent kids being shot up.

Reducing the number of guns in any society would certainly make it harder for anyone, who in a moment of insanity, start shooting around.