To Allen Dyer
You are indeed correct that America would have fewer homicides if proper gun controls were in effect. Of course, more homicidal types would revert to melee weapons to dispense their judgement. Still, the efficiency of the firearm is greater. More people would end up surviving encounters with the homicidal....
But not enough for it to ultimately matter.
The way I understand it is that 5.6 per 100,000 people in USA die by homicide. In the UK, that figure is closer to 2.0 per 100,000. So significantly more people in America die by homicide than in the UK. Let's say proper gun control would bring the USA to the UK level of homicide. That means 3 or 4 people per 100,000 get to live (not sure if permanently injured or not). It's a serious impact, don't get me wrong. I'd be glad that those people survived and had the chance to finish out their lives.
However, I wouldn't be glad of those things at the expense of civil liberty. Having a government, a majority, or even a minority group dictate the terms upon which I must live is what I consider to be the greater of the two evils. In order to prevent a few deaths I would sacrifice more personal freedom. Because a few are unable to wield a power responsibly, a government has the right to revoke everyone's right to wield said power? It's not the well-adjusted person who needs a law of this nature, but those of damaged intellect or psyche. Odd as it seems, it's thus the miscreant that dictates the terms on which people must abide.
It's not easy to say, and it shouldn't be, but I would sooner have those people die in a hail of psychotic gunfire than relinquish any more of my personal freedom and choice.