Question to those not in the USA, and who have lived outside the USA.
I've been thinking about something and want to check an assumption I have. I only hear directly from other people in the USA, and interract with the global community through memes. How are the gun regulations/laws different from yours in terms of strictness, and do you wish there was more or less where you live?
Not looking for a debate here, discuss cold drinks vs hot drinks instead. Appreciate either answer. ❤️
Edit: Thanks for the answers all. I'm super proud how productive eveyone kept this talk. I figured most of you had very different experiences than I. I'll share my most recent experience. I don't have a firearm, but have considered it after being trained enough. When sharing this with "normal" people around town, I had multiple people offer to sell or gift me a gun where the serial number was scratched off and non-traceable. I ofter heard, "oh man, yeah. You need a gun." I have literally never needed one. The fact that people offer to give me one when I don't have a liscence or training shows the mindset of the minority here and how much of a problem a few individuals can make to safety within the current system.
The UK has really strict laws on firearms AFAIK, you have to either apply for a certificate from the police or surrender them even if you're an antique collector. The government website ofc does into more detail. I'm not really involved in the firearms debate, so I can't say if I want more or less. I will say there's a lot of knife crime in the UK though, enough for it to be a common occurrence on local news and a meme in online circles.
I'm not from here, but in Svalbard, a firearm is a legal requirement due to the bears in the area, but even then the use of it should be a last-resort if all the other bear deterrents have failed. Tom Scott's got a good video on it.
The differences between victim survey statistics and crime reporting statistics are not easy to explain. In the US, trends in victim reporting tend to lead law enforcement statistics by a year or two, which makes one wonder whether law enforcement is padding the numbers -- either to make themselves look good (when crime is increasing according to victim reports and it would reflect badly on them if LE statistics followed suit), or to make themselves look necessary (when victim-reported crime is going down and LE statistics might make LE look redundant).
I’m not really involved in the firearms debate, so I can’t say if I want more or less.
There's not really a huge debate as I think most people are fine with the current status quo.
From my own perspective guns were more available and used more casually by criminals before the 1997 legislation in the wake of the Dunblane massacre. Afterwards it was much less of an issue. If you really wanted one you could get one I'm sure but the cost (financial and risk) has gone up making it less of an option for petty criminals. Now you usually here of gun violence between gangs.