>>For example, here in NZ the police don't wear guns, and the
>>NZ society (ie. the summation of individuals) is generally wary of gun
>>ownership. Most individuals can apply for a gun licence (and will
>>probably get it), its just that most *don't want to* - because *as
>>individuals* they have already seen the effects in the US - and its not
>Which is pretty strange, because New Zealand has one of the highest
>gun ownership rates in the world (roughly one gun per four people
>according to NZ police estimates, compared to roughly one gun per two
>people in the US). What you say may apply in cities, but it's far from
>true in the rural areas.
Absolutely right - it applies in the cities. In fact, I wouldn't be too suprised if gun ownership figures in NZ rural areas approached or even surpassed those of the States. The figures you quote, however, still show that gun ownership is 2X higher in the States.
The point I'm making is that people don't choose to own guns for 'self-protection' - the guns are owned by farmers who go pig hunting, deer hunting etc (which I wouldn't mind giving a go myself one day ...); ie the reasons are recreational, not as a means to 'protect us from them'.
This is possibly the reason why gun ownership is not as high as in the States; Kiwi's aren't as paranoid ;o), and the feedback gain is subsequently lower.