Since I moved to Australia, I have had a few run-ins with people on both sides about gun rights. People who are against gun rights always ask why the US is full of guns, and people who are pro-gun rights always tell me how authoritarian the Australian government is for taking guns away.
Bear in mind, gun ownership is still allowed in Australia, but you need a license, and there are several limitations on firearms ownership.
Both the Army and the Police Force taught me how to use firearms effectively. But the key difference, I will tell you, is this: I would want to get a firearm in the US because everyone has one, and in some cases, three, four, five, or ten. In Australia, I don't really have the need to get one. And I will tell you why.
Most people cite self-defence as a reason for guns, yes, if you are talking about the US, because you are going to go against people who have guns. If you don't have one, you aren't going to be able to protect shit, so you can call it a "Self-Inflicted" injury, because that's what the 2nd Amendment brought on. On the other hand, the stance between Australia and America on mass shootings cannot be further apart. In the US, people believe that if they are carrying, they would be able to stop any mass shooting. In Australia, that's the opposite; if NOBODY is armed, then you don't have mass shootings to begin with. If you are trying to digest both reasoning, you will see the American side is more "passive" because most Americans are resigned to the fact that gun issues and gun crime are going to be associated with them. In Australia, on the other hand, Australians believe in proper law enforcement and crime prevention before reaction. That aligns with the position of law enforcement and how people perceive their rights.
