More lax gun laws worldwide AH challenge

Magical123

Banned
So with a POD of 1900 or after have most of the world have fairly lax gun laws and a responsible gun culture(you know training, drilling into kids heads therr not toys that sort of thing.

How would a looser view of civilian gun ownership and use come about?

Thoughts?
 
A positive view of the widespread private ownership of firearms is closely associated with a mode of life characterized by widely separated owner-occupied single-family dwellings, easy access to wilderness areas, and a well-developed "do it yourself" culture when it comes to such things as home repair and automotive maintenance. In other words, it correlates with such things as the availability of places to shoot, hunting (whether for food, sport, or pest control), familiarity with a wide variety of machines, and a low ratio of peace officers to space. At the same time, a negative view of widespread private ownership of firearms corresponds to life in more densely populated places, where most animals encountered are pets, people hire professionals to change their oil and fix their hot water heaters, and setting up a target range in the back yard will result in complaints from neighbors and visits from the police.

So, a world in which more people participated in (or, at least, approved of) the widespread private ownership of firearms would be one in which more people lived in small towns and rural areas, and fewer lived in cities or suburbs. Making that happen requires the adoption of US-style patterns of land ownership. At the very least, this would require the adoption of US-style laws with respect to land ownership. In many places, it would also require the sort of land reform that took place in Estonia in 1919, that is, the break up of large estates into smaller farms, or "homestead" laws that gave individuals title to wilderness land that they staked out and improved.

Another factor that would foster this lifestyle would be the widespread use of private automobiles. This would support "gun-friendly" rural culture in a wide number of ways, from promoting familiarity with mechanical things to facilitating a "widely-separated single-family home" lifestyle.
 
Collapsed States with Warlords don't really count.

Besides, they have 9.1 guns per 100, vs 112 for USA

Obviously, guns are expensive.

Have a lot of countries supplement their military with a large, well-trained reserve force. A militia, but baked in to the national culture to such a degree that it is considered odd for you not to participate.
The idea is actually doable. It might have easily been implemented after the cold war ended in European countries. The professional armies are scaled back, but the overflow is channelled into reserves who are modestly compensated for giving up 12 weekends or so and maybe one full week a year (with full pay). There remains the military core as a full readiness force, but with reserves who can be put into action within a few months.
There are easy cultural access points to really sell it too. Ancient militias and guards, some half a millennia old. At this point they are just playing dress up with muskets, but their traditions can be used to quickly anchor the practice in society.
 
Try Honduas. We have been through San Pedro Suvla on Hedman bus company . Three armed guards at bus station. Concertina wire around bus station. Second highest murder rate in the world.
 
Try Honduas. We have been through San Pedro Suvla on Hedman bus company . Three armed guards at bus station. Concertina wire around bus station. Second highest murder rate in the world.

And Strong gun control laws enacted over the past 30 years(pretty much zero regulation in the '60s) have not stopped the increases in Murders, despite a registry and licenses.
6.2 guns per 100
 
A positive view of the widespread private ownership of firearms is closely associated with a mode of life characterized by widely separated owner-occupied single-family dwellings, easy access to wilderness areas, and a well-developed "do it yourself" culture when it comes to such things as home repair and automotive maintenance. In other words, it correlates with such things as the availability of places to shoot, hunting (whether for food, sport, or pest control), familiarity with a wide variety of machines, and a low ratio of peace officers to space. At the same time, a negative view of widespread private ownership of firearms corresponds to life in more densely populated places, where most animals encountered are pets, people hire professionals to change their oil and fix their hot water heaters, and setting up a target range in the back yard will result in complaints from neighbors and visits from the police.

So, a world in which more people participated in (or, at least, approved of) the widespread private ownership of firearms would be one in which more people lived in small towns and rural areas, and fewer lived in cities or suburbs. Making that happen requires the adoption of US-style patterns of land ownership. At the very least, this would require the adoption of US-style laws with respect to land ownership. In many places, it would also require the sort of land reform that took place in Estonia in 1919, that is, the break up of large estates into smaller farms, or "homestead" laws that gave individuals title to wilderness land that they staked out and improved.

Another factor that would foster this lifestyle would be the widespread use of private automobiles. This would support "gun-friendly" rural culture in a wide number of ways, from promoting familiarity with mechanical things to facilitating a "widely-separated single-family home" lifestyle.

Canada and Australia should be more gun-friendly according to this theory.
 
Canada and Australia should be more gun-friendly according to this theory.
Gun culture in Canada is exactly as he described. The closer to the urban centres you are, the more anti-gun people are. The further, the more guns there are.

At least, that's how I remember it being like back in Quebec.
 
Top