Lazs,
My perception is that I am all for ceding certain powers of the individual to government. That is why I vote. For me, that is a function of government. If the US ended up like England and very few people were allowed to have firearms, then it may be the case that there would be fewer firearm deaths (although I recognise that we can argue the statistics about this until the cows come home).
In the UK, and I suspect it is the same as the US, the majority of criminals who are released reoffend. Our jails are full to bursting and as a result sentences are being shortened simply so that there is room for incoming inmates. We are running out of space and money to build more jails. I simply cannot agree with you that somebody who misuses firearms must be insane.
The old and infirm ought to be able to rely in others to protect them. I do not think that giving the old and infirm guns will solve the problem.
I don't think that England is any more or less civilised than the US - just different. It depends on what you mean by 'civilised'. Again, it's a lifestyle choice, but I would prefer to run the risk of my house being burgled by theives who were less likely to be armed with guns than to live in a place where burglary still existed and everybody had guns.
The 'Englishman's home is his castle' was an expression that people here used to justify defending his property and people from intruders. Perhaps it should be the 'American's home is his castle'.
It may be that one day it will be legal for more and more people here will choose to carry guns (although I doubt it). The problem as I see it is that once all the guns are out there, the genie is out of the bottle and it is very difficult to put it back. When we have a 'gun incident' here (for example schoolchildren getting shot) the overwhelming feeling is that guns should be harder to get hold of, not easier.
Ravs
