No, you miss my point. I think it is our divergent national histories that separate our views on guns.
And obviously you realize there is no "wrath of Toad" involved. I'm just pointing out my view of this divergence in opinion.
As to the difference between Laz and I, it's simply a matter of priorities. I recognize Laz' "self defence" priority as valid. It is his constitutionally guaranteed right. I'm sure he recognizes my "hunting" priorty in the same way. I'm also sure that if he chose to go hunting, he'd view that right as "all of a piece" with his "self defense" right. I would view my "self defence" rights as all part of the 2nd as well, right along with my hunting rights.
Less free? Well, unless you are a licenced member of a gun clubs.
you can't even HAVE a gun for any reason, right? Not even a BB gun?
From that I'd have to say you aren't as free to have a gun as we are. Now that may not be important to you at all.
Which returns us once again to the beginning. Bzzzzzzzt.
There's a reason why Euros/Bermudans don't feel the "need" for a gun. I think it is based in history that continues to this day.
Just as some desert dwellers wouldn't feel any less "free" if their government prohibited fly rods.