As a stronger argument to your point—In Australia nearly no one owns guns; its very difficult to get guns and I certainly know of no-one who has one. However I am completely confident that I can call my shadiest friend and he could call his shadiest of friend (and possibly to a 3rd degree—his friend) and within 7 days I could have a gun for the low-low price of “some monetary compensation”.
The rural Australia figure is for number of people, not number of guns. But when you’re comparing it to America, you’re comparing it to number of guns. This compares apples and oranges.
As a stronger argument to your point—In Australia nearly no one owns guns; its very difficult to get guns and I certainly know of no-one who has one. However I am completely confident that I can call my shadiest friend and he could call his shadiest of friend (and possibly to a 3rd degree—his friend) and within 7 days I could have a gun for the low-low price of “some monetary compensation”.
I’m sure some people in rural areas do. Wiki says:
And that’s only people who legally own guns, of course.
okay yes rural guns exist. That still leaves 20million+ of population without access. Compared to america where there are more guns than people...
The rural Australia figure is for number of people, not number of guns. But when you’re comparing it to America, you’re comparing it to number of guns. This compares apples and oranges.
certainly; this pointless tangent is becoming more of a statement about gun culture than about banning substances.
The fact that bans have a poor track record in human history does not imply that they are impossible, does it?