Well shut my mouth, I was not expecting that detailed and informative response
I used the reference to first world nations because they have relatively equal stability and living standards. It's not fair to include Columbia and it's war on drugs as a means for comparing homicide rates. Neither is it realistic to use countries in the Bulkans that have not gone more than 50 years without a war in their entire history.
Yes, your reference to Swizterland and Japan does perhaps suggest that a correlation with violence is endemic to the cultural history of a society. The United States was founded on violence, and has moulded it's identity around military strength. But could the same not be said for Germany, for example? Here's a nation that has always maintained strong nationalism and also has a very detailed history of wars and violence, yet the importance of guns is inconsequential.
Yes the quote from Billy and your reference to it was an important example for the need for guns 200+ years ago, but is it still valid in the 21st Century? If Guns were eliminated in society, would the U.S. populace be subject to any lack of freedoms? I look to England as another example here, Bobbies do not even carry guns, they don't have to.
[This message has been edited by Lil_G (edited April 05, 2001).]