Davies makes a valid point. Statistically, you’re about as likely to “win” in a lottery, as to be killed by a “terrorist” or nut with a gun. HOWEVER, if you live in many parts of the country where guns are all over the place, in the hands of gang members, your odds of “winning” increase considerably!!
FEDERAL gun regulations are actually pretty weak for maintaining “control” of access. Part of that IS because of our “right to privacy” (which isn’t actually a “right” in the Constitution), and the other part IS the NRA lobbying keeping those laws we do have on the books, relatively impotent on controlling access to firearms.
As a gun owner, and a member of a DEMOCRATIC gun owners caucus, I DO support legitimate access to firearms for LEGAL purposes, and to folks who are trained, sane, and responsible gun owners. As with my concealed weapons permit, with a THOROUGH background check, proof of training in ethical use, as well as competency in handling firearms, I have no problem with that being a MINIMUM FEDERAL LAW to be met by all persons purchasing, or obtaining ANY firearm! LIke New Zealand’s system, licensing gun owners with such “limits”, merely assures, like Switzerland’s “militia” having firearms, that indeed sane and qualified people ARE the ones who have access.
That a “private” (corporate supported, member dues and contributions don’t even begin to cover their administrative costs, and lobbying efforts) organization like the NRA can maintain a computer register of owners, that the law PROHIBITS the GOVERNMENT from maintaining, says something about corporate control of our “state”, but not actual “freedom”!