It's not the tail wagging the dog, though. The large contingent of Americans who throw their political weight in an organized way behind gun ownership as a point of principle were rallied by the gun manufacturing industry. It wasn't organic.

It didn't happen in Australia or New Zealand or the UK even though gun enthusiasts exist in all of those countries.

> It's not the tail wagging the dog, though. The large contingent of Americans who throw their political weight in an organized way behind gun ownership as a point of principle were rallied by the gun manufacturing industry. It wasn't organic.

Idk exactly what you mean by organic, but if it means what I think you're trying to say, idk what's more organic than creating the Second Amendment which was created long before there were gun lobbyists.

> It didn't happen in Australia or New Zealand or the UK even though gun enthusiasts exist in all of those countries.

America is a different country isn't it?

> idk what's more organic than creating the Second Amendment which was created long before there were gun lobbyists.

I think the whole debate over gun control is not as important as people make it out to be, so I don't have a huge dog in this fight.

That said, 2A was not interpreted (at least by the courts, but also it seems from historical research, in public discourse) the way it has been until the late 90s and early 21st century, particularly in DC v. Heller.

Historically, there was generally broad latitude given to cities to have arms restrictions going back to the 19th century. My guess is that the crack epidemic and associated things in the late 80s and 90s is what shifted attitudes here.

But that ability to organize is also protected by the US Constitution. You may consider it unethical, but it’s not illegal.

Replying to Pydry, adjacent to parent:

None of those countries enshrine as law the concept of self defense in the form of gun ownership, though. The "right to bear arms" is considered the fundamental way to protect against tyranny in the United States. One of the founding fathers (Jefferson?) even posited that revolution was a responsibility of the people when a government became too overbearing.

Couple that with the Judeo/Christian concept of "value of life" and you have a people (who, though not Christian in practice, inherited these worldviews) that believes life is sacred and will fight for even the ability to defend themselves and others. Do note that the Judeo/Christian worldviews that benefited the West have been attacked and eroded over the last century and a half, and that the sanctity of human life is actually a big question mark for many. But there remain a staunch few that will continue to hold to their ideals.

I am not convinced that "Judeo/Christian worldviews" have led to a more developed or dominant West than would have developed in the absence of those worldviews.