You can hit them with a baseball bat, and then claim they were attacking you. Wild animal attack, you know?
that is illegal pretty much everywhere.
My focus is less on what, than where.
No open carry by anyone but law enforcement officers. Exception for public lands where hunting takes place, during hunting season. You see someone carrying a gun in public, you call the cops, they take away the weapon.
Concealed carry only with permit, issued only for need.
It’s illegal to kill a wild animal that is attacking you?
Yeah but it does give a certain plausibility to all those stray shots landing assorted places. 
Canada Geese are migratory birds and, as such, are protected by Federal law (the Migratory Bird Act in the US, the Migratory Birds convention Act is Canada). One must be properly licensed to hunt geese, and they can only be taken during a relatively short season. Outside of that they, their nests and their offspring are protected by the same laws.
And they are good to eat. You really didn’t know all of this?
Sure. But do I need to actually SHOOT the geese during hunting season? Or can I just grab them when they are under my feet trying to get bread?
The migratory bird act makes it illegal to pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, or sell those species that are protected under the act.
Strange that Maryland has specific rules on how many migratory canada geese you can bag during hunting season then.
…without a waiver I should have added. I thought that was obvious but there you go.
Ok. I’m not getting your point.
I’d want to strongly associate the gun with its owner, by whatever means necessary, and then the instant that the gun owner commits a crime with the gun in their possession, and is found guilty in court, confiscate every gun they have and ban them from ever owning again. This would include misdemeanors like “brandishing” and “threatening to kill people with said firearm”.
Also, if somebody else commits a crime with a gun that belongs to you, unless that gun was taken from you in the process of the crime being committed, then you will be charged with irresponsible gun ownership and, if found guilty, that will be that for you.
I would also like there to be federally scrutinized gun safety courses and certifications available, which you could be required to attend and pass as an alternative to permanently losing your right to own. This would allow gentler handling of chucklefucks committing crimes of irresponsibility rather than maliciousness. However on failing the course or getting found guilty for a second crime-while-toting there would be no recourse to losing the right.
That can’t be. I thought Obama stole everyone’s guns away?
Honestly I didn’t know it was decided then but I don’t like it either way.
Gun registration, required insurance for any guns that are under your ownership (like a car) - can’t afford the insurance, sell your guns. National gun registration database (right now its all on paper), ammunition sales handed in much the same way buying decent cold medicine is currently handled - i.e. recorded and you only get so much in such a period of time. Tracking information on ammunition so you can trace it down to a sale level.
Cars that are not driven on public streets don’t need to be insured. What’s the equivalent for guns?
I didn’t say anything was the cause. I said there have been societal changes while the type of guns have remained the same.
Blaming guns for violence is like putting braces on false teeth.
But all the examples you gave are changes that have happened across the world, but other developed countries do not have anything like the homicide rate of the US.
Frankly, it is reaching: it’s desperately trying to find any alternative explanation to avoid discussing gun control.
Also, is your argument even complete? If all you are saying is “Guns haven’t changed, so we must have [paraphrased]”, that doesn’t work at all, since:
[ul]
li gun violence has essentially always been a problem in the US; the numbers are sketchy early on but certainly since 1905. So who said anything about a change?[/li][li]Regardless, guns of course have changed within this time period. Many of the most popular SMGs and assault weapons were developed in the 50s and 60s for example.[/li][/ul]
other developed countries also don’t have the legacies of slavery, Jim Crow, and systematic discrimination & racism that we have. They also don’t have the misdirected War on (some) Drugs that we have. A huge portion of gun violence in this country is drug-related gang violence.
You never heard of the M1, the Model 8, or the Thompson?
Actually lots of developed countries are in the midst of an ineffective drug war, and lots of countries have a terrible history of racism, in some cases recent ethnic conflicts. But none have the homicide rate of the US.
But yeah, if you keep scratching around for differences between the US and the rest of the developed world, and lack of gun control remains the off-limits elephant in the room, then sure, you’ll eventually find something.
I don’t know any other country where you can eat meatloaf, so that may be a candidate.