How Guns Are Sold In American Wal-Marts, Chinese Reactions

Guns on display in a glass case at a Wal-Mart in America.

Guns on display in a glass case at a Wal-Mart in America.

From Tiexue, Sina, & Mop:

This is how America’s Wal-Mart sell guns

Today, while visiting Wal-Mart, I took a photo while at the gun sales counter. The guns were sold in a rotating glass display case just like this with price tags attached. If interested, you just ask the salesperson to take it out for you to examine. Being able to buy a gun while buying groceries at Wal-Mart, convenient.

Guns on display in a glass case at a Wal-Mart in America.

In this glass display case are different types of ammunition.

Guns on display in a glass case at a Wal-Mart in America.

Guns on display in a glass case at a Wal-Mart in America.

Guns on display in a glass case at a Wal-Mart in America.

Comments from Tiexue:


I’d like to ask the lou zhu a question. It may be very naive but please be so kind as to give me an answer. Since guns are sold like this in America, is their government not afraid of social problems? Right now in Shanghai, the supermarkets selling cooking knives have also locked them inside glass display cases like this.


Because the hostility between their people is not as deep as it is with us, which is to say they are harmonious in the true meaning and not river crab. Hehe.


China bans guns and aside from political reasons, it may be because the government has considered that there are too many neurotic people in China, people who will bark/howl for no reason. If these kind of people had guns, imagine how bad it would be. (I’m referring to the issue, not people, so I hope certain people will keep that in mind before responding).


I think the American Constitution has a part that says the citizens have the right to overthrow an authoritarian government…it is what I have heard, not sure if it is true or not.
But in China, that is not possible, and the key is that the character of the people [on average] is not there yet. If firearms were available for sale in China, then we’d probably have to wear bullet-proof vests in order to go out.


Our country’s people have treachery/trouble-making in their bones. You can see it now, in all of China, no one respects anyone else. Learned men scorn each other and military men are lowly to each other, this place cursing that place. If everyone in China had guns, then the country would be torn apart. Even though everyone speaks Chinese, everyone has a different heart. Are we lacking lessons from history?!!


Only with citizens who have high restraint and a society with relatively few injustices would [a country] dare be like this.


Imagine for a moment, if we were to sell guns in this manner, I think those domestic tigers, birds, bears, these animals basically could no longer survive.


I think I saw a short-barrel M700, did I see wrong??
America is really not bad. The weapons that are sold without restrictions appear to be those used for hunting, but even openly selling firearms like this truly makes people sigh.


If this were China, the number of crime-related deaths would increase ten times. Therefore, America’s gun deaths is still very little. In the future [if guns were allowed in China], those who are involved in forced demolitions and chengguan would not be so niubi anymore. Pressure us and they’ll just shoot you a few times.


Damn, foreign countries are too incredible, even allowing guns to be sold. If China were to also allow them to be sold, things would be a mess. [The population of] black society [organized crime] would at least increase 2 times.
And with China’s current education level, it is possible that school shootings would happen often.


America is a country that was built up from the first shot of the Battle of Lexington.

And the biggest reason they were victorious at the time was because the ordinary people had guns.


When everyone has guns, no one is afraid of a few people having guns. If it is fear of overthrowing the government, there is no need. If the current government in power truly doesn’t follow the people’s will, in four years at most, they will have to step down and at worst there are still impeachment procedures. There is no need to use knives and guns [no need for violence], truly not worth it. If one wants to express one’s political views, one can organize one’s own political party. Although America in reality is only a two-party system, there still exist other political parties, and what more, the constitution protects the participation of every political party, with the most powerful non-mainstream parties like the Green Party normally getting around 10% of the vote. If one day, this party were to replace the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, the constitution would also protect it. And when there is social disorder, there is the SWAT. With so many people having guns in America, I don’t think a little handgun or a small hunting rifle can cause any social impact.


The reason why America allows the ordinary people to possess guns is to prevent dictatorship…when that happens, the people can revolt…
Over time, Americans have developed the habit of not using guns even if they have them. Or maybe they are bound by ideas of individual heroism, believing that men should use fists to fight it out, and not relying on guns.
But in our country, the once proper so quick to resort to taking up knives, if there were guns, definitely within 10 years, the population of Chinese people would probably be reduced by half…haha.
PS: America as a country has the highest penetration of firearms in the world, with one gun per capita, but the number of Americans that die under the barrel of a gun are only a trivial 30,000…


America’s president is chosen by the American citizens, so this type of government is not afraid of the common people harming society and rebelling, because don’t need to resort to guns [violence] and only need to demonstrate and protest to make the president step down~~


Americans lives are comfortable, so why have a good life and not live it? Usually chaotic/disorderly societies are all in impoverished countries; You have guns, others have guns, mutually checking each other. If you carry a gun illegally, the police have the right to kill you. Americans’ tradition highly values life…

Guns. chinaSMACK personals.

READ  African Man Sings Propanganda Song for CCP 90th Anniversary

Written by Fauna

Fauna is a mysterious young Shanghainese girl who lives in the only place a Shanghainese person would ever want to live: Shanghai. In mid-2008, she started chinaSMACK to combine her hobby of browsing Chinese internet forums with her goal of improving her English. Through her tireless translation of popular Chinese internet news and phenomenon, her English has apparently gotten dramatically better. At least, reading and writing-wise. Unfortunately, she's still not confident enough to have written this bio, about herself, by herself.

  • Bob

    If people in China are allowed to have guns then

    1. Police force in China would go bankrupt from having to actually arm its officers
    2. All Wildlife going extinct in 5 years
    3. SWAT would have to participate in removing nail households
    4. Some crazy guy who use to shout from the roof top every morning shoots down a entire floor of preschoolers

    • Mine

      Haha, isn’t that about what happened in the US??

      • Hmm, not really. Nice try, though. I think the animal extinction thing is really more of a (human) overpopulation issue, not to mention lack of distaste for eating rare animals. China’s animals will be going extinct in 5 years regardless of whether guns are locked up tight or handed out free with new bank accounts.

    • Mike_In_Zhengzhou

      5. China’s pop. would reduce by 94-96% over one months time.

      • bando

        that’s abit much. if it was 1 or 2 percent, then perhaps it would be a good thing

    • 穀歌ba

      China would also organise her economy for the massive export of weapons like america has been doing for the last 6 decades, stimulate conflict in other regions etc. No wonder america is so wealthy!

      • corpsman

        China DOES export HUGE amounts of arms for private ownership. Some Chinese arms are banned for importation to the USA. That is because agents of the Norinco company brazenly broke US law by selling fully automatic assault weapons to street gangs, I own 2 Norinco AK 47’s and a Chinese made copies of the American 1911 .45 ACP pistol and the M14 rifle. All excellent and all quite common in the market. The irony is that the Chinese people are forbidden to possess the same firearms made in their own country. I believe that only free men own military firearms.
        America’s wealth (or poverty, for that matter) has little to do with firearms manufacturing and exportation.

        Semper Fidelis

        • 0311

          I remember that! Selling to Street Gangs.

          Semper Fi Corpsman

          Bravest men in the Navy!

          0311 Marine Corps Infantry!

          • corpsman

            Ooh-RAH, Leatherneck


        • sudon’t

          Yep. I’ve owned Chinese made rifles. Usually based on Russian designs.

      • JohnQPublic

        America is so ‘wealthy’ because our idiot leaders keep printing paper money to pay our debts.
        At present the Chinese government is FAR better at managing their money than the money my country doesnt actually have to spend.

        • John Long

          Maybe. You might check out current economic conditions in China.
          Not to pretty.

        • sudon’t

          You need to learn about how fiat money works. The truth is, they don’t create enough of it.
          BTW, they don’t fire up the printing presses for that, they just create some computer blips. That is to say, they simply type a large number, and hit “Enter”.

      • actionjksn

        I know this post is 5 years old but I must comment. I have a legal AK 47 style rifle made in China by Norinco. China does export guns. Actually the Chinese AK 47’s are some of the most high quality and most sought after AK’s in America. There is one other Chinese AK that is even better and more desired in America. It’s called the Polytech Legend. It and the Norinco have good build quality with a thicker metal receiver and a slightly thicker barrel. They are also renowned for having a really good trigger.

        • doc

          There is another Norinco model called the NHM91. Mine has a forged receiver and a heavy thickness, 20″ (51 cm) barrel. Thing is very accurate to about 400 meters. Then there is my Polytech M14S.A near identical clone to the Springfield M1A, the machining is rougher, the bolt and flash suppressor had to be replaced as they were to soft. Still for about half the price of a M1A one can have a decently accurate (2.5 MOA). The story behind the Chinese M14 is a bit of legend.

          A persistent rumor states that M14 rifles produced by the People’s Republic of China were reverse engineered from enemy captured M14 rifles in Viet Nam. China North Industries Corporation, known as Norinco, is reported to have produced M14 rifles by the early 1970s. The story continues that 100,000 Chinese M14 rifles were produced for an armed revolution in the Philippines. – See more at:

          I confirm the presence of thousands of Chinese made M14s at the Philippines Military Academy, Reported to have been captured by Philippines troops during an attempt to land them from the sea. There is no record of any similar purchase from the PRC, by the Philippines.

  • RegnisTheGreat

    The real reason Americans buy large guns is that they have small penii on average. Us Asian superman with our large penii doesn’t need guns to compensate for anything. Which is why I, as an Asian, is sleeping with an black woman unlike you suckers.

    • brizmat

      haha, do Asians also talk about the size of the dicks, i think every one knows that. i think you need to revise your statement, a black woman with an Asian looks so funny! i guess no feeling at all!!!!

      • RegnisTheGreat

        That’s what you think. We’re actually married and have one kid already. We do it every night…

        • Atsushi

          You’re lame son. Speak for yourself.

          Does she have a wiener?

    • Alikese

      Keep telling yourself that.

      I’ll just leave that there for your perusal at a later date.

      • Chinanon

        Hmm chinas measurement- 50 years ago during a famine.

        as al gore supporters once said, I DEMAND A REMEASURE! (or something like that)

      • Rosy Cheeks

        Ya since thats a peer reviewed study and all, any one can make a graph and post it online….

    • Josh

      You dumbass, it’s penises. You only change the ending to an i when the ending is us, as in octopus –> octopi or hippopotamus –> hippopotami. So not only are you full of bullshit, but you can’t speak English. Congratulations, you’re stupid on more than one level.

      • mojojojo

        Actually you only change to an i when the word is of latin origin.

    • kevin

      Yeh right,thats why all asian women want us :)

  • could you imagine

    a Chinese NRA???


    • RegnisTheGreat

      Who would be the Chinese Charlton Heston? Chow Yun Fat?

      • Chinese Netizen

        Jackie “you peasants don’t deserve freedom” Chan

  • RegnisTheGreat

    Hey Fuana, why am I being moderated? I haven’t posted anything that bad have I?

    [Note from Fauna: Should be fixed.]

    • The writing should read –>
      “Note from Fuana…”

      • Keius

        Based on the avatar, wonder if he’s the same guy asking for “that” contact info on your blog.
        If not “ignore”.
        If so, “another typical 2-timer”

  • Michael

    only rifles are sold like that.
    You must be over 18 to buy a rifle in the USA
    As far as pistols are concerned, its very difficult to buy. You cannot buy pistols at Walmart
    You must be over 21
    You must pass the Brady Bill
    You must wait a week no matter if you pass
    You must have no prior police problems
    And a bunch of other messy paperwork.

    • chinaboy

      some sweet ass pump action hell yeah!!!

      I am very suprised by the hate free comments of the original chinese posters, very rare :-) very nice :-)

    • Brian

      That’s not true… Hand gun laws vary from state to state, but to buy a hand gun, all that is federally required is to fill out two forms, show ID and wait for the background check (which is instant in most cases). There’s no federal waiting period, the waiting period is a state law in the more restrictive, liberal states most notably California, New York, New Jersey and Maryland.

      It’s also not true that you “must have no prior police problems.” Again it varies from state to state, but for the most part, you must have no drug related or felony convictions. In Virginia and Alaska, felons can still buy guns.

      Walmart may not sell pistols, but if they don’t, it’s purely their corporate policy, not the law.

      I’ve bought several hand guns and pistols, and I’ve never waited more than 5-10 minutes for the person on the other end of the phone to say I was good to go. Whenever I’ve bought a gun, I’ve always walked out with it at the end of the transaction. Please don’t spread misinformation, it makes us all look bad.

      • aquadraht

        You are right. And what about Vermont? Thought it was same as Alaska.

      • EugeneTheBeast

        Felons cannot buy guns in Virginia.

      • Red

        In the state of Florida there is a “cool off” period of a few days before you may pick up your firearm, UNLESS you already have a concealed carry license.

    • RP-in-TX

      Not true for most states. Here in Texas you can buy a pistol in about an hour as long as you are 21 and have no criminal record. You don’t have to wait a week. I think only a few states have a waiting period. Most states do not.

    • Brian

      Depends on the state. Long guns (like rifles and shotguns) are 18+ while handguns are 21+. Many states allow you to purchase and take home a firearm the same day, after passing the background check. There are no background check requirements for private sales, though I know many people who insist the purchaser have a concealed weapons or handgun permit. This is so the seller knows the purchaser has passed a background check.

    • Al Catraz

      Thats not exactly true. Handguns are easy to buy (depending on where in the U.S. you live) if you havent been convicted of a felony. Where I live, I have a permit to carry a concealed handgun (which is easy to get). This allows me to walk into a gun store, find what I want, pay for it and walk out. Takes 10-15 minutes

    • bert

      Pass the Brady Bill?

      That was shown to be totally ineffective and so was dropped. The Brady bill doesn’t exist anymore.

    • Bongilante

      Not in the state of Georgia. As long as your name doesn’t come up for possible crimes on the computer you can walk out with a handgun that day. Otherwise you have to wait for the background check to come back and that does take a week. The background check only applies to the state, also you do not need a permit or registration of a handgun in Georgia. Also when I saw crimes it only applies to felonies.

    • Jeff

      Not entirely true. In more liberal states like New York and California there are waiting periods. I live in Tennessee, I just bought a 357 magnum last week. Walked in, picked it out, 5 minutes to fill out paperwork and I was out the door. Its good to live in Tennessee.

    • Eric

      The laws depend on the state you live in. Most states require you to be over 18 to buy a long gun or pistol (rifle or shotgun). Some require you to be over 21 to buy a pistol. Many have waiting (or cool-off) periods of a few days for a handgun. This can usually be bypassed with a Concealed Carry permit.

      The paperwork is Form 4473 and is required by BATF when purchasing a firearm from any FFL. They also have to make a phonecall to NICS to verify you aren’t a felon.

    • CollinLeon

      Incorrect. It is no more difficult to buy a handgun than a rifle in most of the US. I am in Texas and I can walk into a store and buy a handgun and be back in my car in probably 15 minutes. It won’t be a Wal-Mart store though since they have decided to no longer sell firearms in my city. They said that there were not enough people buying them around here to continue selling them. They still sell ammo though. I probably own 20 or so different types of handguns, rifles, and shotguns. I even own a circa-1950 Russian SKS (which is made a lot better than the Chinese SKS) which I’ve never even shot — it’s strictly for collection purposes.

    • adam

      brady bill is no longer in effect, you dont have to wait a week (10 days, actually) anymore.

    • RC45

      Not true. You have very poor information.
      Over 18 for rifle/shotgun – check
      You can buy pistols in most any sporting goods store – check
      Over 21 for handgun – check
      Pass Instant FBI NICS background – check
      Waiting period – no
      No NICS background for Concealed Carry Permit holder – check
      prior police problems? – that is what NICS background is for
      No other paper work.

      Nothing, zero, zip, nada.

      Well, at least that is how it is in Texas and pretty much every other state. A few cities do have draconian restrictions, but not nationally.

      We have guns because an armed citizenry lifes in freedom, and unarmed citizenry lives in fear under tryanny.

    • BusterHymen

      Thursday, July 1, 2010 at 4:14 pm

      only rifles are sold like that.
      You must be over 18 to buy a rifle in the USA
      As far as pistols are concerned, its very difficult to buy. You cannot buy pistols at Walmart
      You must be over 21
      You must pass the Brady Bill
      You must wait a week no matter if you pass
      You must have no prior police problems
      And a bunch of other messy paperwork.”

      This isn’t entirely true.

      It’s true that Wal-Mart doesn’t sell pistols but that’s by choice. They could sell them if they wanted to.

      It’s true that you must be 21 or older to PURCHASE a handgun. You can have one gifted to you by parents or a relative.

      It’s true that you must pass the “Brady Bill”, in actuality a background check. It’s usually instant and if the check is delayed (not denied) then you can get the gun anyway.

      Where I live there’s no waiting period. I can walk into a gun store and get a handgun in 20 minutes or less if I have the money.

      It’s partially that you can’t have any prior police problems but it mainly only applies to violent crimes (robbery, rape, domestic abuse, assault, etc)

      Messy paperwork is mostly untrue. Most states don’t require this.

      This only applies if you’re obtaining a firearm from a retailer. If you’re buying a used gun from an individual within your state you don’t have to do anything.

      As a side note 40 of the 50 states allow concealed carry. In my state you attend an authorized training course and then pay for a background check form your local law enforcement. After 1-6 weeks you get your permit. It’s good for three years and renewal cost depends on the county you live in.

      MOST crimes committed with firearms are are committed by people that obtained the guns ILLEGALLY.

    • BusterHymen

      This isn’t entirely true.

      It’s true that Wal-Mart doesn’t sell pistols but that’s by choice. They could sell them if they wanted to.

      It’s true that you must be 21 or older to PURCHASE a handgun. You can have one gifted to you by parents or a relative.

      It’s true that you must pass the “Brady Bill”, in actuality a background check. It’s usually instant and if the check is delayed (not denied) then you can get the gun anyway.

      Where I live there’s no waiting period. I can walk into a gun store and get a handgun in 20 minutes or less if I have the money.

      It’s partially that you can’t have any prior police problems but it mainly only applies to violent crimes (robbery, rape, domestic abuse, assault, etc)

      Messy paperwork is mostly untrue. Most states don’t require this.

      This only applies if you’re obtaining a firearm from a retailer. If you’re buying a used gun from an individual within your state you don’t have to do anything.

      As a side note 40 of the 50 states allow concealed carry. In my state you attend an authorized training course and then pay for a background check form your local law enforcement. After 1-6 weeks you get your permit. It’s good for three years and renewal cost depends on the county you live in.

      MOST crimes committed with firearms are are committed by people that obtained the guns ILLEGALLY.

    • Sanders

      No you don’t. I bought a handgun last year. Standard background check revealed nothing, so I was in and out in about 20 minutes. Of course, I live in Texas, so this is perfectly normal…

    • tenmikemike

      Not entirely true. Different states have slightly different regulations, some stricter than the Federal gun laws. In my state and many others there is NO one week wait if you pass the NICS instant background check (what you call the Brady Bill). Many states make it no harder to buy pistols than it is rifles or shotguns, except for the federal 21 year age requirement. I have a concealed weapons permit (even though many states allow open carry) so I can bypass the NICS check (because I already had to pass the background check to get it) and purchase any legal firearm. I was just counting; I have 8 pistols, 4 rifles and 1 shotgun, and that is not a large collection to the typical American gun enthusiast. Maybe to those that own only one, for self defense, it may.

    • We must live in different American States then.
      Over 18 – Check
      Over 21 – Check
      Pass the Brady Bill – Check
      Wait a Week – Not here. Pass the check and walk out with the pistol right then and there. Prior Police Problems are stopped here.
      Make out a form for both Federal and State – Check.

      By the way: After going through some very stringent Federal regulations, assorted paperwork and months of waiting, I was given permission to spend $15,000 to lawfully purchase a Fully Automatic Machine Gun; an M16A1. The lawful manufacture ending in May 1986.

      Not available in all 50 States.

    • Bongilante

      That doesn’t apply in all states. The state of GA you only must be 21, must not be convicted of a felony, must not be convicted of a drug offense (misdemeanor or felony), must not have been admitted to a mental health clinic.

    • Matt



      It depends on the state. Most states allow pistols to be sold exactly as rifles except for the age requirement of 21 to purchase. The eligibility requirements are the same for rifles. There is no extra paperwork in most places for pistols vs. rifles.

    • Rob

      It really depends on jurisdiction. The Federal standards are that you must be 18 for rifles, 21 for handguns, you cannot be a convicted felon, you cannot have a domestic violence conviction on your record, you can’t currently be under indictment for a crime, you can’t be an illegal drug user, you can’t have been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution, and you have to be a US citizen or a permanent resident.

      There used to be a waiting period so that they could do a background check, but with the introduction of the National Instant Check System, that’s no longer necessary, and it can all be handled within an hour or so.

      Anything beyond that, such as registration, licensing, permits, waiting periods, etc., are done on a state, county, or municipal level.

  • FYIADragoon

    I’m glad to at least see that Chinese are able to admit the flaws of their own country in comparison to America.

    Now if America could just get rid of those d*mn Jewish lobbyists.

    • anti-dentite

      For every Jew, a .22

    • 穀歌ba

      I guess that you do not know any Jews. How about the lobbyists for offshore drilling, military contracts in the middle east????

      • FYIADragoon

        I know a rather good amount of Israelis, actually. I know far more than is needed to realize that they own our government too. Offshore drilling doesn’t kill our reputation with an entire region of the world like Israel does. Offshore drilling doesn’t humiliate our vice president. Offshore drilling doesn’t waste American money like funding the IDF does. At least that oil eventually comes back to me. I’m never going to see anything from funding the IDF *cough*terrorists in uniform*cough*.

        • Exactly. The same “conservatives” (neo-cons) that are against Obama’s socialized healthcare have no problem funding the IDF and Israel’s socialized healthcare. Then you’re an “anti-Semite” if you don’t grovel for Israel. A few people are waking up though.

          • bydand

            I suppose you also think your nazi buddies didn’t kill around 45 million people. Hint, Jews were only a part of it.

            Oh by the way, a neo-con is a dimocrat that finally woke up. AND one only has to look at England and Canada to see the wonders of socialized health care. Remember Queen Nancy saying “we had to pass obummers healthcare bill so we could find out what was in it?” Apparently reading the thing FIRST was out of the question!

  • It’s posts like these which are so much more provocative than any censor board could ever anticipate. They cast much light.

  • Jay K.

    In my home we have a total of 8 guns, i think 9, but let’s go with 8. we have 3 shotguns, 2×12 guage (Mossbergs), 1×16 guage 2 rifles 1×22 caliber rifle for target practixe and 1×308 winchester, 3 handguns 1 saturday ngiht special a 1×45 and 1 40 calibur Glock. I dual weld son!

    joking aside, i see nothing wrong with a country that has guns for citizens, if the gov is proper and logical about it, society is overall practicall domestically then everything should be balanced. this is a good article.

    Long Live NRA!

    • Xav

      death to the rednecks! oh and how can you in your right mind suport the National Rednecks Association?????

      • Red

        You are truly IGNORANT!

    • aquadraht

      Actually, the US – all their wealth and stability notwithstanding – have one of the highest homicide rates of the world, not too few thereof from gun violence. Among young males, death or disability by accidential or suicidal gun use is among the first two or so causes for such tragedies while it virtually plays no role in countries with stricter gun laws. So it is questionable whether that is “freedom” to praise or just lunacy. Ok, other countries allow to drive at 190mph on the motorway ..

      • Brian Howard

        Actually, here in the US the highest morbidity rate (deaths) among young is because of home swimming pools not guns. And yes we kill our presidents and quickly kill those who kill our presidents as well. I will grant you that americans are rather strange. But I think US also has the highest number of ‘chinese restaurants’ per capita than any other nation – excepting of course china.

      • Mike

        Actually, the US has a lower violent crime rate than most european countries. And you’re about 3 times as likely to be killed by a drunk driver than you are a gun.

        As to buying guns, it depends on the state. Here in Arizona, if you buy from a store, you fill out the paperwork, do the background check, (not needed if you have a concealed carry permit), pay the store and off you go with your gun.

        If you buy from an individual (perfectly legal here), you hand them the cash, they hand you a gun, you shake hands and are on your way.

  • Cocopops

    It’s part of their constitution that all men have equal rights of freedom to arms. Generally, saying that it’s okay to buy weapons to “protect” one self and family. BUT HOW MANY TIMES does it take for another teenager to get hold of his “father’s gun” and kill other teenagers they are disgruntled with at highschool?? Americans dig the graves for the children who need help!

    • Have you noticed a common peculiarity with most of the “mass shooting” locations in recent years? For example Columbine, Virginia Tech and Fort Hood.

      They are all “gun free zones”. The thugs and crazies are not all stupid.


  • RegnisTheGreat

    You know what they say: Guns don’t kill people, violent minorities do!

  • So the videogames and movies are all true: once the zombie apocalypse strikes, get your ass to the Wal-Mart to equip thyself.

    Seriously, where’s the Mad Max special? I don’t have time to do any sawing once I’m beset with zombies/wasteland raiders/detractors of my ability to wield firearms!

    • Ms Galt

      As long as America chooses their Presidents according to how well they star in Western movies and how well they earn a mere degree in business rather than science, America demands guns!

      • HardyPengood

        thanks for the meaningless rhetoric…**yawn**

  • I sincerely believe that if the Chinese were allowed free and legal access to guns, the population would be halved within about 24 hours.

    And there wouldn’t be a single Running Dog Foreigner on the streets. Anywhere.

    • aquadraht

      Ok, I long lost hope to find intelligent life on Chinasmack, yet, did you realize that there was no gun ban in China prior to 1967 or so? And that in remote areas, among herdsmen, hunters and nomads, firearms are quite commonplace? When urban kids can’t buy firearms in the supermarket I fail to consider that a bad idea.

  • Yi Bin

    the reason why a native american can buy a gun easily is because in the constitution law is stated that every single person has the right to defend themselves. That is why the guns and rifles and so on will never be banned. Therefore they see buying a gun as the best option. However in each state they have different Gun laws which must be met in order to buy a gun. also every gun will be registered to people ID if it will be sold. However it is still too easy to get a gun. See history; Colombus high school/university, 2 kids bought their weapons via Internet and just kills several students.

    • bert

      you are wrong.

      Most people don’t have to register their guns, some states or areas do but most places don’t have registration.

    • ssracer

      Talk about serious misinformation. First, not all states require registration of firearms. Second, you cannot simply buy a gun over the internet. Yes, some gun purchases can be made via the internet, but the seller would legally have to ship the firearm to an authorized dealer who would then proceed with any necessary paperwork before the buyer could acquire the weapon.

    • Hoo boy! I am amazed in one sense at how much you Chinese fellows seem to know about American law and culture, certainly more than most Americans know about Chinese culture. In another sense I am amazed at how many of the details you have wrong.
      The Constitutions Second Amendment does not specify a right to self defense, but rather, a right to bear arms in defense of the Constitution by means of the militia. The militia in America is two entities. The first is the National Guard and the various State Defense Forces. They are called the organized militia. Second is the unorganized militia, that is, the people. The unorganized militia becomes organized if and when the President or state governors call up the people to military service. This is well defined in federal law, and most states address this issue in their state constitutions and legislation. As for Columbine, Fort Hood and other massacre sites, as I have referenced elsewhere on this forum. almost all are and were, “gun free zones”. Easy pickings for nut jobs and criminals.

  • shenmeniao

    great post!

    i think Chinese shock about the American government allowing guns to be sold like this can be compared to American people’s shock about how the CCP suppresses Chinese people.

    gee wiz, so shocking!

  • Z

    The comments by the Chinese netizens are very good.

  • Joe Friday

    Not a big thing in a US store that sells hunting rifles. I’m not sure what state this is, but Walmart’s in California do not have this type of display.

    • Keius

      Well, we are talking about Walmart here. If there’s no money to be had selling guns, they won’t sell it. Not many hunters in CA. And they’ll usually only sell hunting rifles and shotguns for the sporting crowd in “redneck” country. Other area Walmarts won’t carry guns. I don’t recall Walmart selling handguns and items that might be an issue with the liberal crowd.

  • MadeinAmerica

    The Second Ammendment of the Constitution here gives the right of a “well organized militia” to bear arms (saying that this right cannot be infringed by any law).

    This has been interpreted as the right of individuals to own guns. Some laws limit the right (e.g., to limit automatic weapons or assault type weapons, guns in cities, waiting period to buy a handgun, etc.), but these are always under pressure to be dropped (including a new Supreme Court ruling this past week).

    Guns are involved in more than 30,000 deaths in the U.S. each year, about the same as drunk driving or suicide. Still, in many parts of the country it is still a gun culture.

    In the town where I live, the law REQUIRES you to own a gun (every home must have one). This was a political statement and it is never enforced. Still, you are supposed to get a waiver.

    I am not pro-gun and our local Walmart does not look like the one pictured, but in some areas they do.

    For now, there are so many guns out there it would be hard to do much. There is no real concern about revolution, but more about the gangs, school shootings, disgruntled employees that shoot up the workplace, etc. The pro-gun lobby focuses on the fact that guns do not kill people, people do. But, guns make it easier for people and no one hunts with assult rifles.

    Still, that is where we are at and likely to stay.

    • The text of the 2nd amendment actually states, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Pretty obvious that it is talking about individual rights, not governmental rights.

      The reason stated in the amendment is because a well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free State. But the right, as stated in the constitution, belongs to the individual.

      • PeterScriabin

        2nd amendment text (minus confusing commas) is: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed”. So, strictly speaking, Chris, you are quite right.

        However, the days when people in the USA might, at any moment, be called upon to band together and defend themselves against a government using police/troops to enforce tyrannical policies, are in practice long gone. Therefore, there is no longer any constitutionally-based right/reason for individuals to keep or bear arms.

        As far as the history: no one paid much attention to the 2nd amendment, and few individuals had the need or money for guns, until after the Civil War (early 1860s). The increase in the capacity for gun production caused by that War got some sharp business minds thinking (funny thing, that). Peace-time sales of guns gradually increased, and the shady re-interpretation of the 2nd amendment became “necessary”, to protect business profits.

        FWIW, I agree with MadeinAmerica that all this is pretty tragic, and a waste of lives.

        The comments elsewhere in this thread about how a Chinese 2nd amendment could quickly halve the population are even more chilling, and probably true! But I love the feeling, on arriving in UK or China, that my chances of getting shot by some gun-toting cretin, have just been exponentially reduced.

        How ironic that a government allowing “freedom” results not just in people being that much freer to buy guns and kill each other, but that they actually do just that – whereas awful governments such as the ones spawned by Chinese communism have had the immeasurable benefit of saving so many lives. (Even Mao’s famine and the Cultural Revolution didn’t get through half the population).

        • Nazdar

          Peter, you are correct that one of the costs of freedom is dealing with the consequences of people’s bad choices — both your own and others. However, the alternative is giving away your freedom, letting a government make your choices for you, and hoping for the best. When it works, things can be good. When it goes awry, there’s no easy way to clean up the mess. You end up with entire countries being abused by their leaders.

          • PeterScriabin

            Nazdar, you are quite correct, of course, and your argument is what lies behind the word “ironic” in my post.

            However, please consider the following situation in a representative democracy: a constitutionally-binding plurality of citizens instructs the representatives to pass a law where, in general, no citizen is allowed private ownership of destructive weapons. (Additional laws may be passed about gun production, production for export, the manner of prosecution, and size of penalty, for being caught with weapons, etc., but let’s keep this simple for a moment).

            The reason the citizens collectively decide to curtail their rights is that they believe they will prefer the feeling of security that accrues from living in a country without privately-owned weapons of destruction, to the feeling of terror that results from a situation where each citizen does not know who will shoot him or his children, or when they will be in the mood to open fire.

            I am not saying this is really what happened in a country like the UK (as opposed to the USA). I only wish to point to the possibility that although having the freedom (the means) to kill each other may be better than submitting to a government that makes this, and many other, decisions for us by force, there exists a still better society – one where we agree collectively and consciously to restrain ourselves from demeaning behavior.

            Of course (and I am only adding this obvious elaboration because there is apparently no minimum-IQ requirement for contributing to this forum), the need for collective action here is so that people are re-assured that their own good behavior (forbearing to terrorize their neighbors) will not be wasted by the failure of others similarly to do the right thing.

        • You are wrong! I grew up with guns and was a good shot at 12.

          I was drafted and went to Viet Nam. The reason I survived was I was a crack shot and scored Expert with the M-16 on the first try, after one hour of range practice.

          We still are called up for service in this day and age. I know of several young guys who volunteered in the last few years that made sure, or their folks made sure they could shoot well before they ever were allowed to join.

          • PeterScriabin

            You begin with the statement: “You are wrong!” You then continue with a number of fairly uninteresting statements about your personal life, that have no bearing (as far as I can tell – do, please, correct me if I missed something) on anything I said.

            The violence of the USA against other countries, and your half-witted delight in having participated in it, have nothing whatever to do with the 2nd amendment or the debate about ordinary citizens being armed against each other. The most charitable interpretation of your post might be that the noise of guns and wars has irreparably damaged your brain.

        • Mike

          Very much incorrect.

          First, you are welcome to believe that the reason for the 2nd Amendment no longer exists. I and many other people disagree. The right will remain until you and those who agree with you manage to amend our Constitution. Given the strong support for the 2nd Amendment in the US that won’t be happening any time soon.

          Second, the idea that guns were not common in the US until after the Civil War is rooted in a book called “Arming America” by Michael Bellesiles. Unfortunately for those who support this thesis, scholars who attempted to replicate Bellesiles’s work found that he had fabricated much of his data. Bellesiles insisted his notes would prove that his critics were wrong… then he mysteriously lost them. Bellesiles was fired by Emory University for fabricating his results and Arming America is now almost universally accepted as fraudulent.

          • PeterScriabin

            Mike – reading comprehension and logic don’t seem to be your strong suits.

            I never said “the reason for the 2nd Amendment no longer exists”. If you can open your mind a tad, when reading the 2nd , you will notice that it cites a particular justification for the right to bear arms, and no other justification. It is this particular justification that I am saying is no longer relevant to modern society. Why?

            As others have pointed out here, the police and US army have much better weapons than you and that crack pot (sorry, I mean crack shot) Marcus Boyd, so it’s not going to do you much good to bear arms against them, is it?

            No, hypocrites, the justification for your guns now, is to protect you against your fellow citizens, right? Thus terrorizing us all. No wonder Americans are all so fawningly polite to each other! I just wish y’all would shut up about the 2nd amendment, as it is totally irrelevant to your need for a gun to express your true violent character.

            As to the book you cite, you have the advantage of me, but my arguments in no way relied upon it.

        • Brian Howard

          By the same argument would you suggest that the 1st or any other of the bill of rights are equally ‘defunct’ in our so modern US? Perhaps that your laptop might be searched or seized for no reason by TSA or ICE on entering the US as the 4th is no longer relevant in modern US? The rest of your comment is so evidently ignorant that I won’t wast time.

        • corpsman

          “2nd amendment text (minus confusing commas) is: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed”. So, strictly speaking, Chris, you are quite right.”

          Minus confusing commas???? There were two, comma based, versions written. The second, with the “confusing commas”, was the one submitted to the states for ratification. Thus, it is, the law.

    • corpsman

      “….and no one hunts with assault rifles.”


  • Bokamba

    Great post! I have engaged Chinese friends in discussion about gun rights on several occasions, but encountered the same kind of annoying defensiveness that Uber mentioned. I’m pleased to see that some Chinese netizens recognize the value of private gun ownership and can envision that it might someday work in China.

    For those who are confused about American gun laws, here’s a brief summary from my perspective:

    – Virtually all American adults (except those with certain psychological problems or criminal histories) are allowed to own guns
    – Some states or localities restrict ownership of certain types of guns, or have limits on the size of magazines.
    – Most states allow people to carry firearms in public (openly or concealed), though some require licenses. Each state has its own restrictions on which places people cannot carry guns (e.g. schools, courthouses).

    • . . . . and the result is a ridiculously high murder rate, with most people who do get shot being shot with their own gun or the gun of a family member/friend.

      Guns kill people, and should be kept out of the hands of everyone except trained professionals and sportsmen.

      • Keius

        In China, the city where i come from. cars kill ALOT more people than guns ever will in Baltimore City(look it up). If you sit in the corner of certain intersections and just watch traffic, you have a pretty good chance of seeing someone getting hit and maybe killed…..
        The rule of thumb is that IF you do hit someone, make sure you back up and run them over again for good measure. It’s better to pay a one time flat fee than to pay medical expenses to the “victim” for the rest of their lives. Older folks are much cheaper. How much you have to pay in restitution is based on age. (don’t you just love how the Chinese courts work?)
        BTW, the “victims” are almost always at fault. These people need to learn to look both ways before crossing. Most of these “victims” though, are immigrant workers from the North. They don’t seem to understand the concept that a 2 ton car can hurt them. The locals know to be careful.

        On that note, people kill people. Guns are just a tool. If i had to kill someone or wanted to commit murder, vehicular manslaughter is a better option than 1st degree murder with a handgun. :)

        • Tadd

          Some statistics…

          USA: There were nearly 6,420,000 auto accidents in the United States in 2005. The financial cost of these crashes is more than 230 Billion dollars. 2.9 million people were injured and 42,636 people killed.

          China: There are about 450,000 car accidents on Chinese roads each year which cause about, 470,000 injuries and 100,000 deaths. The total cost of these crashes was 2.4 Billion dollars.

          If you compare, you can see America clearly has a great deal more accidents and injuries, yet China has more deaths. However, there are many factors not taken into account which could explain the difference in death rate…
          – Emergency response time
          – Available health care
          – Figures being tampered with (the World Health Organisation claims the figures from China could be more than what was officially released)
          – How safe the car is (durability, air bags, reinforced sidings, etc)
          – Whether or not some Chinese do reverse to make sure the person they hit is dead (I feel this is a generalisation)

          In America: 10,086 of 14,831 people were killed with firearms in 2007. American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of any other industrialised nation. In one year, firearms killed:
          Japan = 0
          Great Britain = 19
          Germany = 57
          France = 109
          Canada = 153
          United States = 5,285

          • Keius

            Statistics are always inaccurate in China. The gov always underreports everything. Always tries to put everything in a good light….like how much of the Chinese population has VD’s, HIV+, crime statistics, etc. Like everything else in China, statistics are censored as well :P ALOT of the crime is unreported or goes under the table. I would multiply all statistics and figures by 3 :) For HIV, i’d multiply their figures by 20.

          • KC

            the population of the United States is more on level with the population of the European Union, so the only real comparisons you can do are with larger population countries, or in this case, a union of countries.

            Even after taking the population in account, there will be more deaths per cap in the US than other countries, which can easily be explained by the incredibly diverse cultures and differences in how countries report deaths (note, murder suicides in japan count as multiple suicides, etc) and so forth.

            over HALF of the firearms deaths in the US are suicides as well, typically those kind of people would just end up killing themselves a different way if guns weren’t available.

            even if gun violence was a large problem in this country (which it isn’t really, it breaks down to 0.001% of the population) guns should still be legal for the freedom of it. same reason people think drugs should be legal, kind of ironic though you wont find very many people that think BOTH should be legal…

        • Estimated number of people killed by elicit drug use in the United States in 2000 according to the AMA journal: 17,000

          According to the CDC, in the United States in 2006, there were 30,896 deaths from firearms, divided as follows: Suicide 16,883; Homicide 12,791; Accident 642; Legal Intervention 360; Undetermined 220.

          That is, guns are twice as dangerous as Heroin, Cocaine, illegal amphetamines etc. etc. etc.

          • “A gun is just faster and easier”

            Precisely. Some of the suicides would not have taken place if it were not for the availability of guns, same with the murders. I get your argument about regulation etc., and given where the US is at right now this is the best that can be hoped for, but let’s not pretend this is a good thing. There is no reason why any other country should wish to inflict this on itself.

          • “…then they’re just pandering for attention.”

            Wot, you don’t think that plenty of suicides aren’t doing precisely this?

      • “. . . . and the result is a ridiculously high murder rate, with most people who do get shot being shot with their own gun or the gun of a family member/friend.

        Guns kill people, and should be kept out of the hands of everyone except trained professionals and sportsmen.”

        Bullshit. Firearms are used, legally, by private citizens, hundreds of thousands of times a year to prevent, stop or deter crime. Far more often than by police. Most police I know are very much in favor of private firearms possession, as it makes their work less dangerous.

        There is a direct and high correlation between high rates of private firearms ownership, and a lower rates of crimes against persons and property. That is, those locales with the strictest gun control (DC, LA, NYC, SF, Chicago, Boston, etc.) have the highest rates of violent crime. I have worked in prisons, and it is very clear violent professional criminals are far more fearful of armed citizens than they are of the police. Criminals prefer to do their “work” in places that have the strictest gun laws. After all, being criminals, they ignore gun control laws. I have also noticed that in areas of high rates of firearms possession, people are generally a lot more polite. Something about survival of the mentally, physically and emotionally fittest.
        The Second Amendment was written to enable the very existence of the well regulated militia*, on the grounds that depending on the government to arm the people, in the event of the government usurping the Constitution, is a form of oxymoron.
        The founding fathers of the republic recognized that all governments are, at times, tempted to oppress the people, and the people require the means to resist such oppression. No other nation has such law. In that sense and from other perspectives, the American Revolution, and it’s subsequent Constitutional developments, is the most radical in human history.

        Recall, if you will, April 17,1775, the shot heard around the world, at Concord, Massachusetts. The British colonial government in Boston, sent British Army troops to confiscate the arms of the militia (that is, the people). They not only failed to confiscate the arms, they got their butts waxed by a bunch of farmers and tradesmen as they made a desperate run back to Boston. For the next 6 years the British Army won most of the battles, but lost the war. Barely. While the militia did not win the war alone, without the militias, the Continental (revolutionary) Army would not have succeeded.

        * At the time the Constitution was written, “well regulated militia” meant orderly, competent and trained. Not, as is commonly perceived now, to mean, lots of government regulation.

        If you are truly interested in the facts regarding the intentions and beliefs of the founding fathers (read, radical revolutionaries) please read the Federalist Papers. These documents were an anvil upon which the Constitution was forged. The Supreme Court uses then frequently to determine the meaning of the laws written in the Constitution. It is clearly not, nor was it ever intended to be a ” living document”, that is, subject to change by acclimation, regulation or legislation. The amendment process is clearly defined and is deliberately made an onerous political process, fraught with risk to politicians and government officials. The founding fathers intended the Constitution to be rock hard with respect to the rights of the individual as being superior to the rights of the state. The progressive growth of government power can only be interpreted as morally, legally and essentially anti-Constitution. “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Ben Franklin


        “Love your Enemies, for they tell you your Faults.” Ben Franklin

      • Tom

        Your comments are ridiculous themselves.

        In a country where obesity is at record levels, do we ban forks?
        When someone writes ridiculous and inane comments, or calls for the killing of others, do we ban pencils?

        And you want to ban guns? Better to ban idiotic thinking.

  • The reason America can sell guns so openly is because it’s a nation that respects and follows the law. The guns used in crimes in America are usually bought and sold illegally and almost never cross paths with law-abiding gun owners.

    • “The guns used in crimes in America are usually bought and sold illegally”

      . . . . . . survey says no.

      Unless you’ve got some better stats, the chart seems quite conclusive: 18% of guns possesed by Federal inmates were stolen or bought from a fence/the black market, 15% were bought from drug dealers (and therefore also presumably illegally obtained) – that makes a grand total of 33%. The rest – 67%, more than 2/3rds – were legally obtained.

      • The majority of gun crimes in America involve handguns, and a small percentage of American stores sell handguns. “Straw purchases,” where a legal buyer purchases a gun for another person, usually someone would otherwise be ineligible to buy a gun, is illegal but hard to prosecute. Licensed handgun dealers are often corrupt but also hard to prosecute because of their legal licensing. Stolen guns account for only a small amount of gun crimes, but the sources criminals use to obtain guns are often not the same that a hunter or gun collector would use. By “legally” I meant no funny business. There are many “legal” channels for criminals to obtain guns but the legality lies not only in the source but also the motivation for the purchase.

      • ggh

        FOARP – give me a statistic that isn’t from wikipedia and I’ll believe you. If its not credible enough to cite in a high school paper, its not credible enough for a forum.

      • “Unless you’ve got some better stats, the chart seems quite conclusive: 18% of guns possesed by Federal inmates were stolen or bought from a fence/the black market, 15% were bought from drug dealers (and therefore also presumably illegally obtained) – that makes a grand total of 33%. The rest – 67%, more than 2/3rds – were legally obtained.”

        You have ignored the impact of the international smuggler. One of the current political ironies extent is the notion that the US provides most of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels come from the US. Since they favor fully automatic weapons, obtaining such in the US is very difficult and expensive. So much so, that domestic resellers of fully automatic weapons are much more inclined to sell them through legal channels to government and some private agencies, as well as licensed collectors. The profit margin is excellent and the risks are negligible. It simply makes better economic sense to obtain fully automatic weapons from sources other than within the US. The same economic and legal strictures apply to criminals in the US. Finally, the US-Mexican border is so poorly secured that smuggling weapons into the US is relatively easy, with powerful profit motives as most of the customers are professional criminals.


  • RegnisTheGreat

    Yeah, but I bet most of those “Guns” are made in PRC.

    • Keius

      Talk about ignorant.

      We all know they’re all made in Israel. :P

  • kimboslice

    The reason Americans can own guns is the same reason Americans can openly criticize the President, politicians, and our government. The Founders distrusted government and trusted the people. In other countries, the government distrusts the people and tries to control, manipulate and spy on them. Texas has a lot of guns, and you are not afraid. Vermont has no crime but you can have a gun and even carry it in your coat. So, having a gun does not cause crime, but criminals with guns can terrorize citizens armed with nothing.

    • Keius

      Here here! I concur.
      Criminals “might” have second thoughts about robbing someone or breaking in to a home if there’s a good chance they might get shot. Look up crime statistics in England, Canada, Australia, and then areas where there are carry laws like Florida and the Midwest.

      Nothings perfect. They’ll always be problems with guns but i believe having them is better than not having them. I believe in self defense and would prefer to be on equal footing with the armed criminals. People should have the option to choose . And those irresponsible *sses that somehow let their young kids get a hang of those guns should be locked up.

      • You mean “look up the crime stats for countries including their major urban areas, and then compare them with only our mainly rural areas”, yes, the countryside suffers from less criminal activity than the city – your point being? Surely the real test is to compare like with like – London with New York, Sydney with Atlanta, Wales with Iowa, Ireland with Kentucky – and the result in all cases is that the US has a higher murder rate (which is one of the few crimes for which most countries have the same definition).

        Yes, if you have a gun in your hand you are on an even footing with armed criminals, but wouldn’t it be better simply to prevent the criminals from having access to guns? American history means that widespread ownership of guns is unlikely to disappear at any time in the foreseeable future, but this is hardly a good thing.

        • RP-in-TX

          But most U.S. cities have MUCH lower rates of burglary and home invasions than London. I’ve read that almost half of burglaries in London occur while the occupants are home. In the U.S. that happens in about 1-2% of burglaries. It’s just not worth trying to rob someones home when there is a possibility they will shoot you.

          • Check it out –


            The US has a higher rate of burglaries per capita than France, Ireland, Holland etc. – all of which have tight gun controls and low rates of private ownership. Of course, different countries have different definitions of constitutes burglary, and different rates of reporting, so we’re not comparing like with like, but there’s simply no evidence here than gun ownership decreases the likelihood of a burglary. Go through the stats on that website and you’ll find that the US has higher rates of assault, and rape than the UK and comparable levels of burglaries, car theft, and overall crime – although once again we may not be comparing like with like here. Murder is one of the few crimes where both the likelihood of detection and the definition of the crime are comparable between countries.

        • almond

          Preventing criminals from getting guns? Now why didn’t we think of that? We’re just handing them out like samples at a grocery! Not saying measure shouldn’t be taken or that guns should be easier to get but… xD I’m sure the law enforcement division isn’t exactly giddy and excited to hand out guns to criminals like popcorn. It’s not easy to eradicate the desire of people on the black market or otherwise to stop supplying arms to criminals.

        • Keius

          Can’t really compare those. The comparison i’m making is those areas where guns are banned and those areas where guns are legal to carry openly or concealed.


          Irregardless of the gun issue, if you don’t want to get killed, by guns or other means…more likely by being shot though, don’t live in poor areas :P This is sort of common sense though but i guess we need even more statistics…

  • The reactions of the commenters are really thoughtful and they sound educated. It’s weird and wrong but I don’t think of the average chinese person as being so thoughtful when it comes to the US, maybe just the ones here in SZ.

  • Peye

    These guns you see for sale are one of the most useless and destructive pieces of merchandise offered the puplic. What is a gun made for? To destroy something or to kill. In the US a great number of the population is so mentally imbalanced and insecure that they feel the need to own a gun to boost their selfconfidence or to protect themself. Besides in some parts of the US the situation has deteriorated to a point that killings with guns is a regular occurance ,especially among young people. So it is wise for everyone’s benefit to keep these things under control and away from the general population.

    • RP-in-TX

      The murder rate in the U.S. has declined by almost half in the last 20 years. There was a lot of violence with gangs in the late-1980’s and early 1990’s due to crack, but that situation has improved dramatically.

      Part of the reason for the large gun sales in the U.S. is that hunting is very popular here. I go hunting several times a year myself, and have since childhood.

    • almond

      “the situation has deteriorated to a point that killings with guns is a regular occurance”

      “so mentally imbalanced and insecure that they feel the need to own a gun to… to protect themself”

      So on one hand you say that killings with guns is a regular occurance and yet the people who then feel they need one to protect themselves are ‘mentally imbalanced’? I’m not on either side in this case and I do feel like we probably need to be more careful about the processes in which people can gain access to guns, HOWEVER, do you really think if a criminal really wants to get a gun, they can’t even if there are a more laws in place to attempt to make sure they don’t?

      • Keius

        I do own a gun legally, but I can tell you that if i wanted to commit a crime with a gun, i sure wouldn’t use my legally registered one if i didn’t want it traced to me. It’d cost me 400 bucks and 15 minutes to head downtown and buy one with no serial number or some stolen one…..umm…600 if i wanted to make sure i got a halfway decent piece :)

        I’ve got a kid and i keep mines locked up in a safe far far away from any ammo. Before my kid, it used to be in my nightstand. Reminds me though, i don’t think i’ve even fired the thing in 5 years.

        Anyway, i’ve always thought it stupid that lawmakers continue to make new more restrictive gun laws. Criminals ignore laws, so we’ll just make more laws that they can ignore…..

        More laws don’t matter if you just let them walk after catching them with illegal guns. This is common practice in Baltimore. Our prison system just can’t handle it. As messed up as China’s prison system/death penalty is, they do have the right idea in some ways.

        • bert

          Don’t hide the gun. Teach the child to respect it. My father did and I think that was the right approach.

          • Keius

            He’s 2 years old right now :) Handgun safety and all that are in the future along with trap, skeet, etc. Doubt i’ll do hunting with him…that hasn’t been a part of my lifestyle since i was married….sigh

        • I agree with teaching kids to respect firearms early. The problem is that people don’t do that as much now.

          A firearm, be it a rifle, shotgun, pistol, or revolver, is just a tool. If you learn to use any or all of them, you will respect them and use them safely. They also will help you protect your family, property, and your own life if needed.

  • Greg

    I’m a 40 year old American. I hope that my comments can help you understand the nature of guns in America.

    Guns have been a part of American life from nearly the beginning of the settlement of North America. Ownership of guns is protected by the 2nd amendment to the Constitution. Some of the thinking about guns in early America deal with the possibility of being owned by the King of Britain (who was thought of as a villain). The British philosopher John Locke said (basically) “all governments get their right to govern from the people.” This is true of all governments: fascist, democratic, communist & socialist.

    Compared to other Western democracies, there is a great deal of gun violence in America. However, the vast majority of gun owners use them for hunting and a sense of self-protection. There are many laws against using guns for any reason besides hunting. So in America, it’s OK to own a gun, but there are strong restrictions on how you can use one. You can use a gun for hunting and to protect your house (once a criminal has entered), but any other use generally has a strong law against it.

    Personally, I don’t like guns and I will never own one. I can feel protected against gun owners because I know our police are extremely good at catching murderers. Even a nice American jail is a bad, bad place. Also, the American culture has become used to the idea of guns. There are some families where it’s very normal to own a gun, and I feel (mostly) confident that such people are not mad killers.

    Generally, you will find more gun ownership in rural areas and less in urban and sub-urban areas. Guns are a normal part of life in rural America. In the city, there are rules about carrying a gun and if it is hidden. These laws can depend on the individual state (eg California might be different from Texas).

    Certainly what I have said doesn’t cover the entire story (there is still the cultural meaning of guns and the psychology of guns), but I hope what I’ve written will give a better understanding of how guns are part of American culture.

  • Here in Toronto, Canada, on the northern border of the US, hand guns are prohibited by the general public. Rifles can be purchased for hunters. Hand guns can be purchased for collectors. The vast majority of gun crime here uses an illegal gun. 50% of these guns are stolen from Canadian gun collectors. The other 50% are smuggled in from the US. Canada provides marijuana, and other drugs and receive payment in guns.

    For the US the wide access to guns seems to work. “An armed society is a polite society”, as I’ve read.

    In China all university students receive military training of a month (or used to). They learn to dig trenches, plan military strategy and shoot a rifle. Lots of graduates in China know how to shoot, hopefully better than they drive a car.

    • I’m a university teacher in China, and I’ve never seen any guns at the three schools where I’ve taught. Some simulated knife tactics, but it’s mostly marching drills and synchronized exercise regimens. I’ve never met a university student who has held a gun before. It could be possible that some schools permit gun training but the military training that students endure is mostly for psychological indoctrination rather than practical defense skills.

  • wuwoo

    The Chinese goverment sucks because their parent suck. When you beat your children for disclipe you create either a wimp who needs a gun to win or a tyrant who will ban any form of power another man can have over him. Fear breeds fear breeds suffering. Love your children, they are the future that will save you.

  • CaseyOrourke

    I live in Texas, served 14 years in the military and am a qualified marksman in both rife and pistol, so I have no need tp prove my expertise with them. My time in the service taught me a healthy respect for firearms and the damage they can cause.

    As a citizen I have the constitutional right to legally own multiple firearms if I wanted, but I choose not to because at this point in my life I have no need for them.

    The city I live in is perfectly safe with a professional and competent police force that adaquately protects our community and violent crime is not a concern. I have no need to hunt for my food or kill dangerous animals.

    I still however support the constitutional right to bear arms and will do so again if I deem it necessary.

  • Bill G.

    Guns are ingrained into the US culture, and different cultures here mesh together; remember that our culture is only a few hundred years old, so we don’t have 40 centuries of animosity between groups to deal with.

    Many large cities here regulate handguns very closely (although that will soon change); as a consequence, social, law-abiding citizens have great difficulty getting guns, while the criminals (our ‘black society) have no difficulty. The population in some of these towns are at the mercy of the criminals.

    Also, our anti-gun citizens ‘stretch the truth’ when describing ‘children killed by guns’. They include people up to the age of 26 years, and include criminal-on-criminal murders in the total.

    While an unfortunate and irreplaceable few children are indeed killed accidentally each year bu firearms, it is actually a small percentage of the children that die accidentally from other means.

    And finally, our country’s constitution does allow firearms for the purpose of deposing an unjust government; the Revolutionary War of our nation was fought for precisely that reason; the depose the unjust rule of Great Britain (who, incidentally, were the same folks that disarmed YOUR population!)

  • yihaaaa

    probably because… if chinese people have to use chopsticks because a knife is too complicated… how is it possible to use a gun ? hihih

  • Flea on a Drum

    What Bill G. & some of the others who know this issue have said is entirely correct. There is a strong tendency among overly-sheltered, liberal, “frogs in the well” that if it’s impossible to regulate & control the criminals, then by all means regulate the law-abiding, so that it will to voters like they are doing something. I am 55 years old, have owned guns since childhood, and neither I, nor anyone I know has ever been hurt by, or has hurt any other person, with a gun. On the contrary, violent and potentially deadly situations have been dissipated by the mere appearance of a gun. Gun ownership requires responsibility & discipline. One must always keep in mind the four principles of gun safety. If you don’t know them, look them up. This can be passed on from father to child, whereby the gun is not just an object, but a symbol of trust, responsibility and self-control. Unfortunately, it doesn’t always work out this way. That is why it is necessary for honest, well-intended people to have firearms, to act as a deterrent. The police can not be everywhere at once and statistics show that police have a much higher percentage of accidental deaths due firearms than citizens do (many are poorly trained), and the job of law enforcement is not to provide personal protection anyway, it is simply to enforce the law.

    • Mike

      Law enforcement’s job is to actually enforce judges’ orders. Officers, by law, do not need to enforce any law but they must obey and carry out judges’ orders.
      I agree that police officers aren’t always trained best and having guns is not a major issue in America. Don’t blame the guns, blame the people. MS13 is the most dangerous gang and they do not rely on guns for their murders.
      Take a look at Arizona’s crime rates as they’ve loosened gun control; the rate has declined.
      Chinese people don’t have the self control to be able to handle owning guns. Not to mention owning guns would give the people the ability to attempt an otherthrow of the Communist regime.

      • aquadraht

        You are so pathetic. Every time when I try to imagine how fat American clerks and traders take their guns from Walmart in order to overthrow the government, I cannot but giggle hysterically. Your self-delusion is striking. To disperse some ten thousand fat US suburbia dwellers with there wildly mixed collection of guns, it would take an infantry platoon, 2 or 3 light armored vehicles with water cannons (possibly one with a real machine gun for the worst case), and switching off cell phone network etc.

        For any forceful overthrowing of a government it needs at least parts of armed forces siding with the insurgents. Thousands of armed rednecks, without proper command and control, would rather shoot one another in the feet. So much for your dreams of an armed citizenship.

        • CollinLeon

          You seem to fail to realize that many gun owners are also ex-military. In a situation where the government has completely gotten out of touch with the populace and an armed revolt was necessary, it is not unrealistic to think that at least some of the military would be on the side of the civilians.

          I’ve heard people say that a handgun is an acceptable weapon against an armored vehicle. The best response I heard once by an ex-Marine was “with a handgun, I can *get* a rocket launcher”…

          • “….it is not unrealistic to think that at least some of the military would be on the side of the civilians.”

            Analyze the oath rendered by all persons who join the US military.

            I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

            Pre-eminent is the Constitution. The Law. Not some men.


        • Cosantoir

          Who do you think makes up the American armed forces—and in particular the “combat arms” like Infantry, Artillery and Armor?—men overwhelmingly from suburbs and small towns in the West, Midwest and South who grew up in families who own guns.

          And we have far more impressive weapons in our legal possession than the recreational shotguns and hunting rifles at Walmart—though an enemy would never know the difference between a .30 caliber bullet from a military M24 sniper rifle or a “civilian” Remington 700 hunting rifle.

          Tens of millions of Americans—who you arrogantly and bigotedly refer to as “rednecks”—own AR-15 rifles that are nearly identical to the M16s and M4s of the US armed forces.

          The millions of us who are veterans of the US armed forces did not suddenly forget everything we learned as warriors on the day we hung up our uniforms.

          • aquadraht

            I can’t but laugh more loudly. Obviously, none of you has the tiniest knowlegde of military history, much less history of revolutions, insurrections. and civil wars. In your Hollywood fantasy world, all the good gun owners are united an willing to overthrow the bad government, and they are able to do so because of their Walmart guns, and because possibly the one of the other of them had the questionable fun to massacre some Asians or Middle Easterners from behind an extremly overwhelming air and artillery superiority (which did not hinder Chinese in 1950 and Vietnamese two decades later to miserably kick your butts). Since 1865, no American has learnt fighting in the rubble of the own houses – well should be glad about.

            Actually, in an armed insurrection you need political will, political leadership, and a broad popular movement. These conditions granted, and fighting an unpopular government with few support in the populace, it is strikingly unimportant whether the weapons come from Walmart or are taken from police or army precincts, or even stem from military units siding with the insurgents.

            Your Hollywood Dreams may even break apart into a full-featured nightmare once – like it was the cause in practically all civil wars – considerable parts of the populace are assembled around two or more major inimical factions in the country, no matter whether Southerner vs. Northerners, Leftists vs. Rightists, Black vs. Whites or vice versa. Then your nice distribution of weaponry will be the guarantee for an endless series of massacres and countermassacres.

            Your dream of millions of freedom-loving NRA-Rednecks standing up against the government stays ridiculous, given the topography, the widely suburbian settlement pattern, and the means of control and communication. The government could easily block any movement by cutting radio and TV, phone and cellphone communication, fuel supply and sub- and interurban roads with a minimum of troops. Any wannabe-revolutionary would have trouble to collect, much more to lead, feed, clothe and otherwise supply their heroes, every some hundred a pack from suburbian dwellings.

            Once there is no organization, armed resistance would simply be crime and treated that way. And the overwhelming majority even of arms-possessing citizens would applaud government and police for a crackdown of such culprits.

            But dream on

          • Cosantoir


            Laugh as loudly as you please.

            The braying of a jackass is one way to recognize the beast…

            Quite a few of us know just a little bit about “military history, much less history of revolutions, insurrections. and civil wars” and our “Hollywood fantasy” world is unfortunately the all-too-real one in which we’ve spent years away from our families in military service, seen friends killed, and shed our own blood.

            I’ve spent some time in the “rubble” of Iraqi houses—and I’ve put a few Iraqis in their graves whilst there.

            So keep smugly patting yourself on the back. And pray you never face the likes of me.

        • Kyle c

          US Military Officers and enlisted men swear an oath to defend the Constitution, nothing else, against all enemies foreign and domestic.

          here is the wording for an Army Officer – other branches are similar if not exactly the same.

          “I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”

          enlisted men take a similar oath

          so you see….it is the military that would lead the charge against an enemy that seeks to overthrow the Consititution of the United States regardless of where that enemy came from, internally or externally.

          As a former senior military officer, I know we would actively discuss this and it is always to restore a constitutionally elected government, of the people, by the people and for the people.

          • corpsman

            “I can’t but laugh more loudly. Obviously, none of you has the tiniest knowlegde of military history, much less history of revolutions, insurrections. and civil wars. In your Hollywood fantasy world, all the good gun owners are united an willing to overthrow the bad government, and they are able to do so because of their Walmart guns, and because possibly the one of the other of them had the questionable fun to massacre some Asians or Middle Easterners from behind an extremly overwhelming air and artillery superiority (which did not hinder Chinese in 1950 and Vietnamese two decades later to miserably kick your butts). Since 1865, no American has learnt fighting in the rubble of the own houses – well should be glad about.”

            Bull. Your claim that the Vietnamese “miserably kick your butts” is dead wrong. I challenge you to study the military history of that conflict. The US military lost no major battles, inflicted casualties at a very high favorable ratio, and had the North Vietnamese government on the ropes with the Rolling Thunder raids in 1973, when Kissinger snatched POLITICAL defeat from the jaws of military victory. The Soviets recognized this, particularly after the Son Tay POW raid, which demonstrated that there was no place to hide from American spec ops capabilities. When the raiders landed at the secondary school site, they expected to encounter local militia. Instead they killed over 100 east European air defense troops, while taking no casualties. In response, the Soviets realized that in order to fulfill the Marxist dream of world domination the USSR had to match and surpass US military capacity. This they nearly succeeded accomplishing, however the effort broke their socialistic economy. The fall of the Soviet empire can be directly traced to Vietnam, and the efforts of a wild Texas congressman by the name of Charlie Wilson. who nearly single handed caused the collapse of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. He did that to gain a sense of revenge for the Soviet involvement in Vietnam and to avenge the brutal treatment of the Afghan people that he learned about in the refugee camps in Pakistan.
            I am sick and tired of the IGNORANT claims of MILITARY defeat in Vietnam. As for 1950, read up on the battle of the Frozen Chosin. You might start with this little video. Then there is this bit of testimony: While the numbers of casualties are disputed to this day, there can be no doubt the Chinese military goal of annihilating the 1st Marine Division was not achieved, whereas 8 Chinese divisions were decimated.

  • Pingback: A Chinese Reaction to the Simplicity of Buying a Firearm in America. - INGunOwners()

  • slimboyinhk

    I cannot disagree more with the majority of posters. America’s problem is that there is too much easy access to guns. Guns get stolen then are used for crime. A crazy man in China can take a knife and stab only so many adults before being subdued. A crazy American with a gun can kill many, as has happened many times. Japan’s murder rate is one of the lowest in the world because they have strict gun control. The myth that if everyone had a gun then criminals will be scared. Wrong, criminals will just shoot first in all instances. Innocent people, including children, will be killed by gun-toting idiots who will claim self-defense. Guns are not the answer!

    • Keius

      Couple things:
      Yes, guns do get stolen and are used for crime. It happens, sucks, but it happens. People need to secure them better. I agree with you on this one.

      A crazy man in China “can” kill more people in China than a person with a gun in the US. This is very possible. The common Chinese person will run. He/she will not try to subdue the nutcase. The crazy man will just continue killing…Something in the Chinese mindset…”look out for number one and let everyone else rot”…I won’t get in to this….

      Japan has a low murder rate not because of guns, it’s because of their culture and mindset. For the most part, they are too “polite” to go postal. There are exceptions of course but they are more likely to commit suicide than to commit murder. It’s more “honorable”.

      Lastly, When everyone has guns, it does give criminals second thoughts before doing something nutty. The nine states with the lowest violent crime rates are all “shall issue” carry permit states. The 31 states that do issue permits of some kind average a 20% lower murder rate than those that don’t.

      I will say that i don’t believe allowing carry laws in places like D.C. or Baltimore City or Detroit would help. It can only make things worse, due to several different factors.
      Elsewhere, guns are a pretty good deterrent.

    • Cosantoir

      The majority of the states in the United States have changed their laws regarding the carry of concealed handguns within the last couple of decades. In each case, they have made it MUCH EASIER to get a permit to carry a handgun.

      In EVERY case ignorant and emotional people have made the same claims you are making.

      In NOT A SINGLE CASE have those claims come to pass.

      Criminals have NOT started “shooting first.” Quite to the contrary, many criminals have been SHOT while attempting to rob or murder innocent people. Many other criminals have become frightened of dying at the hands of those they would rob or murder, and have changed their criminal activities to non-violent crimes like theft of (unoccupied, parked) cars rather than trying to car-jack someone who might shoot back.

      Children and other innocent people have NOT been being killed by people claiming “self-defense.” What HAS happened is a decrease in mass-murders by crazy people, and a shift by crazy mass-murderers towards places—like schools—where they know that they will be the only one with a gun. Just because they’re crazy doesn’t mean they’re stupid.

      More guns means less crime.

      You son’t have to like it, but that’s what the facts say.

  • Jim March

    Somebody please post this simple graphic over there:

    Explain how it works: in states in green, it is legal to carry a concealed handgun on your person with no prior government permission. In the blue states you need a government-issued permit to carry a concealed handgun, however you have to pass a background check and (usually) a day or two of training. Still, you WILL get the permit unless they can find a good reason not to such as a criminal conviction. In the yellow states these “carry permits” exist but government officials decide who gets them, so they’re relatively rare, and in the red states permits to carry concealed weapons don’t exist.

    Watch the map as it changes.

    There are now millions of people acting as a strong deterrent to street crime.

  • Mike

    Here in America, it’s true you can buy guns at walmart but we still have to wait about 3 days for background checks and permits to be authorized. The constitution also says that we can bear arms as an army to over through the government, but that hasn’t happens since the American revolution around 1775.

  • FigJam

    American have it in their constitution. The right to bare arms. Allowed to have guns, but there are restrictions to it. Everyone must register their guns, and also apply for permit to have one. Without a permit, you can’t purchase a gun.

    It’s in the American constitution. The Freedom Speach. Citizens are allowed to voice their opinion if they believe that the government is doing something wrong or don’t agree with it. The American President served a 4 year term. Only a maximum 2 term allowed. If you don’t like your president, you can elect another one. The government is elected by it’s people. Government have no power if the people won’t follow. American’s repsect each other, human rights.

    • Wrong!

      I can go out today to buy an AR-15 and only show my ID (drivers license) and walk out in 30 min with it and a case of Ammo. FOS

  • Dave

    I’m an American, and for other countries to understand our love and need for private gun ownership they need to look at the beginning of our nation. We used the weapons we kept at home to defeat a bad government! Since then it is the absolute right to own guns of almost any type. Some guns like machine guns require extra tax and registration-though there are not many to buy. You can own artillery cannons in the USA and hand grenades if you want. However, every commercial sale requires a personal background check. Most guns can be sold between private people without any government paperwork. It is a great source of pride for me that not only can I have weapons as good as the military, but that my society trusts me to own them. That is what being an American is about, being given an abnormally large amount of responsibility and achieving great things with it.

    Lastly, people in countries like China need to know that the minute you pick up a gun, you instantly change from subject to Citizen. Look at how similar the USA is from England, we are both free societies, but Americans still control our government because we still have the ability to change it by force if needed.

    • jon

      LMAO. Americans control the government? OMG. So many American morons on chinasmack. Also there are tons of countries with lax gun law but non have so many people killed by gun shootings, except maybe mexico. America is very violent for a country which allows guns.

      • corpsman

        Mexico does not have lax gun laws. Indeed, a policeman may assume violent intent if an unauthorized person is armed.
        Fat lot of good those laws do. Full auto sub-machine guns,
        rifles and machine guns are far more common in Mexico
        than the US. China is a common original source. The claim
        that such weapons come from the US makes no sense
        as it is far more profitable and safe to sell the relatively
        few such weapons to licensed American collectors and
        Class 3 dealers. I have watched Juarez, Mexico from El Paso, Texas on Mexican Independence Day. The celebratory automatic gunfire sounded like a major battle.

        On the other hand, it is possible to legally own full auto weapons ans cannons in the US. The number of occasions such legal full auto weapons have been used in crimes is so rare as to make them statistically insignificant. Illegal full auto weapons are, of course, used illegally.

        The point is that people who legally own firearms are far less
        likely to use them in the commission of a crime than are the owners of illegal firearms. On the other hand, legal firearms owners prevent far more crimes against persons and property than do the police.

        A sheriffs deputy friend made an interesting point. If firearms were to be outlawed, then otherwise law abiding citizens would become outlaws. The number of home machine shops in our county of 400,000 people is estimated at 3,000. Each should be capable of producing one to twenty new firearms a month. So, if 10% of those shops produced 2 firearms a month… the new revolution would be on. Soon thereafter, the market for home made firearms would skyrocket. Add to that the already minimum of 300,000,000 plus firearms already extent. You can bet most such firearms would be full auto. In America, prohibition has never worked. Same thing goes for ammunition. The technologies are well within the capacity of millions of home machine shop owners. For an example of how that would work, look into the gun making shops in Pakistan’s Afghan border provinces. Using crude, manually powered tools, those gun makers routinely produce AK 47s, small semi-auto pistols and SMLE rifles. They are known as Khyber Pass guns.

    • “Look at how similar the USA is from England, we are both free societies, but Americans still control our government because we still have the ability to change it by force if needed”

      Whereas in ‘England’ we have these things called elections, you might want to try them sometime . . .

      • Cosantoir

        In England you also have a long history of ignoring elections when your government doesn’t get the results it wants.

        Ask any Irish or Scot or Welshman about how much their vote means when they decide they want out of the UK.

        • “Ask any Irish or Scot or Welshman about how much their vote means when they decide they want out of the UK.”

          I’m guessing your an American: 2000, remember that?

          As for the rest, well, let’s see – Ireland is independent and has been since 1921, and no Northern Irish, Welsh, or Scottish vote has ever resulted in a majority for independence. Perhaps you would like to tell me which election we in ‘England’ ignored?

          • Got a point there, maybe Gandhi should have got himself a gun?

          • I’m guessing your an American: 2000, remember that?

            In 2000, just as in any other presidential election, the states voted in proportion to their electoral vote count. It would be as if England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland each got one vote in deciding the next UK parliament instead of England swamping them with sheer numbers. I’m glad you’re there and we’re here. There is a reason the UK was evicted from its American colonies south of the 49th parallel, you know.

          • Once again, I’m not going to be down on someone just for not knowing how the UK electoral system works, but maybe you shouldn’t talk about stuff you obviously don’t understand.

            The UK electoral system means that the entire country is divided up into constituencies of roughly equal population, that is true, but it is the Scottish, Welsh, and Northern Irish themselves who choose to not to elect pro-independence (or in NI’s case, Republican) parties to the majority of the seats within their borders. It is not England’s population which prevents a majority for independence (or, in NI terms, Republicanism) but the populations of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

          • Once again, I’m not going to be down on someone just for not knowing how the UK electoral system works, but maybe you shouldn’t talk about stuff you obviously don’t understand.

            Similarly, it’s not fair to criticize you for not researching how the American presidential system works (it’s electoral votes, not actual individual votes), since your combination of laziness and arrogance is in-born, but most people put more of an effort into looking things up before they comment on anything at all.

          • Cosantoir

            The Irish voted overwhelmingly in both 1914 and 1918 for self-rule and independence.

            In 1914 the British ignored them.

            In 1918 the British ignored them.

            In 1921 the Irish kicked you out of most of Ireland—at the point of guns—and even then you ignored the votes of the majority of the Irish and clung to the 6 counties in the north.

  • kimboslice

    What even most Americans do not know is that when our states were still just colonies, in some places the law required you to have a working gun in your home. Gun ownership was once not a right but also an obligation, a civic duty. Further, the right to have them was not for protection and hunting only. It was to fight a tyrannical government if necessary. Our colonists and Founders did not trust government to let them be the exclusive owners of arms.

  • mike

    The first amnendment of the US constitution
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

    The second amendment of the US constitution

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    There are 27 in total, but the first 10 are called the Bill Of Rights and are guaranteed by this constitution. The only way to keep a government from growing too powerful is the will of the people to do what’s right.

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

  • Austin

    I am an American. Born and raised.

    We have guns like this for sale because the second amendment of our constitution says it is our right. Wal-Mart sells hunting rifles and shotguns, there are gun stores with hundreds of guns, from assault rifles like AK-47’s to handguns.

    We are not really a harmonious people and the ability to live in a society with guns has more to do with the fact that we are BORN into a system with guns. For us guns are nothing special, and we are mostly non-violent not because of harmony, but because of laziness.

    The reason for us to have guns is, as said before in the comments, to overthrow our government if they become too much. The problem is, the American people of today would not do that. That is why George Bush stayed in office 8 years, even though his job approval at the end was only 8-14%.

    We live with guns because we always lived with guns. Our police and military have better guns than most citizens, and they would win if there was a fight. People here are very afraid of death, they will do anything to avoid pain or discomfort. So no one would ever use the guns to fight.

    Most of our criminals are not educated. There are no great crime syndicates here.. only street thugs. And the street thugs exist mostly for drugs.

    Also, someone mentioned school shootings. We have those here, plenty. People who get bullied sometimes will bring guns to school and kill people.

    America has many many problems, just like everyone else

    • jon

      America non-violent? Are you a fucking moron? LOL LMAO ROFL. America is one of the most violent countries in the world, and the gun laws have EVERYTHING to do with it. Don’t lie.

      • America non-violent? Are you a fucking moron? LOL LMAO ROFL. America is one of the most violent countries in the world, and the gun laws have EVERYTHING to do with it. Don’t lie.

        You’re mistaking Hollywood entertainment with reality. In this homicide rate ranking, the US ranks 45th in the world.

        • Yeah, although the 44 nations above them are made up entirely of relatively poor nations. The United States doesn’t have the highest murder rate in the world, but it does have the highest rate in the 1st world.

          • Yeah, although the 44 nations above them are made up entirely of relatively poor nations. The United States doesn’t have the highest murder rate in the world, but it does have the highest rate in the 1st world.

            It’s also got the highest black population (12%) in the First World. Put the same proportion of blacks in the UK (which is 2% black) or indeed, any other First World country, and I bet you’d have the same murder rate. In fact, Jamaica, which has gun prohibition, has a per capita murder rate which is 20 times higher than China, despite having a higher GDP per capita, whether you use nominal or PPP. Heck, Jamaica also has higher GDP per capita than Thailand and the Philippines (where, unlike Jamaica, gun possession is legal), but Jamaica’s murder rate is 7 to 20 times higher. The key difference? No blacks to speak of in China, Thailand or the Philippines.

            I’m not racist in the sense of thinking that law-abiding blacks are responsible for the acts of black criminals. I don’t think there should be special laws discriminating against blacks, criminal or otherwise. But the reality, whether you like it or not, is that while a minority of blacks are violent criminals, that minority is, on a per capita basis, more substantial at all levels of income than for other races.

        • Nando

          And haven’t you ever gave a thought to the possibility that maybe the higher crime rates on black people are because of the higher POVERTY rates on black people?
          If you discriminate politically and economically a group of people with the same ethnical characteristics, pay them less to nothing for the same job and, therefore, force them to criminality, you shouldn’t be able to complain about how they are a violent race.

  • C&N

    natural that walmart should be selling guns – how else will you kill the zombies?

  • mike

    We are given the right as Americans to keep and bare arms. this was given to ensure the goverment is free. The guns in wally world are for hunting only..

  • Jonathan Rutledge

    wow,I am amazed,The people of China leaving comments understand the issue of gun ownership here in America than our elected officials do.

  • elenore

    This picture reminds me of “The Evil Dead” movies,”Shop Smart Shop Smart.”We have 3 guns in our house one Shot Gun,(passed Down from grandparents),2 rifles.My husband like to hunt,We live in Michigan.But we keep them well locked up with Ammo locked elsewhere same as Hunting Bows.We have plenty of Black Bears(Ninja Bears) in my State,but to hunt them you have to have tags sames as deers,etc.,they pretty expensive and Bears tags have a lottery.Most of American is a Live and Let Live Society.Most people don’t get upset until people try to force their lifestyle onto others.Like Religious Communities marrying under age children,or Nudest at public parks,etc..As long as you leave others alone,they pretty much leave you alone.Most people I know do not carry hand guns,only a few people I know have a CCW.One is a trucker who works in Detroit City Proper and out of state,the other is a single lady,she has a hand gun because for some stupid reason Tasers and Pepper Spray are illegal to own in my state,which more women would rather carry than a gun.

  • Hongjian

    Lets not get too much ahead of ourselfes.

    China and the US cannot be compared, and the fanboys in the original source praising america and their gun-culture over the top.

    This just reeks too much of “neighbors grass is greener”…

    China needs the power-monopoly in the hands of the state. In fact, China already had their ‘guns for all’ policy back then in the 30’s. And what happened? Civil-War and communists arming themselves overthrowing the ‘democratic’ and ‘more free’ KMT, these faggots loved so much.
    Of course, faggots here would say, ‘cool we should now wage another civil war to overthrow the CCP’ – but they are forgetting how many victims these first already claimed and into what level of shit this turned China into. The second wont be any better – not with all the social issues China still has.

    Shit like this shall never allowed to happen again – even less in the name of ‘freedom and democracy’. The state who holds the shit together with its mailed fist should be the only one allowed to have weapons.

    • Cosantoir

      Spoken like someone who approves of mass-murder.

      Just so long as he gets to choose who will be murdered.

    • corpsman

      One of the first things the communist party did when taking power was confiscate firearms. Subsequently, Mao ordered the murders of 80 million Chinese.

  • Flea on a Drum

    I’ve found Chinese people who move here to the U.S. to be very capable & responsible gun owners. Also, look how well Chinese Olympic competitors are doing in shooting events now—particularly the women. I shoot with members of the state and city law enforcement community where I live. I “qualify” along with them on shooting range training regimens. They tell me time & time again that the one thing burglars & rapists and fear the most is the prospect of an armed target. They are happy to see reasonable, well trained civilians carrying guns for self defense. Some of the most crucial training is how to avoid ever having to resort to using a gun in the first place by avoiding potential problems. Best self defense weapon is the mind; sometimes that isn’t enough, unfortunately. Here is a link to an article that examines the fears many people have regarding firearms:

  • Gipper

    If no one among us is capable of governing himself then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else?

  • Flea on a Drum

    Gipper: That would be Barack Hussein Obama—his wife told us all that he’s “ready to rule”. LOL!!!

  • It is funny how the chinese who left comments all took it for granted that the United States must be such a great society because it can afford to let people own guns without everyone killing each other.

    I would like to offer a different perspective: if in Europe, or in China, the state historically does not allow people to buy weapons, it is because they are afraid of people using them against the government. In Europe in the past, there were massive communist parties and workers’ movements which could have made use of the guns to start a revolution. In the US most people are brainwashed enough that letting them have guns is not a threat to the government. The guns are only used by the poor to kill each other.

    • In the US most people are brainwashed enough that letting them have guns is not a threat to the government.

      I would credit the lack of greed for what isn’t theirs. Under the Kuomintang, guns weren’t banned. The Communists took advantage of that loophole to arm themselves and win for themselves a country. They then ate like emperors by starving tens of millions to death. That had nothing to do with them not being brainwashed – it had to do with the classic Chinese mode of advancement – win the throne, and you can have your slaves work to feed you for the rest of their lives.

    • Notable exceptions to the European standard are Switzerland and Finland. In both countries, military service is compulsory, with an initial year or two of active service, then decades of reserve service. In both cases, military firearms are issued to people, they take them and the ammunition home. In Switzerland, these rifles and pistols are retained in the family. Both countries have very small standing armies and reserve forces 5 to 10 times larger. Sound familiar? The Swiss have not had to fight a war with a foreign power for hundreds of years. The Finns had to fight a Soviet communist invasion in 1939-40, which, while they did not win the war, the Finns made it so hard on the Soviets, the Soviets did not try to take control of the government. Thus Finland became the only nation in Europe with a long border with the USSR that was independent and non-communist.

  • Rick

    I’m an American raised in a military family and hunted as a teenager but I am appalled at how easily guns are available in my country. Some here feel that 30,000 dead a year is tiny, a drop in the bucket, but most of these deaths were preventable. IN the heat of the moment, guns do irrevocable harm to others. After living in China for awhile and returning to the U.S. I felt unsafe on the streets not knowing who was “packing heat,” i.e. carrying a gun, legally or not. It is a wild West mentality that Europeans frankly find barbaric and for good reason. This talk about how it proves the government trusts its citizens or that its citizens need guns to stand up to the government is a poor reason to live in an armed camp of a society where such violence is condoned.

    • jon

      Every reason to be scared. Americans have a very high shooting kill rate compared to other countries. This is because Americans are generally more prone to violence then other people.

    • Geoffrey

      Guns do irrevocable harm to others? A gun does not pull its own trigger; people are ultimately responsible for their own actions, be it signing a contract, driving a car, or shooting a gun. “Heat of the moment” is not an excuse. You pull the trigger, you’re responsible for where that bullet goes, be it through a paper target and into a dirt berm, or into the chest of a person.

      Basically you are arguing that people cannot be trusted, because a gun is merely a force multiplier. It will not shoot anything except what it’s aimed at when the trigger is pulled. Those who would shoot others maliciously or negligently must be held responsible for their actions. Don’t blame inanimate objects, or take freedom away from the innocent.

      Deaths, preventable? No. At most, they are merely postponed. Everybody dies one way or another. Nobody ever said freedom is guaranteed safe.

    • RuggedJay


      In switzerland every able bodied male is REQUIRED to own a combat rifle. It has one of the highest standards of living in the world. And one of the lowest crime rates.

    • RC45

      Pretty ignorant rant.

    • After living in China for awhile and returning to the U.S. I felt unsafe on the streets not knowing who was “packing heat,” i.e. carrying a gun, legally or not.

      This is kind of weird, because the Chinese I know feel safer in America, because they haven’t been subjected to the level of thefts and robberies they have in China.

    • You are FOS Bro.

  • Zoey

    There’s a shortage of guns in china because they sold them all ((AK-47s’)) to arabian countries! Come on ppl, if you think china doesn’t have weapons then you are obviously an oblivious retread. Chinas’ citizens don’t have guns because their gubbament demands complete control of their citizens. And they do have complete control of their citizen/minions. And I would suggest that anyone who would like to be controlled by their gubbament to move to a country where this is so. That way the rest of us that want to be free can be free.

    Again, guns, cars, knives etc. are not our problem. The ppl who use these everyday implements to commit crimes that are the problem. But because society at large can never seem to get to the root of any problem I can assure you that ppl who kill ((civilians and politicians alike)) will continue to be a problem…

    Trust meh