Japan (and South Korea) have achieved something impressive: virtually no gun violence. How did they do it?

I think gun control and the 2nd amendment can coexist, but in order for this to be effective the issue of gun violence needs to be looked at from a new perspective. Here's what I mean: when it comes to gun violence in America, Conservatives blame 'violent' video games, Liberals blame guns, but no one actually looks at the root of the problem: mental illness.

Because let's be honest here: who really has a serious conversation about mental health within the frame of this issue? The talk about how the shooter had this disorder or that disorder or whatever, but no one sticks with the topic. I'm of the opinion that for gun control to be more effective and actually accomplish something it needs to be legislated to focus on mental health, instead of pointless s*** like an 'assault weapon' ban.

Often times people get the wrong idea of what it means to be pro-2A, they think it means being anti-gun control period, however one can be pro-2A but also be a proponent for gun control, for example myself. I'm strongly pro-gun but as you can tell I think it's been proven that effective control is a necessity. How exactly to go about it, that's up for debate, this is just my opinion.

Good comment. Japan doesn’t ban civilian ownership of guns entirely, nor does South Korea. Japan’s system of gun control is mainly about these three things: (1) Banning certain highly lethal classes of weapons (handguns for instance); (2) Requiring training; (3) Rigorous background checks, including a psych eval and interviewing family members. That would help account for the “mental health” issues you reference.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/gun-control-how-japan-has-almost-completely-eliminated-gun-deaths-2017-10%3famp

The only thing about Japan’s gun control scheme that definitely wouldn’t fly under 2A is the handgun ban: see D.C. v. Heller (2008). Which is unfortunate, because statistics show handguns are how most human deaths occur. (Personally, I’d be fine with allowing long-barreled rifles, which are mainly for hunting)

All the other stuff would be inevitably protested and challenged in court by pro-gun groups, but Second Amendment jurisprudence has typically been deferential to gun restrictions.

Which is what you’d expect from an Amendment beginning “A well-regulated militia...”

There are “cultural differences” between Japan and America as well, but the biggest one is simply this: Our culture worships guns and theirs doesn’t. Japan has been restricting firearms (and samurai swords) ever since the 1500s.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_hunt

I know conservatives would protest that living under a Shogunate is “tyranny,” but modern Japan and many other countries show that democracy, prosperity, and gun control are compatible.