Even in Taiwan, R.O.C. citizens can possess firearms for self defense and you rarely hear about high gun deaths in that country.

Japanese civilians can’t even carry pepper spray or stun guns without some sort of retarded repercussion for goodness sakes.

If American troops were to ever leave Japan or decide to place the burden of national defense upon the Japanese government then Japan is in big trouble. Is Japan really an ally or a freeloader of American military spending? It’s high time Japan defends itself and give its citizens the proper means of doing so.

If Chinese troops were to invade Japan and defeat the JSDF, what means do Japanese civilians themselves have of self defense?

Also the bear and dear population has been a HUGE problem in Japan. None of which is covered by Google News or any major media outlets.

Gun deaths may be down, but suicide and stabbing deaths continues to climb not to mention the constant population decline in Japan.

All of these things spells disaster in the future.

You should always be prepared for the inevitable and it looks like Japan has its pants all the way down on this one.

#1 – if you have to open fire, you will actually immobilize your target with at least one of those rounds. This is not reasonable. Highly trained law enforcement officers under stress will hit their target less than 50% of the the shots fired. Moreover, even On-Target shots may not successfully stop an attacker. The Miami 1986 shootout with the FBI had mortally wounded suspects continuing to return fire. So much so that many of those federal agents died.

#2 – You’re assuming you only have one assailant. If it becomes a 2, 3 or 4 on 1 situation, then all of a sudden, if you miss even twice, you’re doomed.

#3 – The reason the FBI almost automatically switched to semiautomatics from revolvers and there is almost no military in the world that does not use some kind of box-fed ammunition source is that it simply takes too long to reload a revolver, even if you’ve got a speed loader. Your capacity is also limited (again). Whereas with a Glock G17 gives you 17 rounds in the magazine plus one in the chamber and the ability to carry 2 or 3 additional magazines for a total of 69 rounds per officer. So not only do you spend less time reloading (and reducing your risk of being shot/stabbed to death while reloading), the amount of time it takes to reload is much, much faster. In a self-defense situation, the extra seconds could save your life.

#4 – it assumes that the Only time you will ever use a gun is to defend against a gun attack. There are multiple cases in which a single assailant armed with a knife can kill 2-3 dozen people in less than a minute. Ballistic vests offer absolutely no protection against a knife attack, either. The law enforcement officer trying to stop someone trying to kill them with a knife has to open they can stop that threat with JUST five rounds.

It is good/useful that law enforcement agencies teach Highly effective martial arts techniques for disarming, immobilizing and controlling violent subjects and it is true that being well armed is no guarantee you will survival a lethal confrontation with someone determined to kill you. However, the point is about maximizing the opportunity to survive such confrontations however infrequently they might occur.

Where do you live?

Ever been to Japan.?

Laws are fine, but many of them are really unnecessary. In Japan there is not so much freedom.

Great job.