I agree with you in that part of the issue is the armed populace in the US (Australia is very much an unarmed populace, and always has been; ignore most of what

I agree with you in that part of the issue is the armed populace in the US (Australia is very much an unarmed populace, and always has been; ignore most of what you hear about the 1996 gun bans from anyone). Another part of the issue is the 'us vs them' attitude that appears to be more prevalent in US policing (and in US politics in general). In contrast, the UK's police tries to follow the Peelian Principles, which are designed to avoid the 'us vs them' mentality. For my money, I'd rather have a population without guns, if it means we don't have to be scared of the people we hire to keep our cities orderly. The armed population in the US doesn't seem to be rising up against government transgressions there any more than the unarmed population does here, so it doesn't seem like the rationale for amendment #2 holds water.