EuGuy:

"Also, given the higher tax rate and the greater dependency on social services even among the lower-middle class (e.g. for subsidized housing), people were reluctant to speak out in any way that might attract the resentment of a local bureaucratic decision-maker." Thanks for the interesting read. But I am curious about the quoted part: are you referring to Eastern Europe during the times of the Iron Curtain, or what? Living in western Europe, I have never noticed any reluctance to speak out about political issues - including such topics as gun-control (you go from "sportsmen", to say that people in general were oppressed). Moreover, I can assure you that our social systems are regulated by law - hence they do not demand our silence in return for their favors.

As for your assurances that your social systems are well-regulated by law -- and hence do not demand silence in return for their favors, well, obviously no bureaucratic functionary will _admit_ to doing that. But if one apartment in counsel housing is available and there are five applicants, and the decision makers decide not to consider the applicant whose politics they don't like -- there is no remedy. That is, not unless the political victim can provide proof -- which he cannot unless the power abusers are foolish enough to _admit_ their guilt.

More to the point, if you advocate that people should be allowed to shoot burglars, and then the police chief thereafter denies your application for a shotgun license on the grounds that he therefore does consider you to be of good character -- there is darn little you can do to overturn his decision. Now I suppose you'll argue that the police chief is thereby making the correct decision, but that is besides the point. The wise man who desires the renewal of his shotgun licence will hold his tongue and refrain from advocating armed self-defense.

_That_ is why self-defense is not raised as an issue in European gun-control debates.