I'm not really trying to "prove" anything, but it does show how much culture matters.  And cali is not the most restrictive from a legal perspective, that honor goes to Wisconsin, Illinois or the District of Columbia, all of which (until very recently) are no-issue states.  Cali is a may-issue state, but has more restrictive 'valid reasons' than Liechtenstein according to the link I referenced, because Cali doesn't honor "personal protection" as a legitimate cause unless you're a member of the state justice apparatus already, such as a prosecutor.  Granted, I could get a shotgun in Cali for inside my own home, and I can't determine if that is the case in Liechtenstein, but all of these comparisons are apples to oranges, due to variations in local culture and demographics.  Both San Fransico & Detroit are very liberal politcally, and have very restrictive gun regulations, with populations well in excess of Leichtenstin; but while San Fran is about as dangerous as my own mid-sized mid-eastern city (which is to say, not very dangerous) Detroit is one of the most dangerous places on Earth.  There is no definitive evidence that gun control has any non-neglible effect on crime, and all the evidence in the world that it does have an effect on the legal availability of firearms and only the legal availablilty of firearms.  We can both produce plenty of studies that confirm our biases, no doubt.  What you guys seem to lack ability to do is justify why?  By what logic do you guys justify subjugating my daughter to her armed rapist?