From a different link:
At the outset, the recognition that a global landmine crisis existed was quick to take root and gain universal acceptance. This is not the case with light weapons, despite the speed with which it has become an international issue. On the contrary, there is a major confrontation looming between those who wish to control or ban light weapons and those who believe that irresponsible users are to blame, not the weapons themselves. The National Rifle Association of the United States and similar organizations are beginning to develop a global presence and are commissioning research to provide statistical evidence in an attempt to show that measures to restrict gun ownership have little or nothing to do with rising crime and homicide.
Much is made at the moment of the need to combat entrenched gun cultures. The need to reverse fixed beliefs in the right, if not the duty, to bear arms is an enormous task. This is not just the case in ‘frontier’ states, such as the United States and South Africa. It is also the case in countries where the state is weak and the security forces find themselves unable to guarantee the safety and security of people and property. It was the westward expansion in the United States that forged the culture of gun ownership in areas where the state could not be effective because expansion had occurred so quickly. In Canada, however, the Mounted Police attempted to guarantee the security of individuals across the vast landmass, thereby giving a sense at least of law and order, which may explain why the gun culture in Canada is less entrenched than in the United States.