trip, having lived in singapore for 13 years and the last year in the states, I can tell you that it is quite different.
Even if guns were banned, the fact is the US as a whole is too big and police response time is inefficient. It's not possible to have constant police patrols in areas, and lights are too cost-inefficient as a whole. As such, it's much more likely for muggings or other stuff. The same for home invasions, if some madman were to come smashing into your house, much less likely for someone to report it or what not. So people like to have arms for self-defense, which is not that ridiculous. Of course, the argument can be made that when guns are allowed, the attackers have guns too, but in self-defense occasions you probably still will have the upper hand.
As such I think it's fair for certain allowances for firearms.
What I do not agree with, however, are guns in public areas (like cinemas), or on the roads. Guns should be for self-defense and self-defense only. The argument that someone who had a gun in the cinema would have helped is stupid. Unless you're a military grade sniper or something, you're unlikely to hit your target in such poor visibility. The same goes for any crowded public area, you're only going to make it worse.
What I also don't agree with is the stupid thing that is the NRA and the stupid politicians (mostly republicans) who keep taking donations from that stupid organization. BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS AND BAN WEAPONS WITH LARGE NUMBER OF ROUNDS. That is so freaking instinctive.