(MintPress) – With elections months away, the debate over gun control is likely to emerge once again as a divisive issue, with conservatives claiming President Barack Obama will limit their freedom to carry weapons, and liberals arguing that Mitt Romney will rollback regulations. And while the National Rifle Association (NRA) continues to play victim, arguing American’s rights are being trampled, it should be celebrating, as the last decade has proved to be quite successful for the large lobby organization and its fans.

In the last decade, the NRA has done its job well. According to a recent Mother Jones investigative piece, nearly 100 laws have been passed throughout the nation, rolling back gun control provisions and lifting the curtain on areas where guns were once prohibited, like bars and colleges.

The loosening of gun safety laws in the U.S. hasn’t changed its standing on a global scale. In 1998, America was already leading the world with the most lax gun laws. Considering the trend since 1999 has included widespread loosening of such laws, the U.S. has maintained its position as a Western leader of gun violence and gun ownership.

And while gun laws have become less restrictive over the last decade, Americans are still apprehensive about the issue, according to nationwide polls, which indicate that even a majority of gun carrying Americans believe in some regulations mandated for concealed carry permits.

Yet, rollbacks continue, sparking debate among those who see any restrictions on gun ownership as a front to democracy.

Exactly how gun hungry are we?

The number of guns owned by civilians in the U.S. sits at around 270 million, according to gunpolicy.org, a firearm injury and prevention organization. That equates to nearly 90 guns per 100 people living in the nation. Of course, this means the U.S. is winning the global gun game, in terms of weapons-per-person and overall firearm possession.

Sure, America has a lot of guns, but is that what’s driving violent crime rates? It depends on who you ask.

The question presented to Americans hasn’t wavered: Do guns kill people, or do people kill people? Those on both sides of the issue have battled with this question, paired with the reasoning that more guns could lead to peace.

Either way, it’s tough to deny that guns don’t play a pivotal role in violent crimes in America.

In 2009, there were 15,241 reported homicides in the U.S., according to gunpolicy.org. Of those murders, more than 9,140 were carried out by the use of firearm. Clearly, there are underlying issues behind such acts of fatal violence, but firearms were the weapon of choice.

Obviously, people in other Western nations deal with many of the same issues existing in the U.S. Yet the role of firearms in homicides doesn’t seem to come close to that of America’s.

Australia’s population is much smaller than America’s, with 22.6 million residents, compared to a population in the U.S. of 311.6 million. However, its homicide numbers are strikingly low, with 260 in a one year period spanning between 2007 and 2008. In 2008, 225 of those murders were carried out with firearms, proving, again, that it serves as an effective weapon of choice.

The story in England, however, is a bit different. In 2009, 724 homicide cases were reported in the U.K., only 138 of which resulted from firearms. Gun ownership in the U.K. is drastically lower than it is in the States, with nearly seven firearms per every 100 people, compared to America’s 88 firearms.

In the case of England, fewer firearm ownerships has led to fewer homicides by firearm. So, why isn’t America following suit?

Those in favor of the right to bear arms, a right guaranteed in our constitution, claim that any restriction to that measure is a front to American freedom. In a sense, it defines who and what America is — and it’s not likely to change any time soon, no matter how many murders go down.

New laws spark debate

The issue of gun ownership is slowly infiltrating every aspect of American life, even health care. In 2011, Florida outlawed doctors from asking patients about firearm use — a law that was overturned after a group of doctors sued, claiming it hindered their ability to do their job and inform patients on the dangers of gun use.

The reversal of the law was met with praise by the American Bar Association, which claimed that the prohibition on questions relating to guns went over the line.

“For medical practitioners to meet their preventive care and safety counseling responsibilities, they must be able to discuss a broad range of topics with their patients related to known risk factors,” the Association said in a statement.

While Florida’s case is unique in that regard, it represents the attitude among those fighting for their right to bear arms, afforded, arguably, by the Second Amendment. Any restrictions to the open carrying of weapons seems now to be under attack, regardless of the safety benefits behind it.

Eight states throughout the nation now allow those with permits to carry weapons inside bars, despite the common agreement that weapons and alcohol typically don’t mix well.

In Wisconsin, civilians are also allowed to carry weapons inside state parks and wildlife refuges. Hunting, however, is restricted within 1,700 feet of a school or hospital. Despite the relaxed firearm atmosphere, there are actually some gun rules in Wisconsin, and if someone is convicted of breaking such laws, there are consequences. For example, shooting at a railroad train is prohibited and could result in the revocation of a firearm permit — a move that’s comforting for conductors, surely.

Recent shootings — and response

The U.S. has seen its fair share of gun tragedies over the last few years.

In July, the nation was rocked by a mass shooting in a movie theater in Colorado, followed by a fatal mass shooting at a Sikh temple in Wisconsin.

Last January, Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was shot in the head at close range, though miraculously survived the incident. And, perhaps most controversial, in February the nation dealt with the “stand your ground” law, which initially allowed George Zimmerman, the man who pulled the trigger and killed unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, to avoid arrest.

All of these issues and more have brought the gun control debate to the forefront. But with powerful lobby organizations like the NRA, it’s tough for pro gun restriction organizations to win the battle. Even in the presidential debate, candidates tiptoe around the issue, careful not to offend those who cling to their guns.