Ok, I will take a shot at this. There is an interesting book:
Payback: The Case for Revenge
by Thane Rosenbaum
It examines the difference between a justice society and a revenge society. In the former, justice and defense are the responsibility of the state. The state is seen as the repository and sole user of force (except for the limited and controlled self-situation). No other use of force is acceptable.
In the latter, revenge societies, the state has failed to enforce laws or provide for your safety. Thus, you have to be the instrument of force in almost all circumstances. This leads to militias (not in the 2nd Amend. sense, but fun in the Middle East, Balkans, Africa, Afghan sense), blood feuds between families, clans and tribes.
Having guns outside of limited sporting usage or the strict limits of self-defense speaks to having a society that doesn't have the rule of law and a state that keeps you state. It is on the verge of becoming a revenge society. Thus folks may not want that and see limiting guns as preventing society from falling in such a pit.
The USA is special in the sense that we recognized (or some did) that we needed a repository of force outside the normal armed forces and police to defend against tyranny. Most countries do not have that principle in their fundamental governing documents. That is the core of the 2nd Amend. in some views.
Having a gun for self-defense wouldn't be necessary if the rule of law was actual efficient except in very rare cases. Having a wide distribution of deadly instruments of force or weapons of mass destruction (Sen. Joe Manchin) is not needed and really a bad thing - given their potential for misuse.
Even for self-defense - the Double Barrel Biden or 5 is enough mantras would cover some limited possession of guns for SD. The tyranny usage is seen as ridiculous by the antigun folks. Certainly, the higher cap guns are not needed.
That's my first take on this. A justice society doesn't need significant civilian firearms ownership outside of some limited cases. That is the world view. Note, that eventually the sports, hunting and self-defense needs would eliminated.
Some countries are developing some pretty neat less lethal SD alternatives for their civilians. In the abstract, they could be useful.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/03/19/umarex-hdr50-airguns/
That covers SD and keeps the general populace weaponry below that of the state.