system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: The United States would have turned out very differently if its initial gun laws had been different.

Canada and the United States are a little bit like a "twins separated at birth" study.  There are many similarities in their formation.  They were both initially inhabited by indigenous peoples, mostly from the same original group.  They were both colonies.  Canada was a colony of Britain and France and the U.S. was a colony of Britain, France, Spain and Russia but for both of them, the major influencing mother country was Britain.  They both gained independence, developed similar laws, spoke mostly English, explored and spread across their respective land masses and participated in many of the same large events (gold rush, world wars, etc.)  In spite of all this, they have turned out to be two very different cultures.

In the United States, firearms had few restrictions from the beginning.  They started out with 69 Indian wars where they conquered and subdued the indigenous population.  They had enough guns to revolt against Britain and win their independence.  They spread across their land mass with the gun becoming the power.  There were actually gun fights in the streets in some western towns.  As they continued on their growth to become the world power, they were constantly involved in wars.  Since 1776, there has only been 17 years where the U.S. was not involved in a war.

In Canada, the first major controlling European influence was the Hudson's Bay Company, a company based on the fur trade.  As the indigenous people were necessary in this business, their policy became, "Don't shoot your customers." (tic) Canada had zero Indian wars.  They definitely weren't nice to the indigenous people but they didn't have wars.  Almost immediately after becoming a nation, Canada develop the RCMP which spread across the country.  Revolvers were banned in Canada so that there could be no dramatic street shootouts.  Canada did not have enough military might to mount a revolt against Britain so they negotiated a settlement for independence instead.  

There are obviously many other influences that plotted the course of each country but, it seems to me that had the United States started with the same gun limitations as Canada, they would have turned out very differently.
gpt
You are attempting to distill national differences down to a single item.

Here is a list of why they are different:

- One fought a revolution for independence, the other did not

- One has a strong widespread agricultural climate (southern US) which bred significant use of slave labor - the other does not.

- One has a largely inhabitable landmass while the other does not. Canada's northern reaches, while inhabited by people, have nowhere near the population density of the US nor the climate to sustain a large population. 

- One is roughly 10x the population of the other. (California has more people that Canada)

- One has vastly different social safety nets that than other

- One has vastly different history of treatment of African Americans

- In the early/mid 20th century, one turned into a global superpower which continues today. The other did not. Arguably, Canada has had to bend to the will of the US in this time. 

- In the early days of both countries - meaningful gun laws did not exist. It was not until much much later that gun laws got stricter

Sorry but no, gun laws are not the reason the US and Canada differ.