So even though guns are prevalent, you think a ten round limit keeps people from pulling the trigger at all? Like it ain't worth it just to pop off ten because popping in a loaded magazine is difficult? Or they could just go with a rifle where there is no capacity limitations.
Criminals aren't the ones who apply for a license to carry. Anyone looking to shoot someone isn't worried about transporting their gun to the future crime scene. By the way. The policy has been not to issue them, which is why my county just lost in the 9th Circuit to a Sherdogger.
There's a prcoessing time for permits, if that's what you mean. Pistol permits are single use only and good for a matter of days, so that would qualify. With long guns the permit is good for a year so once you have it that's that. Fwiw, most dudes around here with guns who I've talked to aren't strangers to ignoring the registration laws. Lots of 'em out there that were never on the registry. People die every day. A friend and his friend just completed a couple 80% lowers (i.e. built their own with no intention to register).
Training is for handguns only and it's either an NRA pistol course for half a day or like a 3 day hunting course. Unless they've changed in the last few years to offer something shorter. Teaching a guy about hunting doesn't stop crime. Teaching a guy how to operate his gun and shoot better doesn't sound like a crime-stopping move either. The legal information provided likely does, but probably not the violent kind. Or I could buy a rifle or build my own Glock.
Don't know what to say on SYG. I'm not familiar with statistics showing people getting away with something under normal self-defense laws that they wouldn't under SYG. After recognizing Castle Law relatively recently, I've seen no cases of that law even being used (let alone improperly).
But sure, mix it all together and somehow it's accomplishing more than just burdening gun owners and tax payers.