Hmm, I'm inclined to disagree, in Sweden, only cops and the military (legally) have access to heavy fire arms, it is possible to obtain gun licenses for civilians, but the process is long and difficult (you have to be "clean", ie no arrests or similar for the past 5 years, and you'll have to be a member of a gun club). And I really don't see Sweden as a police state... -.-
As you state yourself, civilians can own guns. Sure, there are some common sense limitations. In the US, convicted felons aren't allowed to possess firearms, the average citizen isn't allowed to own fully automatics (machine guns) and there is a "waiting period" for handguns in most states. The point isn't to allow every nutcase to have a gun, the fact that they MAY have a gun provides the deterent.
What is rigid and repressive control?
Being arrested or detained for disagreeing with the government. There have been people in this country that have been "detained" incommunicado for simply speaking out against the Bush administration, even though no threats were made, and no laws broken. I get pulled over fairly often with no reason given (I have long hair). It would be worse if the public wasn't allowed to have guns.
Also, violent crime in general, and in particular gun crime, is lower in places that allow concealed carry. Even in the most "gun crazy" places, like parts of Texas, a permit is required, proficiency must be demonstrated to get the permit, and there are other limitations (such as "No guns in bars")
Prohibition always fails, whether its booze or guns. Far better to require proof of proficiency, a background check, and the ability for the licensing agency to check mental health records, than to force people who want protection to violate the law and have no chance to practice with their firearms. And before you say that protecting the public is the Police's job, they aren't always around. It doesn't do me any good when they show up after the fact, even if they catch my killer I'm still dead.
I'd also like to point out that I have been in the military and worked for several years as a policeman. Legal, regulated gun ownership is far better than an ineffective ban. Bans don't do much to reduce gun crime, the vast majority of gun crime is performed with illegally aquired guns. No law, even a nationwide ban, can close the lid to Pandora's box.
I used to live in a poor neigborhood in Rockford Il, and can state categorically that being able pull a gun has saved my life at least twice, without ever having to use it. When I reported the break-ins to 911 (called while the crackheads were coming in the door) both times it was over a half hour before police responded. Without my gun, I would be just another statistic. I feel that my genuine need to defend myself outweighs your idealistic desire to live in a gun free society. That society does not exist.
The only way to combat violent gun crime is to create a culture that reduces people's desire to perform violence. There will always be a few nutjobs that go on spree's even if they have to use a blunt object.