The USA was founded on the principle that everybody should be armed to be able to defend against a corrupt state. Some other countries were founded on the principle that nobody should be armed (unless really nessesary) and that corrupt states should be dealt with in other ways. Both concepts are valid and have their unique drawbacks and advantages. The problem is that it's possible to derive a democratic society of that choice by making it even easier to circumvent gun control.

Maybe somewhere in the world it will have positive effects if minorities are suddenly armed. In other places of the world police suddenly has to assume that everyone could carry a weapon, potentially leading to a lot of the problems the US has with their police. It's certainly not universally positive.