Anti-Gun Agenda : Core Motivations

[Sylvan-Forge]

At the head of many gun control organisations are educated and fairly intelligent individuals with a knowledge of world history and the capability for logical thought.

More specifically, these people are aware of tyrants in times past (and present) and the mechanisms employed to firstly disarm the conquered populace and then to dominate, enslave and murder them.
Surely they understand that the unwashed know history too.
Surely they understand that if you ban arms, you make a potential victim out of the lawful people who will be less equipped to resist violence crime directed at them.
Surely they understand that arms design and manufacture is a mature industry and the knowledge is widely available to enable one to construct their own arms.
Surely they understand that should an arms ban take place, a black-market industry will fill the void.

We oft speak of these groups as morons, blissninnies, and the like. And I submit, as to the lower echelons, the foot soldiers of the anti-gun groups, these labels are likely accurate.
Well meaning folk, but ignorant.

But with the top dogs, I do not believe this is the case.

With support from the ultra-rich, the politicians, legislators, big media, and big business, I believe what we have here, are people that are hell bent on installing some new global reich. One in which exists a select group of elite rulers and managers with a slave support class underneath.
Hence the drive and desire to disarm populations.


How else could the motivations of the antis be explained?

 

[Gordon Fink]

It’s a bit of both, mixed with a very large dose of historical chauvinism.

~G. Fink

 

[AJ Dual]

II think you're reading too much into their motivations.

Intentionaly promoting civilian disarmament in hopes of some kind of totalitarian outcome is far fetched, at best. What I am NOT arguing, is that totalitarianisim isn't an outcome, I feel that it is, and it's one of my strongest reasons for being an RKBA supporter. What I don't think is it's the concious intent.

It's simpler than that.

Money, power, fame…
People can convince themselves of a great many things when it's "their team" they're fighting for, and the human capacity for rationalization gets even stronger when the motivating factors of pay, a job, personal or professional power, and fame get thrown into the mix.

Whether they "truly believe it" or not gets to be moot at some point, and the movment becomes a means onto itself for some people.

 

[expvideo]

Another left wing conspiracy thread?! Jeez!

 

[Alex45ACP]

This is proof of how evil the gun grabbers truly are.

Surely they know that all the "facts" they spew about "assault weapons" and whatnot are lies, and surely they have at least a basic grasp of history.

 

[Zundfolge]

Here's a repost of a classification system I came up with for antis.

I concluded that there are 4 basic types of anti gun folk (and there are many who fall into more than one category).

• The Duped: The majority of people who say they support gun control or vote for anti-gun candidates ... these people have bought the lies told by the gun control movement. They honestly believe that gun control would make us safer. There is hope to turn these people to the truth as they are just lied too and not committed to believing the lies because of other personal reasons like groups 2 & 3 (and they are by far the largest group).
• The Partisans: They are Democrats/liberals/progressives ... and their party says "guns are bad"...or more to the point "those who support gun rights are our enemy" so they support gun control and vote for anti gun candidates. These people are pretty much unreachable unless Republicans became pro gun control. Most could care less one way or the other whether guns are legal, illegal, restricted, or whatever (although most are partially duped and I'm sure there are plenty Hoplolphobes among them too).
• The Hopolophobes: just simply people with an irrational fear of guns ... they are unreachable. Therapy for their phobia is required. (this is a somewhat small group ... smaller than 1 and 2).
• The Power Seekers: These are the Schumers and Feinsteins ... these are the leaders of the movement who know guns aren't bad but know they can't implement their other diabolical plans against us as long as we're armed (this is actually a very small group ... even most anti-gun politicians are just Partisans, Dupes and/or Hopolophobes, only a very select few are trying to enslave us).

 

[WayneConrad]

Conspiracy is not a necessary condition for groups of people to do evil.

All it takes is a herd.

 

[Standing Wolf]

...these people are aware of tyrants in times past (and present) and the mechanisms employed to firstly disarm the conquered populace and then to dominate, enslave and murder them.
Surely they understand that the unwashed know history too.

Sorry, but very, very few adults in America are even superficially familiar with human history.

Zundfolge's classification corresponds closely to my experience.

 

[ProguninTN]

Zundfolge

For the most part, I also have to agree with Zundfolge. Although, I'm not sure which category Sarah Brady and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) fall. Both had family members killed/injured by guns and they want to go after guns rather than the perpetrators of the crime.

 

[ryoushi]

I think the examples in American history of one guy with a gun taking out powerful leaders chills those who worship government to the bone. On a personal level, people who like to think they have total control over every aspect of their life tremble at the thought of gun violence. A stray round from an idiot's News Years celebration, or drive by shooting, etc. is almost impossible to predict or prevent so the only solution in their mind is to eliminate the threat.

 

[Sylvan-Forge]

G. Fink,
Aye, like Zundfolge's Partisan and Power Seeker.

AJ Dual,
Team spirit, ra ra ra.
"becomes a means onto itself."
Indeed.

expvideo,

Leftist? Where? How far left is he? Gott'a keep an eye on them .. mm hm
Or you mean I'm the leftist?


Alex45ACP,
'Tis a pity.

Zundfolge,
Excellent analysis.
What about money interests? Might that be a cross between Partisan and PowerSeeker?

WayneConrad,
Riots, Crowd Behavior, PP's (panicky peoples) I get that.
Thing is, when the herd changes direction, it seems to do so with orchestration. Sociological phenomena maybe.

Standing Wolf,
With all their sophistry and college degrees? ... maybe all those 60's drugs wiped their memories of whorlhistory101. On second thought, maybe wh101 don' go there..

ProguninTN,
True. Emotionally blinded. Tools mayhap.

ryoushi,
Very insightful and lucid point.
Not just a few bad actors such as "those nutty militia guys", but Hopolophobes and those that fear the statistically improbable.
Fear in general.




I think I saw this in a Tom Clancy book:
Spy motivators..
MICE - Money, Idealogy, Conscienceness, Ego

 

[mljdeckard]

I absolutely concur that entities led by those such as Kofi Annan and George Soros take full advantage of all of the above to further their agendas of domination and control.

 

[K-Romulus]

Zundfolge is generally right

But I think your "Power Seeker" definition is way off/too tinfoil-ly

My version:

Power Seeker: Politician who does not have any Monty Burns-type "diabolical plans," but who knows they can use the Dupes/Partisans/Hoplophobes to their political advantage to further their own ambition and drive to accumulate prestige and social power.

See MD Congressman Chris van Hollen; MD state senate candidates (both with one foot already in the statehouse and the other on a banana peel after winning the Dem primaries for their districts) Mike Lenett and Jamie Raskin

 

[glummer]

It's bigotry.

We are Jews; they are Nazis; "gun control" laws are the Nuremburg laws.

We are blacks; they are the Klan; "gun control" laws are Jim Crow.

Some people need a socially acceptable hate target to persecute. They get the pleasures of sadism, without the need to hide it.

For the rank-and-file, knee-jerk types, I think the major emotional factor is inferiority. Anyone who can't be trusted to own a gun is inferior to anyone who can. Massively, morally, inferior. They hate us for that. If we do not exist, then they are no longer inferior; they become normal, by definition. So we MUST be wrong, because they NEED us to be wrong. And we deserve whatever happens to us.

 

[WayneConrad]

"Thing is, when the herd changes direction, it seems to do so with orchestration. Sociological phenomena maybe."

Yeah, that's my best guess at most of what happens politically. Birds don't get together and have a secret meeting to decide which direction the flock should go. They just go. I suspect that much of politics is as thoughtful and deliberative as is a flock of birds.

I can't discount cabals and conspiracies, but without direct evidence of one, I think the simpler explanation is the sorts of emergent, undirected behavior we see in all other animals.

 

[armedpolak]

no no no no no

you guys got it all wrong i lived through disarment, let me explain...

people born in the USA, who spent their entire lives free of violence and/or wars, and who never been prosecuted by their own government, and in part thank to the media, see guns used in one way only: by criminals. also, notice how MOST of the gun grabbers always say "people aren't responsible enough", by people they mean everyone except them... that's because living in such prosperity, getting a high education, and being patted on the back by the libs all the time, they at some point convinced themselfs that they are in fact better, smarter, more responsible than the *AVERAGE* citizen. here lays the root of all gun grabbing evil: ego. they also assume that the majority thinks just like them, after all, it only seams logical that presence of a gun in the hands of irresponsible average citizen will induce violent behaviour. don't forget they see us as a minority. so they convinced themselfes that if they are so progresive in their thoughts, and that most other people think just like them, then taking guns away will not do harm, instead it will do good. they see guns as this last wall between them and the ethernal happines.

here's what they are forgetting: and they are forgetting it because they always say "well, no, genocide couldn't happen in 21st century american, that was long ago, we are all smarter today, we would never do such things, we are enlighted and our thoughts progressed forward, we are forward thinkers, BS BS BS, vilonce will cease to be once guns are gone, oh yes!"... here's the forgotten part: HUMANS HAVE NOT CHANGED A BIT SINCE HOMER WROTE THE ILYADA & ODYSYEA !!! Yes, everything around us have changed, including out thinking, we have new technology, and we understand more things today. But fundamentally our nature stays unchanges over the millenias! People 5000 years ago murdered, raped, burglarized, envied, hated and loved just as much as they do today. Mother's love for a child didn't change over the years. Man's love for a woman didn't change. And joy of seeing your grandchild walk for the first time is as strong today as it was then.

That's what those people have forgotten, or (as my very liberal friend tells me) this is different today or can be changed today. hence the thought of disarming seams rational and practical in light of their dilusion about changed nature of human beings today vs the past.

I rest my case

 

[wolf]

i love conspiracy theories...the movie of the same name w/Gibson was great..it just shows the type of person you need to be to feed the myth..

government conspiracy is an oxymoron...it infers that a large body of people are all going in the same direction with specific tasks and goals to perform and they will not tell anyone outside of the group of their plans.

YEAH RIGHT

wolf

 

[MBane666]

I don't thnk "conspiracy" is the right word, but I do think that the Powers-That-Be in the gun control movement want a society in which violence is the exclusive province of the state, because — theoretically — that will be the society easiest to control.

That's the situation in England now, and Australia's headed that way.

The movement quickly goes from antigun to anti-any violence that doesn't come from the government itself. It is, in fact, the old spectre of an egalitarian state...ie, all lives are equal in value...there is no difference between you and the man who attempts to murder you, so your so-called "self-defense" is no different than his so-called "attempted murder." Again, England's there, and it will be the situation in America should the antis win.

If it wasn't such a nightmare, it'd be a fascinating topic...what is the endgame?

I think the endgame is all about social control...100% video coverage of the environment, digital ID chips, etc. I base that one the fact that it seems to be the direction countries like England (and Japan) are going in.

Of course, I'm paranoid.

Michael B :banghead:

 

[kengrubb]

The Seven Varieties Of Gun Control Advocates

http://www.jpfo.org/jp_seven.htm

This is a pretty good read on the subject.

ELITISTS
AUTHORITARIANS
CRIMINALS
THE FEARFUL
IDEOLOGICAL CHAMELEONS
SECURITY MONOPOLISTS
THE DYSFUNCTIONALLY UNWORLDLY

 

[ETXhiker]

Of course, I'm paranoid.

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean someone isn't out to get you.

Yes, England's recent laws disturb me deeply. When you put someone in prison for defending their family against a home invasion by a couple of meth zombies, it defies all normal logic. How long before we step through the looking glass here?

 

[Jeff]

It's bigotry.

We are Jews; they are Nazis; "gun control" laws are the Nuremburg laws.

We are blacks; they are the Klan; "gun control" laws are Jim Crow.

Some people need a socially acceptable hate target to persecute. They get the pleasures of sadism, without the need to hide it.

For the rank-and-file, knee-jerk types, I think the major emotional factor is inferiority. Anyone who can't be trusted to own a gun is inferior to anyone who can. Massively, morally, inferior. They hate us for that. If we do not exist, then they are no longer inferior; they become normal, by definition. So we MUST be wrong, because they NEED us to be wrong. And we deserve whatever happens to us.

Well said, glummer.

I like your thinking and your ability to communicate it.

 

[eukanuba]

They have their views. They believe it is the best way for a safer world. And for a few of these folks, guns are just plain vulgar and uncivilized.

I just flat disagree. It is a dangerous world. I'd rather be ready.