Society and Gun Laws

[MoscowMike]

I’m happy to see us getting movement in a positive direction, but we need to remember that laws eventually reflect society’s attitudes. A century ago society decided that drinking alcohol should be banned. After a few years, society decided that was a bad idea and the laws changed back.

We are seeing less restrictive gun laws both now and on the horizon because current courts are deciding some restrictions are unconstitutional. Courts in the future may reinterpret those ideas or the Constitution could be amended again.

As long as we live in a society where we are uncomfortable letting our neighbors know we own guns, where for many it’s hard to find a shooting range nearby and where a big chunk of the population thinks of guns as something criminals use, our rights are in danger.

We can’t just depend on the courts, we need to work on society, which is much harder, and takes long term commitment.

For example, does your local Boy Scout group teach gun safety and marksmanship? Is there a local firearms club and if so do they welcome new members? Are there local laws in place to protect shooting ranges from spurious lawsuits? Does your local legal system take criminal misuse of guns seriously? When you meet someone new, do you invite them to go shooting?

There are lots of areas where we can use our influence. The more people who speak up, write letters, contribute time and money and vote, the better our odds are. Fewer restrictions mean it will be easier to work for long-term change. It won’t be time to relax.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Maybe its the locale, but all the young folks I've come into contact with here have been somewhere between gun-curious and strongly pro. I've invited a number of them shooting and all have been enthusiastic about it, generally leaving even more so afterwards.
Thats my advice. Take a kid shooting. It's tougher to demonize something when you don't fear it anymore.

 

[Riomouse911]

I coach the AFJROTC air rifle marksmanship team at my local high school. I do my best to make the idea of gun safety and shooting skill a foundation for their future gun ownership.

Stay safe.

 

[nettlle]

It's rural here. Miles of croplands. All my neighbors including myself shoot a lot in our back yards. No drama here. Shoot rabbits in my front yard during season.

 

[entropy]

Volunteering as a Firearms Safety instructor, 4-H or High School Trap shooting coach or similar is one of the best ways to preserve and protect the future of shooting sports.

 

[mljdeckard]

What you're saying is true. But I think the stark lines are being drawn in individual states. Middle ground is going away. More states are going to decide whether they are red or blue, and the shade will be very distinct. More people than ever are being driven to gun ownership. Not all of them will remain enthusiastic for their lifetime, but more of them will resent being told that it's wrong.

 

[nettlle]

Deleted

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Between the urbanization/suburbanization of society and fatherlessness hav/ing become the norm, far fewer of today's young grow up with firearms.

 

[CDW4ME]

One positive in the last 30+ years has been the increase in concealed carry; much more people legally carry concealed now and they are not going to want to lose that.
I lived in KY in 1990 and well remember how I wanted to carry concealed but legally could not.

 

[hso]

We can’t just depend on the courts, we need to work on society, which is much harder, and takes long term commitment.

It is important to note this. It is also important to understand that we have to be as focused on the impact on society, and laws, as the Anti 2A groups are so that we work to normalize normal firearms ownership. No glorification of gore or criminals or posturing will work for us because that is part of what has eroded the peoples' perception of gun owners.

 

[AlexanderA]

Society is becoming more pro-gun because of the perceived need for guns (rising crime rate, etc.). This is independent from any lobbying, cultivation, etc. from the pro-gun side. I doubt that "taking your neighbor shooting" really makes much difference. The neighbor will buy a gun if he personally feels threatened. Not because of a pleasant day at the range.

Highly publicized mass shootings stir up the antigun crowd. They also prompt ordinary people to arm themselves, so that they can resist mass shooters. I really think the latter phenomenon is more significant, in the long run.

 

[entropy]

In the short term view, you're not wrong. It is incumbent upon us to foster that 'buy a gun and a box of ammo' mentality into something positive. Unless that new gun owner gets out and practices- fundamentals first, then basic firearms defensive use, legalities, and learns and practices situational awareness, nothing is gained, both personally for them, or gun owners as a whole, except one less anti. And even that's not a certainty, there are plenty of antis that own guns.

 

[I6turbo]

More recently, for anyone paying attention, I'd think the fact that about 1400 largely-disarmed Israeli citizens just got massacred in the most barbaric ways imaginable (while the effective weapons that could have protected them were held by the police and IDF) might be raising a few additional eyebrows for those who just planned to dial 911 if trouble arose.

The tragedy in Israel happened after years of the government increasing regulations that made it a difficult and bureaucratic PITA for citizens (even though most of the men have served in the military) to jump through the hoops to have privately-owned guns and a very few rounds of ammo. And even much harder for them to have long guns, rifles, that would be most effective at repelling an attack by well-armed invaders. Private gun ownership was treated like a highly regulated privilege instead of a right. They specifically rejected a 2A type of right for Israeli citizens, apparently having learned nothing from the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. Of course after the attack, they are relaxing restrictions and handing out weapons directly to citizens.

But I think this latest example of "criminals WILL have guns and WILL use them on the unarmed" regardless of any utopian-dream laws or other good intentions, and following the out-of-control firey "protests" of 2020 while the police were often forced to stand by and watch, these eye-openers continue wake up more and more Americans to the fact that their self defense ultimately may come down to them as individuals, fathers, and citizens of their local communities. More people are realizing that 911 may only be able to send the meat wagon for you after the universal background check laws magazine capacity limits and call-the-police-in-case-of-emergency plans have resulted in disaster.

 

[Anchorite]

Society is becoming more pro-gun because of the perceived need for guns (rising crime rate, etc.). This is independent from any lobbying, cultivation, etc. from the pro-gun side. I doubt that "taking your neighbor shooting" really makes much difference. The neighbor will buy a gun if he personally feels threatened. Not because of a pleasant day at the range.

Highly publicized mass shootings stir up the antigun crowd. They also prompt ordinary people to arm themselves, so that they can resist mass shooters. I really think the latter phenomenon is more significant, in the long run.

I don’t think anyone - today - would argue or say that they don’t have the right to “defend” themselves from an active threat that maybe life-threatening. Or that each person has the right to live their life free of threats to their security.

It seems to really get more complicated when we start trying to define or outline how ”we” expect to keep ourselves safe, or live our lives free of threats. Is it individually or collectively through government action? What amount of personal security and safety is one willing to take on, and how much of that is one willing to sacrifice or depend on the government to cover?

Then it gets way more complicated and quickly.

 

[AlexanderA]

there are plenty of antis that own guns.

Yes. The explanation is that (a) they don't believe that bans will apply to them, and (b) they feel stronger and more secure if they are armed, but everybody else is not.

The extremism of the organized antigun movement is destroying this line of thinking. The masks have dropped. Antigun legislators are pushing bans with no grandfathering. When faced with the real possibility of losing their own guns, the "antigun" gun owners are being forced to finally pick sides.

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

IIRC Israel has no constitution, hence no 2A.

 

[hso]

doubt that "taking your neighbor shooting" really makes much difference.

I can agree you aren't likely to shift someone to gun owner because someone takes them shooting, BUT that someone they know and view as trustworthy has shown them that gun owners aren't the crazed criminals/reckless reprobate depicted by antis can cause them to question the Anti propaganda or the movie tropes. "Neighbor AL is a responsible guy that showed me there are gun people that are good folks and not just a bunch of thugs."