Study Finds Gun Owners Distrust Government

Status
Not open for further replies.
I note that the study was controlled for, among other things, political philosophy. That means that people on the left, as well as on the right, who do not trust the government contributed to those statistics. Which is a point I have been trying to make around here for a long time. It also makes sense, since people on the left in this country historically have more reason to distrust the govt.

I also note that every thread seems to devolve into coffee can hilarity. I wonder if I'll be considered a member of the Koffee Kan Konspiracy, since I store my used brass in coffee cans. Was about to transport a bunch of them across country, and don't want to get in trouble.
 
trees and guns and distrust of the government.

Yes, but for many people, trees are for making paper and fires and houses, while for others, they're for hugging.

And yet, they still go home to stick framed houses and read their newspaper and wipe with traditional TP.

Before you think this is off topic:

These people who don't *think* they get benefit from trees, do.

These people who don't *think* they get benefit from RKBA, do.

They just don't realize it. Yet.
 
The government has done a lot of things over the years to warrant a fair amount of mistrust from its citizens. The fact that they are always looking for new ways to limit civilian access to firearms through the use of import bans and registration requirements has not done much to endear them to gun owners.
 
but for many people, trees are for making paper and fires and houses
And yet, they still breathe the air generated by trees, and they drink clean water and live on hillslopes that don't wash away because trees hold the soil on the slope, and some even hunt or otherwise enjoy wildlife that lives in or under trees. When will they ever learn?
 
A very good question would be, "Why do types of people who don't typically own guns-- liberals, Socialists, Progressives-- necessarily trust their government?"

I would imagine there are plenty of pissed-off liberals out there right now, sore-assed because of the questionable 2000 election (questionable at least to them), the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, and loosened environmental policies. How can they possibly trust their government?
 
The government didn't trust itself, so it gave us the 2A. Why this country has lasted this long would be an interesting discussion.
 
Last edited:
The government has done a lot of things over the years to warrant a fair amount of mistrust from its citizens. The fact that they are always looking for new ways to limit civilian access to firearms through the use of import bans and registration requirements has not done much to endear them to gun owners.
exactly...and all the scheming and sneaking their agenda into bills that might pass otherwise. Theres little accountability after the fact.

Why should I trust someone whom doesnt trust me? Why should I trust someone who has to have their nose in every aspect of daily life?Why should anyone trust someone that will lie, scheme and be disrespectful?
 
The government didn't trust itself, so it gave us the 2A. Why it has lasted this long would be an interesting discussion.
Because the Government knows that the citizens don't have the sand to use the 2A for any reason other than recreation.
Remember: 99.99% of heroin addicts and convicts in federal prisons ate French fries as a child.
So did 99.99% of those comprising the government including the citizenry; in this instance at least there doesn't appear to be a lot of distinction.
 
It also makes sense, since people on the left in this country historically have more reason to distrust the govt.

The "left" tends to promote government dependency, welfare is an example. While the "left" might not trust the government - biting the hand that feeds you is also not a good idea. Conservatives tend to promote self reliance and not depending on others, especially the government.

The "leftists" are the ones who are trying to take the guns away through gun control, Kerry, Kennedy, Feinstein, Schumer. The "right" at least attempts to defend the right to keep and bear arms (for fear or losing those NRA votes).

Generally speaking, the left is the enemy of freedom regarding RKBA.
 
Last edited:
... and in related news, another study determined that dogs mistrust fleas.

pax

The word 'politics' is derived from the word 'poly' meaning 'many', and the word 'ticks' meaning 'blood sucking parasites'. -- Larry Hardiman
 
"For some people, guns represent freedom and the ability to protect themselves," Curry said. "Guns are seen as a little bit of protection in an otherwise chaotic world."

For anyone that has had to use a weapon in defense of self or family, I doubt if they viewed it as "a little bit of protection" anymore than the recipient of said force considered it "a little bit of lead".
 
Complete inversion of cause and effect. Many people own guns BECAUSE they dont trust the government, not the other way around.
 
c_yeager is right, although I don't see what difference it makes. Either way it is a good thing and is legal behavior.

If gun ownership caused distrust of the .gov, then we would see far more people becoming libertarian than the stats show. Also, the lable "gun owner" would become useful, unlike it is now. That is, today, "gun owners" as a group do not hold any predictable or consistent political beliefs. Instead it is a collection of subgroups (hunters, target shootes, sportsmen, self defense, militia, C&R, etc,) with vastly different political priorities.
 
When the U.S. gummint starts unconstitutionally financing certain religious groups, arresting others for their religious affiliation, illegally searching and seizing property, holding prisoners for years without charging them with crimes and giving itself powers not delegated by the Constitution everybody else is gonna stand up and say, "Them gun owners was right all along."

Uh, "starts"? Dude, we've started all of that a while back. Examples:

Religion--don't honestly have a good example off the top of my head for the financing, but I bet I can find one if I look. As far as arrest, if you don't count burning alive, we can look at some of the American Indians who used hallucinogens in their rituals and now are not allowed to do so because of Federal drug laws.

Illegal search/seizure: How's civil asset forfiture work for ya? Search warrants based on the "anonymous tip"?

Holding prisoners for years without trial--I'll get fried for this one, but how about the detainees in the War on Terror?

Giving itself powers beyond those defined in the Constitution? The latest stretch of the Commerce Clause (Raich vs. Ashcroft) is just the most recent in a long line that, depending on your definitions, may stretch back as far as the Whiskey Rebellion.

I'm being lazy and not offering a lot of examples. Google is your friend, though.

As far as gun owners distrusting government, well, yeah, I distrust my government for the same reason I distrust any large organization--power corrupts. It'd be an intereseting study to look at how those same gun owners feel about banks, insurance companies, international comglomerates, etc.
 
In other news, government scientists discover that TREES ARE MADE OF WOOD!

+1
And extensive multiple-regression-anaylsis studies have concluded the sky is blue.

Freeholder, I think he meant, in a roundabout/sarcastic way, that he understands that those things are in fact happening, or have happened. He's on the same page. :) Having said that, not just a whole lot of waves of new people have stood up and said gun owners were right all along, yet. But we'll see... I have two good friends that are diehard Democrats, but they distrust the gov, own guns, and one of them I even convinced to not vote for Kerry, since he was so anti-gun, even though this friend is active in the state young Democrats club (an officer)! :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top