What is the psychology of anti-gun people?

[SuperNaut]

When pacifists try to characterize 2a supporters as blood-thirsty psychopaths it really chaps my hide. Is that really the best way to get the point across? Marginalize and dehumanize your opposition? You know what gets my attention? Facts.

The same goes for the OP.

 

[squarooticus]

We see a similar sort of thing when people try to determine how safe it is to fly versus drive. As many of us know, it's safer to be in an airplane than in a car, but people are much more worried about flying than driving. Why? Because it's easier to remember examples of airplane disasters than car disasters.

I actually don't think this is it.

I don't fear flying, but I much prefer driving over flying despite the statistically greater likelihood of dying in a car because in a car I have control: I can drive defensively; I can drive at times and on roads with fewer other cars; I can choose not to drive in the rain or snow; I can avoid roads with lots of deer; I can choose the driver; etc. In short, I have a significant amount of control over the conditions under which I drive, which can drastically alter the odds of getting into a serious accident.

The same is not true of flying: I need to make reservations far in advance of any predictions about the weather; I don't get to choose the pilot; I don't get to choose the maintenance crew; and I don't get to choose the other passengers. When flying, you really are rolling the dice, because you have almost zero control over the flight conditions.

This is why I would carry even were someone able to prove that statistically I would be (say) 10x more likely to be killed while carrying versus not. Why? Because statistics are just that: statistics. They say a lot about large groups, but nothing about individuals. And it seems pretty clear to me that my chances of survival are much greater with a gun than without, regardless of the starting conditions, because I am not dumb.

Cheers,
Kyle

 

[Durruti]

Squarooticus,

Hmmm... how to put this nicely...?

I will say that in general (not refering to you personally) most people consider themselves above average. This is particularly true with regards to both driving and shooting ability.

Of course, maybe you are above average (half of all people are, after all). Again, I'm not saying anything about you personally, just that this is an error people tend to make.

Cheers back at ya!
Durruti

 

[Durruti]

Well now you know one who isn't

Duly noted

 

[lionking]

quote supernaut;When pacifists try to characterize 2a supporters as blood-thirsty psychopaths it really chaps my hide. Is that really the best way to get the point across? Marginalize and dehumanize your opposition? You know what gets my attention? Facts.

they don't care about facts.Lies and stereotyping gunowners is their standard method of operating.Just like they will never admit to a gunban or restriction being a failure but will demand more money or a broadening of the guncontrol laws instead.
Pacifists,I can actually respect that idea in a sense,there have been many combat medics who were pacifists who still put themselves in the line of fire to serve.Alot of anti gunners are more elitists rather than pacifists though who feel it fine to defend themselves but see others not being as intellectually or morally capable,ala hollywood types and politicians who own a gun or use a bodyguard yet actively support gun control.

I suppose Im preaching to the choir though.

 

[SuperNaut]

My wife was a staunch anti, I won her over with data, and patience. She's not a masochist, and most definitely has high self-esteem.

If you don't care about increasing the numbers of intelligent Constitution savvy people on our side, by all means continue to pretend that they aren't just like you and me. It sure is easier.

If the OP had linked to any data at all, I might be singing a different tune.

 

[mountainclmbr]

Let us just be thankful that none of the passengers of the 9/11 flights had a gun. They were disarmed to prevent danger. It worked and the hijackers were perfectly safe. We should disarm as a country to prove to our enemies that we mean them no harm!

Leftists please repeat after me: " Baaaaaaaa Baaaaaaaaaa!".

 

[Durruti]

SuperNaut makes an excellent point. For the most part, antis are not that different from us. We won't win over the hardcore ones, but most of them are open, rational people who might be willing to change positions with a little talk (and range time ).

 

[lionking]

I see what you are saying supernaut,a everyday person may be persuaded but the chief gun control advocates will doubtfully be persuaded,they are to be defeated rather than debated.

 

[justiceforRob]

Just new to this thread and not sure how this all works but.....I got on this thread..legal and political... to ask questions and get some feedback from other people about our situation. My best friend Rob was celebrating the Fourth of July. The neighbors called the sheriff's department and two deputies responded. They shot my friend 3 times to the head. The county investigated itself and came up with self defense on their part. End of investigation I suppose and no questions are being answered to the family. What can someone do to get an outside investigation started. My friend had a concealed weapons permit in the county and state that he was killed. Any feedback appreciated!

 

[SuperNaut]

I see what you are saying supernaut,a everyday person may be persuaded but the chief gun control advocates will doubtfully be persuaded,they are to be defeated rather than debated.

Roger that.

People are funny and fickle though. I had a lot of anti friends who changed their minds literally overnight after Katrina.

Sometimes it takes events like a f******g massive disaster to wake people up, other times it takes just a little patience. I know it's more fun to think that antis are all screwy in the head, but I know from experience that they just haven't been presented the data in a calm cogent manner.

I have to count to ten every time an anti tells me that it is only a matter of time before I snap and kill everyone in my neighborhood. If I got all fired up at their mischaracterization and unthinkingly demeaned them it would only cement their position.

I'll be the calm one, I'll be the rational one, I'll present data, and not just win them over; but everyone listening too.

 

[squarooticus]

I will say that in general (not refering to you personally) most people consider themselves above average.

What I said with respect to driving/flying has very little to do with whether I'm above average or not: most of it addresses the conditions under which I choose to drive, not my skill, though certainly I do have a high opinion of myself there.

As for carrying a gun, yes, a lot of that is related to skill and awareness; but just as much of it is related to keeping cleaning areas free of ammunition, locking up guns that are not currently in-use as defensive weapons, teaching the people who share your living space to respect guns, and generally following the four rules. I'm going to guess that most of us here are above average on those counts.

There's a lot more to beating statistics than fooling one's self. Most of it has to do with understanding the group that is being profiled, and figuring out whether and in what way you are an outlier. Since surveys don't usually provide you with enough information about the people being profiled, it's hard to do that, so you just make an educated guess.

Cheers,
Kyle

 

[mountainclmbr]

The problem is that laws do not discourage crimminals, especially when there are lax sentences that seem to have the goal to encourage even more LEO control and resulting taxes because people feel less safe. So gun control laws will primarily affect the law-abiding while possibly encouraging the law breakers. A disarmed populace is easy pickings for the felon with nothing much to lose. A disarmed populace is also easy pickings for power grabbing politicians. I have a problem with both with no idea which is worse. I feel that the politicians/LEOs and crimminals are both competing for the money in my wallet. It seems that they symphathise with each other. I am struggling to see the difference.

 

[Zundfolge]

foob, it is possible for a well intentioned person to dupe himself with fallacious logic.

Yes but that's not what was stated by him, he specifically states "these people have bought the lies told by the gun control movement."

I still stand by that statement.

The statement "Gun control will reduce crime." is a lie told by people who know it is a lie in order to convince other people to support their cause. It is also a lie told by people who believe it to be the truth.

The facts, the data, the truth ... all back up the idea that gun control (regardless of degree) does absolutely NOTHING to make a community or country safer.

I believe that most people who support gun control either by voting for gun control politicians or by their answers to polls asking about gun control, or if asked what they believe they will say gun control is a good idea ... most of these people are not activists, just normal people who have been told a lie and happen to believe it. They have been duped.


For an outline of the facts involved, please go here www.gunfacts.info and note that the Gun Facts report is backed up by many sources. Go there and make up your own mind about the rightness or wrongness of those who believe in gun control.


Oh and for the record I don't think you're a troll ... you sure aren't acting like one, you're just engaging in a civil debate as far as I can tell (only thing more annoying than trolls on forums is people who jump up and shout TROLL every time someone with a different point of view shows up).

 

[Baba Louie]

justiceforRob, check your p.m.

back on topic...
While this is a dangerous and, dare I say it, an emotional thing to do... those anti-gun types can be stereotyped and generalized as emotional stereotypists who generalize that guns, and thus gun owners, are... icky and scary and might harm them. Just as I might do the same about them and their attempts and ill-thought out desires to disarm me and mine in a world of truly evil ner-do-wells who seem to do quite well knowing that a whole lot of us DO own firearms. Can you imagine our society wherein only criminals and the police are armed with firearms? Like the Mayor of New Orleans wanted last September or Washington DC?

Doesn't work for me.

 

[Byron Quick]

If anti rhetoric is examined a large part of the 'reasoning' is based on a fundamental lack of trust of people who carry and who wish to have the means to defend themselves with firearms.

This distrust does not come from research into what actually happens across the nation amongst CCW holders. Rather it comes from within the antis themselves. Many of them realize they could not be trusted to carry a firearm in a trustworthy manner.

This realization leaves them with two choices: 1) Acknowledging that the vast majority of CCW holders are more responsible than they are, have better self control than they...or 2) demanding that we should be restricted for we obviously can not be more competent, more responsible, and have better self control.

This, I believe, is part of the psychology but does not explain the higher levels of the gun control movement's hierarchy. The top people cannot be explained in this manner. They do have the self control necessary to responsibly carry. They do have the intelligence to realize gun control laws do not work and have never worked. Therefore, their goals are different than their stated goals and their motivations are different than their stated motivations. To take their stated goals and stated motivations at face value, one would be forced to assume a lack of intelligence coupled with an inability to grasp reality. I do not make that assumption. Since there is such a wide variance between their observed ability and their words and actions-I am forced to the conclusion that their goals and motivations are not what is proclaimed. This, in turn, leads me to view those leaders-and their duped followers-with suspicion.

 

[tellner]

At some point intellectually honest people will agree on the facts and apply consistent methods of inference to draw conclusions from them. One reason we are not in agreement is that for all of us (yes, including the Fundamentalist Objectivists) the basic axioms by which our minds work, their substructure, is based on beliefs and views of the world that are inarguable and not susceptible to external logic.

 

[squarooticus]

To take their stated goals and stated motivations at face value, one would be forced to assume a lack of intelligence coupled with an inability to grasp reality. I do not make that assumption. Since there is such a wide variance between their observed ability and their words and actions-I am forced to the conclusion that their goals and motivations are not what is proclaimed.

I am almost convinced that they don't mean what they say. Seeing how politicians talk out of both sides of their mouth on other issues, why should guns be any different?

Privately, they may even acknowledge that at worst private gun ownership and CCW have no effect on crime; but they are able to use it as a wedge issue based primarily on the ignorance (no offense intended; I mean it literally) of the populace with regard to guns. It serves to form their base. It's despicable behavior, but do you expect any different from career politicians who've never had to put in an honest day's work in their lives?

Thus, I recommend a healthy dose of education. Since getting my permit in April and joining one of the local clubs, I have brought 4 non-shooters to the club as guests. At least two of them will be applying for permits, and one of them is a confirmed lib (gay and Democrat voter). This is what we need to do to make this issue not a wedge issue anymore.

Cheers,
Kyle

 

[iliketoshootguns]

This is good stuff. I have learned a great deal from all of you.

BTW my original post was not touching on the fence sitters per se, but was more in regards to radical leftists, as in the hardcore san francisco ban everything outright bunch.

I too realize that there are moderate people who just need a little education in the right direction to see legitimate gun ownership as a good thing.

My concern is the psychology of those who have the unrelenting will and resources to make the second amendment a thing of the past.

Yall have a nice day.

 

[tellner]

Just another radical leftist view...

Gun control cements the use of force in the hands of the police, military and private security. The government is largely a bought and paid for operation of the corporate elite. It behooves those whose interests are with the working classes to democratize the ownership of weapons.

 

[Koobuh]

Of course the People's Army types believe that. They also believe that once the Glorious Revolution is over, there is no longer a need for arms- therefore, no one but the People's Government, Police, and Army may have them.
Since the People obviously have already had a say in how government is administered, they no longer have need to hold onto arms in order to overthrow their capitalist oppressors, and anything the people do not need, they shall not have.



No sweeter poison but the words we love to hear, from the mouths of seeming friends.

 

[LAK]

What is the psychology of anti-gun people?

You have an elite whose vice is called power and control. They are generally extremely wealthy, have no moral compass, and have no conscience (or it has been dulled to the point that it is not active).

Then you have those who are obsessed with themselves, often gripped by forms of vice, and do not exercize reason and logic to conclusive ends in all things that come or are set before them. They sometimes do not care about the subject matter and will agree with someone to get something else they want. Also generally with no firm moral compass.

Those who are emotionally driven (as opposed to people who are primarily guided by reason and logic). Who when confronted with horror, suffering, death etc, exercize judgments clouded by their emotional perceptions.

The first group uses and manipulates the second two in a variety of ways for their own ends. All three are described offhand in condensed form - and there are variations to each group with overlaps now and then.

------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[Deanimator]

Well now you know one who isn't

I had a friend in lawschool who was a Stalinist and he was VERY pro-gun. It was the Klan massacre of the communists in North Carolina that changed his mind.

Of course once he came to power, he would have disarmed and massacred all of his opponents...

 

[dance varmint]

Chipping in my 2 cents...

The anti-gun person watches the violent crime on the news and says,
"It won't happen to ME."

The gun person watches the violent crime on the news, checks his chamber, and says,
"It WON'T happen to me."

 

[Jeff]

The worst combination of anything comes from the putrid blend of fear, loathing, and hubris. Fear of guns, loathing for those who own them, and the hubris to not want to be wrong.

The final ingredient is the most insidious, because in the light of reasoning, logic, facts, and history, stubborn and unreasonable jackasses will never admit they subscribed their whole lives to the sub-culture of gun control and the utter wrongfulness of its immorality.