Why do people become anti-gun?

[Werewolf]

3. Un-American Ideology - I've seen more than a few anti-gunners who are simply nihilists and support ANY use of governmental authority without reference to right or wrong. These people fear the ability of people to resist governmental oppression. These people actually condemn the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto and Sobibor for violently resisting their own murders. They view ANY resistance to governmental oppression as more evil than the oppression itself, even genocide.

Were that the above isn't true because that is down right scary and I mean the cold shivers down the spine type of scary.

 

[Deanimator]

Were that the above isn't true because that is down right scary and I mean the cold shivers down the spine type of scary.

A funny story:

A while ago on the Fullbore-L mailing list for longrange rifle shooters all around the world (Canada, UK, Germany, S. Africa as well as the US) there was a retired Canadian cop. Political Correctness was just spurting from all of his orifices, to include a hysterical rant about how people shouldn't have "sniper rifles" (indistinguishable from the fundamental subject matter of the mailing list). He waxed incoherent about the subject/citizen's duty to obey ALL laws and commands of the government, regardless of their nature. I asked him if people had a duty to go into a racial concentration camp if instructed to do so. He of course said, "yes".

Then one day, he got into a dispute with the Canadian firearms registration authority. He exchanged a number of heated emails with them. Magically, those emails began being posted in usenet by a couple of current Canadian cops with whom he was also not on the best of terms. He had an epileptic fit over these violations of his "rights". He ranted and raved and railed over the collossal injustice of it all! I simply replied with the sermon of German Protestant Pastor Martin Niemoller (1892-1984):

"They came for the Communists, and I didn't object - For I wasn't
a Communist;

They came for the Socialists, and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Socialist;

They came for the labor leaders, and I didn't object - For I wasn't a labor leader;

They came for the Jews, and I didn't object - For I wasn't a Jew;

Then they came for me - And there was no one left to object."

He replied, "What the h*** does THAT mean???"

I just snickered...

 

[glummer]

Lots of interlocking reasons. A couple more:

Psychological defense against inferiority.
Anyone who can be trusted with a gun is morally superior to anyone who can't. Many of those who are inferior HATE the rest of us. They want to make us NOT BE, somehow. If everyone is like them, then they are no longer inferior.
These are the ones who are hardest to change. They really NEED us to go away.

Team spirit.
For a lot of moderate/liberal types, it's simply rooting for their side. Gun control is part of the team colors, and right/wrong, or practicality are irrelevant. The Yanks wear pinstripes because that's what they wear. No one asks them to prove that it is RIGHT.
I think these people are the most superficially commited, and probably the most reachable.

 

[ryan in maine]

disclaimer: I can only share my experience from northern Maine. the following is a list of anti-gun personalities I have personally seen.

defer to government
- if my party doesn't like guns then I should probly follow suit to stay true to their beliefs
- want everyone disarmed for their own perceived benefit (like was mentioned, often bigotry @ a masked ball, how many gun laws started out targeting black folks?)
- blatant spreading of ignorance or taking advantage of a citizen and their already existing ignorance
- flat out lying about the role of firearms in the US

ignorant upbringing
- the guns kill part overwhelms the guns save part
- lack even basic firearms instruction
- unfamiliar with and often intimidated by pro-gun personalities

fear
- the guns kill part overwhelms the guns save part
- hoplophobic

traumatic experience
- knows someone who was shot and killed (often seemingly distant connections to victim)
- was nearly shot themselves
- thinks being anti-gun is being anti-war and the reverse

media brainwashing
- usually horror stories with an anti-gun twist
- badly misused statistics

extreme pacifism
- couldn't imagine taking another life even to save a luvd one or themself
- especially not with a firearm

popular opinion
- similar to brainwashing yet requires less effort from anti-gun folks
- will not change their opinion unless friend/party majority does so first

denial
- refusing to believe in the possibility that they could be the target of a violent attack (mugging, rape, burglary, wrong place @ the wrong time, etc)

 

[Deanimator]

Team spirit.
For a lot of moderate/liberal types, it's simply rooting for their side. Gun control is part of the team colors, and right/wrong, or practicality are irrelevant. The Yanks wear pinstripes because that's what they wear. No one asks them to prove that it is RIGHT.
I think these people are the most superficially commited, and probably the most reachable.

There's a lot of truth to this. I see a LOT of gun control people who say things for absolutely no reason other than other gun control people say them. When somebody else questions this, they're either astonished or enraged that somebody would have the timerity to suggest that they think for themselves, much less that one's beliefs should be ones own.

 

[10man]

You all have made excellent points and I totally agree with most. here's my two cents and excuse me for my tangent trip.
The way I see it is that a lot of these anti-views are a byproduct on the urban environment as with a flock of sheep or swine on the farm they become accustomed to the constant presence of the Sheppard or farmer. A thus have never been responsible for they're own safety or security and when the wolves are at the door the Shepard is only a bleat er I mean phone call away. But, put a swine in the wild and it grows long of tusk and covered with hair and muscle it adapts to the more demanding environment or becomes food for something else.
These same sheep safe in their urban pasture can't begin to understand that the very nature of nature it's self is a constant state of war on it's self, Does not the Hawk make war on the rabbit? Or crow on the hawk? Aggression is ingrained in every organism on the planet it's in our very DNA; It's how we have survived to this point. These anti's are the most pathetic self loathing being's, not unlike a prey animal given the choice of fight or flight will choose flght every time. :banghead:

 

[justashooter]

"fear of firearms is a sign of emotional and sexual immaturity"

words from the father of modern psychology

 

[Beatnik]

Guns represent the individual taking care of business. People who are antigun generally have coniptions at the thought of you and me living our lives unhindered.

No, in my experience they honestly believe that there's no "business" to take care of. Until you understand that at the person-to-person level, you will not advance our goals, you will only serve to lump anyone who is "anti-gun" into some nebulous "them liberals" cloud.

I'm playing Johnny-come-lately here, but I have been thinking about this a lot.

Yes, I was lumping, but the idea which I think I failed to convey works at a level deeper than "screw liberals". Each of us depends on certain things happening or not happening in order for our society to work - like getting from point A to point B without getting hurt, or not having to worry about this week's invasion of our country.

There are exactly two ways to go about this. Either let all of the citizenry contribute to creating this situation voluntarily, or choose only certain citizens to tackle the problem. Individual gun ownership represents the first option.

Antis - in my own experience - almost always subscribe to the second option. It is not the individual's responsibility, or even right, to perform tasks which they see as reserved for the government. For whatever reason (perhaps the fact that they're spending 50% of their income on an entity who is supposed to be performing these tasks) they simply want someone who is not them to take care of it, and they want to be able to trust that person.

They don't say this, and this is not always the exact opinion. I'm sure that the president of the Willie Horton Fan Club, or anyone who honestly thinks the need to reform serial rapists outweighs the need not to be raped, would have a different opinion.

But frankly, I'm not interested in that opinion because I think my words are wasted on that mentality. I subscribe to the idea that most antis aren't trying to protect rapists - they just haven't thought it all the way through. At the core, most people will agree that they simply don't want to be raped.

I'm typing this post on a machine running Linux - a real-world case study in how on a completely level playing field where anyone can do great harm, more people always volunteer to create a safe society and will police those interested in harming others.

I have faith that people who go to work, pay their taxes, own homes, and raise families - in other words, voters - fall into the category of people who are interested in a safe society. When I run into one who is an anti for whatever reason, I try to point out that they are at the core one of these people, and that there's a way to have a safe society with no tax increase, no extra cops hired, no extra bureaucracy, an economic boost, and fewer accidental deaths than are caused by swimming pools.

The only catch is that you have to trust your next door neighbor enough to let him own a gun and, if it comes down to it, "take care of business".

So I apologize - I agree that one should not come at it with the stock "liberals suck" argument, and I admit that my wording was poor. Hopefully I've shown that I have thought it through farther than I originally posted, and I also invite everyone to do the same.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I was in England on a project about 10 years ago, and read the local papers. There had been a series of brutal rapes and assaults, and the paper said the police were advising women to carry perfume sprays (O.C. is illegal in England.) If attacked, they were to spray the attacker in the eyes and run.

Now in all Christian charity, I have to say there's something fundamentally wrong with a mindset that advises potential victims to carry weapons but prohibits them from having weapons that actually work.

 

[Curly]

I'd be interested in hearing any personal experiences (or know anybody) in the category: "I was anti-gun until I was mugged."

 

[Beorning]

Ignorance would get my vote as the number one reason why people are anti-gun. It's pervasive. We are socialized to feel a certain way about firearms.

I've owned rifles and shotguns for years. I use them, hunt with them, et cetera. Just bought my first handgun last week. I found it a bit curious that I had thoughts along the lines that a handgun was somehow inherently more dangerous than my 12 gauge. Ridiculous.

Now take someone who has never handled any firearm. Never been in regular proximity to any firearm and has been exposed to the negative socialization surrounding firearms. Go a step further and assume that this person is pre-disposed to left wing political leanings. There's little chance they'll be anything but anti-gun.

That which we do not know we fear. This is default human nature, IMO.

My wife was extremely hesitant when I brought up buying a handgun, for all the typical reasons. Now that she has handled one, learned how to field strip it and reassemble it, she sees it for what it is. A tool. A machine. Nothing more, nothing less. Something to be respected, but not feared.

 

[tinygnat219]

Keith Wheeler, interesting post. Definitely thought provoking, as a converted anti, just wanted to share some concerns.

My wife grew up in a similar situation, but add on top of that her first "experience" with firearms was that in high school her best friend committed suicide with one. Ouch! That Sucks. That's a definite hump to get over. I have a friend who as an ER nurse is completely anti-gun. She has to try and fix the messes that guns wielded by sickos and criminals tend to make. Does your wife realize that her friend might have committed suicide another way and that the firearm is just a tool? One of my roommates committed suicide by Carbon Monoxide Poisoning by attaching an air hose from his exhaust port and funneling it into the car. Yet I don't blame the car for his suicide. I wonder how I could have helped him, and how I missed warning signs.

Honestly, what I don't understand is why so many of you guys don't understand anti-gun types. Firearms are dangerous. Firearms are powerful. Firearms are shrouded in a cloak of myth and stereotypes.
As a former Anti, this is a situation, and typically a statement of ignorance. It's not good to assign human qualities to inanimate objects. The key here is education and understanding of the object that strips the myths and stereotypes away. Once that's gone, all you have is an inanimate object that's simply a hunk of metal, plastic, or wood. That's all, Tnothing more, nothing less. Firearms are only dangerous when wielded by the wrong people or in defense from the wrong people.

For someone who has had no experience with them, or worse yet someone whose experiences were those of my wife, it's very easy to understand why they would think "firearms are dangerous, we're better off to prevent danger". If you can't understand their position, I suggest you sit back for a moment, take a deep breath, and think about it. Sure, it's a position I disagree with for many reasons, but it isn't that difficult of a position to understand.
Actually you have a good point. No experience or bad experiences can lead to the "firearms are dangerous" mentality. However, it's a view that isn't founded on anything that has facts, and the logic behind it is flawed at best. The thing is to listen, then educate. It's hard to do, as I can attest, but eventually the truth wins out. I guarantee that a different experience where a burglar breaks in and runs away after being confronted by a homeowner with a gun will change that way of thinking. It probably won't make them members of the NRA's ILA, but it will get them thinking that a gun just saved their life.

Seriously, stop for a minute, think about what you truly believe. If the RKBA is truly that important to you, can't you see how understanding your enemy is so much better than resorting to slander?
Not sure how saying an anti-gunner is wrong is slander. It's a fact.

Think about the car analogy. How many here are saying we should get rid of seatbelts? To these people it's the same thing, they see a danger, and want it to be minimized. The problem is they are focusing on the tiny part of the system, and don't understand the higher level dangers that disarming a populace imposes. The trick is to be smarter than they are. To them their beliefs on the situation are rather rational and we seem to be the irrational ones. Education, not name calling, will be the solution.
Completely agree with your last statement. Not sure what you mean in the first part, I assume it's about the seatbelt laws. Not sure if there is a corollary there or not. GOOD POST!


TJ

 

[gwine]

Can't say I was ever anti-gun but I really don't ever remember playing much with a toy gun when I was a lad. I remember once my dad going hunting and my sister freaking out because the rabbit he bought back was missing what little brain a rabbit has, but that isn't really an anti sentiment. I think for me it was more a lack of opportunity to experience using one that made me more apathetic than anti.

Later I used to tell people, somewhat jokingly, that I was not the person who should be owning a gun, because I'd probably use it for the wrong reason (like on a Sea-Doo - what caliber would it take to put a hole in the engine block, anyway? ). Obviously you can't predict who will snap, but I realize now that my comment was rather off-base.

Now I'm a member (not card carrying, yet - still waiting) of the NRA and my local gun club, and the owner of a S&W 617-6. I hope to have a lot of fun shooting and getting together with like-minded folks and in the process project a positive image of responsible gun ownership.

And, I hope to add to my collection. Soon.

 

[Ramon67]

I think it's in vogue now to be anti-gun.

It's just another expression of PC. It sounds 'kewl' in liberal circles to talk trash about gun ownership.

 

[.45 AUTO]

In my personal opinion it is based partly on how you are raised, among other things. If you were raised in a home were guns, hunting, and shooting were the norm, whether or not you were interested in those things, chances are you would not be anti-gun. Some people are anti-gun based on emotions of how criminals use guns for wrongfull purposes, they feel I have no interest in guns, etc, and all I know is how mad, and sad I am that criminals use guns in crimes, so I mind as well be anti-gun. Emotions and illogical thinking can block how people would normally feel about guns.

 

[thirty-thirty]

Why do people become anti-gun? Because they watch TV!

People simply do not realize how TV shapes their opinions and values through subtle messages and repetition.
Next would be academia. Colleges are indoctrination camps.

 

[Green Lantern]

Part of me wonders if anti-gun types are "born" rather than "made."

For instance, a co-worker was accidentally shot in the leg with a .22 by someone when she was little. But she's has very little interest in guns these decades later, she's not an "anti."

Then again, she was raised by a State Trooper, so to counter her VERY bad experience with guns, she also saw responsible gun-carrying for defense on a daily basis.

thirty-thirty - I don't know about TV. Then again, I grew up on James Bond and Sledge Hammer where guns were glorified..! At least in "my day" (I feel too young to justify using that phrase) there was more pro-gun TV than anti-gun that I was exposed to. Well, I've always loved MacGyver, but I guess RDA didn't get all "preachy" on his anti-gun views on there.

Then there was the Ninja Turtles, where Leo dissed guns on a regular basis at least in the Archie Comics-produced TMNT comic book. Even at that young age, I thought he was kind of lame for doing so!

As I type this it occurs to me that you may speak of the mainstream media. But then again, I'd think that MOST kids don't "grow" up on the news. The evening news is right up there with Cable late night for "stuff I'd feel comfy letting my own kids watch." By the time one starts paying attention to the media, I'd say MOST of the time they've already formed their opinions on guns.

 

[thirty-thirty]

When i think of anti-gunners, I think of those who are opposed to the private ownership and use of guns by private citizens.

"thirty-thirty - I don't know about TV. Then again, I grew up on James Bond and Sledge Hammer where guns were glorified..! At least in "my day" (I feel too young to justify using that phrase) there was more pro-gun TV than anti-gun that I was exposed to. "

These are not examples of Hollywood portraying gun owning private citizens in a favorable light, they are portaying gun use by state officials in a favorable light. Big difference IMO.

 

[Web]

A lot of antis just have not had any experience with guns or with thinking or even hearing about the reasons for having guns. Since they're always hearing about people and children getting shot, and not about them being saved by guns, the real question isn't, why do ppl become anti-gun, but, why wouldn't they? A lot of people really think that if guns are banned, there won't be any guns. They think if they ban the manufacture of guns, and get rid of the ones already here, there will be no more guns. And then no one will die of guns anymore. This is a good thing to them because even though they know you can be killed by other things, guns are a particularly handy and lethal way to be killed. And most people are too irresponsible to have them anyway.

That is about as far as their thinking on it goes.

 

[crazed_ss]

I'd say because guns are primarily designed as tools of violence.

 

[Deanimator]

I'd say because guns are primarily designed as tools of violence.

What sort of "violence" was my High Standard Citation "designed" for?

How about a Walther OSP? An IZH35? A Winchester 52D? An S&W Model 52?

 

[ricci316]

People become anti-gun because nobody smacked them upside the head with the truth about the subject. It's easier to go to an anti-gun website and get false information then it is to find a website with correct information.

 

[Green Lantern]

These are not examples of Hollywood portraying gun owning private citizens in a favorable light, they are portaying gun use by state officials in a favorable light. Big difference IMO.

Ahhhhh....GOOD point! It's a rare thing to find positive gun use by "civvies" in TV, movies, books, or even comic books.

I used to read a LOT of Dean Koontz, the early stuff that was first published under fake names. IIRC, There was a recurring theme with gun use from the good guys - they'd forget to take the safety off and thus get trounced by the monster/bad guy! :banghead:

Though in his later stuff - the "Fear Nothing" and "Seize the Night" duology, he fixes this by giving the good guy a GLOCK! And part two even features a markedly unjust gun confiscation by the sheriff - who is rightly portayed as the "bad guy" since he's part of the evil conspiracy the protagonists are fighting. Hmmm...

I read (maybe on here) of ONE TV show that had a good guy civvie CCW. Other than that, I don't know if there are ANY instances of a non-"official" good guy shown LEGALLY carrying a concealed weapon for self defense in any medium.

And there is a Hollywood group out there, I forget the exact name, who actually PROVIDES anti-gun propoganda for TV producers to insert into their shows!

 

[crazed_ss]

What sort of "violence" was my High Standard Citation "designed" for?

How about a Walther OSP? An IZH35? A Winchester 52D? An S&W Model 52

Not every gun, but guns in general were originally designed as weapons.. like a sword, dagger, or crossbow. Weapons are used to kill/injure. Some people are just turned off by that.. dont see why everyone finds that odd.

Many people throughout history have been turned off by weapons whether or not they're being used for good or evil. Guns are weapons and weapons are tools of violence. Many people associate guns with violence (violence is bad), and that's why they dont like them.

Just my opinion... maybe i've lived in CA too long

 

[Deanimator]

Not every gun, but guns in general were originally designed as weapons.. like a sword, dagger, or crossbow. Weapons are used to kill/injure. Some people are just turned off by that.. dont see why everyone finds that odd.

English playwrite Joe Orton was beaten to death in his sleep with a claw hammer, wielded by his boyfriend. My godsister was stabbed to death by her boyfriend, using a kitchen knife. Hammers and knives have a longstanding history as weapons of war.