The Emotional Gap Between Gun Owners And Gun Banners

The Emotional Gap Between Gun Owners And Gun Banners
The Emotional Gap Between Gun Owners And Gun Banners

U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- Knowledge cures ignorance. False dogma, on the other hand, may be untreatable. As Twain said more politely, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” If you’ve spent any time listening to the so called “gun debate”, then you’ve noticed that the debate isn’t about facts at all. So where do our beliefs and feelings come from?  More importantly, what will change them?

Too often our “facts” are chosen to justify our emotions. Most of what gun-ban supporters think they know is what they’ve seen on TV. Hollywood violence feels “real”, while self-defense is merely theoretical or non-existent. The gun-prohibitionists has never seen what self-defense looks like, let alone touched it, trained for it, and lived with it. Nor have their friends. Instead, they claim “the police” will protect them, and self-defense is seen as vigilantism.

Violence is the quintessential emotional topic, but the message matters. When we read about the mass murder of our children at school, we first have to assemble the words into meaningful descriptions. That takes work and understanding. Even then, the emotions are ugly when we read the news accounts and police reports.

School Shootings
School Shootings

There is a reason the networks show us pictures of injured students on the news. Those images speak directly to our emotions without requiring interpretation or thought. That is both good and bad. Emotional images can motivate us or they can desensitize us. Our emotions can can cause us to think or to stop reasoning entirely.

The gun-control advocate blames the tool. He claims that violent criminals wouldn’t exist if it were not for firearms. It is emotionally easier to blame a lump of plastic and metal than to realize that another human being thinks we’re worthless. When reminded that murderers used rented trucks, knives, sticks, and even bare hands, the gun-ban advocate might reluctantly admit that violent predators are real.

Despite that grudging admission, the gun-hater still clings to the claim that self-defense is not the answer. Like the zebra in the herd, they assume a violent predator will attack someone else. The anti-gun advocate assumes they are safe as long as the herd is present..most of the time. I find it odd that the advocates for gun control have armed bodyguards.

The advocate for gun-control can’t imagine anyone choosing to defend themselves by being violent and using the tools of violence.

To the gun-prohibitionist, any person who wants a gun is a criminal by definition. Gun-ban advocates think they are saving the poor when they ban guns in our inner cities. For the anti-gun crowd, it is morally superior to be an unarmed victim rather than to stand out as a defender or a protector.

 

It is as if the disarmed herd would rather not know about the predators who hunt them, as if self-defense is the ultimate social gaff. Self-defense is far too inconvenient to be taken seriously. For them, the solution is to call the police..if you are still physically able to do so after you’ve been attacked.

Gun-ban supporters can’t imagine that there are people who think and act in ways different than their own.

For example, they think that violent criminals will obey the next firearms law we pass..even though these same criminals routinely violate the 23 thousand firearms regulations already on the books. People who choose to be disarmed can’t imagine that there is an unseen world of people around them who are entirely capable of violence and who control themselves. They are the defenders and the protectors. They are gun owners.

Some gun owners and gun prohibitionists do share a common fault. Both sides may think that the gun is magic. Some prohibitionists thinks it causes violence. Some gun owners thinks a gun will protect them. In the real world, a piece of plastic and steel is a mundane tool.

Reality is tedious and boring rather than magical. In fact, protecting your family requires frequent attention, and self-defense takes practice. Turning the gun into a fetish is easier for both sides. It is easy to understand why.

Our reaction to violence is complex. I find it emotionally uncomfortable to think about violence. Most people do. That discomfort drives some people to look away and pretend that violence doesn’t exist and that they are immune from violence. Repeated exposure to violence numbs the conscience of a criminal predator. For most gun owners, their empathy with the innocent victim drives them to be a protector. The defender is driven to study violence.

This empathy felt by the protector also kindles an unnatural ability to commit violence. The protector wants to stop predatory violence and to protect the next victim. If the defender can’t be there, then they want the victim to defend themselves. Sure, call the police when you can and file a report, but only once you’ve defended yourself and are safe.

Revolver Woman Self Defense Home Invasion
Gun owners notice the thousands of examples were innocent men and women defend themselves with a firearm every day.

That reaction is more common than you might expect. Many people who claim to be non-violent will break their pledge when their children are threatened. That is a good thing and we should forgive their hypocrisy. It is good to protect the innocent from acts “too terrible to contemplate.” Armed America thinks it is better still to plan for defense and have the physical and mental tools you’ll need.

Once these protectors are aware of violence, then their belief in self-defense is confirmed by the news. Defenders see the futility of “Just giving the violent criminal what they want.” Hundreds of people have been injured while waiting for murderers to reach satiation. Gun owners believe different people are different. Gun owners don’t plan for mercy from the merciless.

This awareness of violence manifests itself in other ways as well. Gun owners notice the thousands of examples were innocent men and women defend themselves with a firearm every day. They notice that poor minorities are most often the victims of violence, and that poor minorities need tools of self defense more than anyone else. Gun prohibitionists never notice these examples.

It is as if gun owners and gun prohibitionists live in different and largely separate worlds.

Gun owners shake their head at the way firearms are used in popular entertainment. Real gun owners have lived with guns. They know what firearms do and what they don’t do. They know the physical reality of living with lethal force, as well as they psychological reality. Gun owners don’t recognize themselves in today’s violent and stylized “entertainment”.

There is another emotional disconnect between the armed and the disarmed. The people who chose to defend themselves and their families can’t imagine leaving their safety up to the kindness of criminals. Yes, they may fail, but they will not be easy prey.

How do these two worlds meet? The gun-control advocate can discover what he doesn’t know on his own terms. Step into a dojo and take an empty hand defense course. Take an emergency trauma care course and understand the lethal damage that a knife or a screwdriver can do.

The gun-owner should talk to people who don’t own gun and are not part of his tribe. Rediscover what they don’t know and accept their limitations.

We have to live with both points of view. The secret is to respect all the other person’s rights as we do so. Don't you agree?


About Rob MorseSlow Facts

The original article is here.  Rob Morse writes about gun rights at Ammoland, at Clash Daily, and on his SlowFacts blog. He hosts the Self Defense Gun Stories Podcast and co-hosts the Polite Society Podcast. Rob is an NRA pistol instructor and combat handgun competitor.

  • 14 thoughts on “The Emotional Gap Between Gun Owners And Gun Banners

    1. “The secret is to respect all the other person’s rights…”

      In the limited sense that ALL citizens have absolutely identical legal and moral rights… yes, society and its courts must treat all citizens equally.

      But the Liberals are trying to destroy gun-owners’ rights in order to merely appease their own emotional desires. THAT cannot be tolerated, or discussed/negotiated in any way. The legislative removal of gun-owners’ legal rights is NOT a “right” – of any kind (legal, moral, ethical, logical, rational, reasonable, responsible, or practical) – possessed by any Liberal. And I will not allow Liberals to act in that manner. If prevention can be obtained at the ballot box, that is properly gun-owners’ first option… but if Liberals cannot be contained in that manner, so be it – stronger measures are available if necessary.

    2. I do not respect leftists/democrats. They don’t respect my rights, so for the sake of “equality” I equally do not respect their rights. We need to stop this politeness B.S.. This Is war.

      1. RIGHT YOU ARE James.
        and i feel in the not to distant future that WAR IS GOING TO GO HOT.
        then all those SNOWFLAKE IDIOTS WILL WISH THEY WERE ON ANOTHER PLANET, BECAUSE THIS ONE WILL BE HELL FOR ALL OF THEM WHEN THE SHTF.
        and they HAVE BROUGHT IT UPON THEMSELVES.

      2. Correct, James…
        “Political Correctness” is male-bovine-manure that has passed its expiration date. Way past…

    3. This article link of recent news in Sydney NSW Australia is hilarious too just alike an anti-firearms campaigner understanding of crime and criminals and i suppose worse, law enforcement whom believe disarming the people and-or stifling the peoples’ rights and equipment effectiveness.
      It involves a recent discovery of a mummified body in the house of a deceased drug addict, in which police found a firearm that was part of the death of a person that was missing for a decade.

      Worse, “facts” as you refer to the parts of the arguments, are required finally to be “real world working example parts” of a hypothetical proposition with the value of merit of its inherent meaning and summation for a solutions’ decision.
      Some of these recent incidents in Australia “the land of no firearms and no crimes” are just obscure minor encounters of crime but in actual fact point severely toward the problem that much of what in Australia should have been AKA “solved” as serious crimes “OR prevented by firearms ban ” is not so much as either honestly showing or truly understood as existent as a problem in some accountable quantity (e.g alike or something like …. 10 percent more completely unknown of ever having been occurred).
      Is there a difference between anti firearms and pro firearms by ignorance or controlled by personal want of the world inside their head”.
      When the Anti gunners say “look to Australia”, knowing the truth of Australia and the problems of human rights violation (whether government alike the 250 or so resolutions against it) or just plain despicable crime from personifications of total human evil, the only thing Australian records of crime does not properly show or present is the fact to move anyone’s mind in Australia around requires to be the personification of total human evil also, and that is confusing, but it does finally point that because there is no valid effect to have firearms ban in Australia , there is no good reason to see Australia as an example from their act, leading to confusion whether anyone mentioning Australian firearm ban is anti-firearm or pro-firearms !?

      1. There has never been a gun problem in Australia. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has been recording causes of death since 1915. From there to the current day, there have only been 4 years where gun related murders exceeded 100 victims. It was trending down even before the 1996 gun laws. The latest National Homicide Program report puts the total of murders in Aust at 253, of these 32 are carried out with a firearm. 32 out of 24.6 million residents can be expressed as 0.00013% of the population. If every gun murder for the last century was added together, it would not amount to half of all Australian smoking deaths that occur in one year. This is irrelevant to people who push for gun prohibition. Their stock in trade is mining for emotion rather than relying on evidence. I live 45 minutes from the Port Arthur site and have seen the milking of this tragedy up close. 22 years after the fact, it is still being referenced. The victims are now just been treated as marketing tools rather than the respect they deserve.

    4. It is fine to think you don’t need a gun or have no interest in owning or shooting a gun. However, the God given rights are to be able to defend yourself and your family, or neighbor if asked. Shut your mouth and leave me alone because I am not bothering you or forcing a gun on you. I don’t need a nanny because I have existed for 75 years and owned a gun for at least 60 years of that. My guns or myself have never shot anyone whether they needed it or not.

    5. The anti gun advocates basically fall into two groups.
      First we have those who truly believe that if we could only make all those nasty guns just go away then we’d all be safe. For them I say loot to Great Britain to see how well that approach has worked for them.
      Second, we have the anti gunners who actually love firearms, just not in the hands of the public, only under the control of the government or in the hands of their bodyguards. As Mao Zedung famously said: “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” And if they can only disarm the American people then they can force us into the liberal socialist society they desperately want. Because communism is a wonderful system, it’s just never been implemented correctly. Once they have absolute power things will be different.

    6. Self defense, is, at its hearts, self-reliance.

      Progressives loath the concept of self-reliance as on of the goals of “The Narrative” is complete dependence on government. They do not want self-defense to an option, period.

      In their utopia they would prefer you lay down and die, nice like, so .gov can come by and take a report at some later point. Or that ladies just ‘bite the pillow’, and maybe pee a bit, after all, “it will be over soon and that way no one dies” (well, unless that assailant you’ve been instructed to be accommodating to decides to kill you. See ‘lay down and die, nice like’ for reference). This is the perverted world they wish to live in.

    7. ”The secret is to respect all the other person’s rights as we do so, don’t you agree?” No, Rob, I don’t and here’s why; because these people, by and large, not only don’t respect my opinions or Rights, they are ideologues who refuse to accept any facts presented contrary to their beliefs. Instead they reply with ad hominem attacks, profanity laced invectives and the occasional veiled death threat against us or even our families.

      So, no, their “rights” are used to subjugate us, strip us of OUR Rights with the ultimate goal of enslaving us under their way of thinking. I have no respect for that.

      1. “So, no, their “rights” are used to subjugate us, strip us of OUR Rights with the ultimate goal of enslaving us under their way of thinking. I have no respect for that.”

        This !
        Too it i would add that I feel hot or cold,well or not well,everything else I Think,Leftist’s feelings do not over rule my rights PERIOD.

    8. Second Amendment supporters are following our Constitution and are rational. Gun or Constitution banners are liberals, Democrats and nut cases. The first Question the DEMOCRAT who showed up to kill the Republican congress members at their baseball practice one year ago TODAY was “Are those players Republicans?” When told yes, he got HIS DEMOCRAT GUN and began the shooting.

    9. Please don’t confuse me with facts. Even better, make it illegal to publish the facts or have the facts aired in public. A lot of intelligent people are against hearing, even worse learning about the facts and don’t want anybody else to learn the facts. Just because you are intelligent does not make you smart. There are a lot of educated dummies teaching and learning in schools, and running loose in our society.

    10. I will respect the personal limitations of the gun controllers ONLY as long as that acceptance does NOT impede my ability to protect me and mine. Living in a world of unicorns and rainbows is their choice, not mine and I refuse to suffer due to their idiotic choices!

    Leave a Comment 14 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *