The Different Types of “Anti-Gunners” and How To Change Their Minds
Why are some people “anti-gun”?
Well with over 500 documented cases right here on this site of citizens lawfully using firearms to defend either themselves (in less than a year by the way), their families, their homes, or complete strangers you would think people would understand why firearms are a needed tool in modern society. However, we all know that is not the case. There are still multitudes of Americans who would be classified as “Anti-Gun”.
Why is this? In this article we’ll present several theories that we think might shed some light on the way anti-gun people think. When dealing with someone who is anti-gun it is easy to become emotional and not look at the reasons the person feels the way they do. These reasons can vary drastically and it’s very important to understand the reasons someone feels the way they do if you want to have a chance to change their mind.
Type 1: Fear of the Unknown
In this day and age there are many people who have reached adulthood who have never handled a gun, let alone been properly trained/instructed on firearm safety/use. This fact is resulting in more people than ever fearing guns because they don’t understand them. I’m sure everyone reading this article knows someone who thinks that guns can (and regularly do) “just go off”. There is almost no way a modern, well maintained firearm can fire while sitting in a stationary position. Also nearly all modern guns have safeguards against dropping, bumping, etc. I would venture a guess (and it is just a guess) that 99% of all negligent discharges that happened with modern firearms were the result of poor handling.
Too many people simply don’t understand how guns work and how safe they can be when handled properly. Fortunately this type of “anti-gunner” is the easiest to educate. Through proper training and education many of these people can be made to see the truth about firearms.
Type 2: Fear From Personal Issues
Some people may have a fear of guns that is rooted in a real life experience. These people are different from Type 1 folks as their fear is based on a real life event. Maybe they lost a loved one at the hand’s a murdered who used a gun. This group has a more legitimate reason to have a sense of fear of firearms. It would be the same as someone being afraid of flying because a family member died in a plane crash.
This group of people can still benefit from proper firearm education. In many cases these people could probably move on somewhat mentally and emotionally by facing their fear of firearms.
When trying to reason with this type of person a gentle approach should be taken. They have a real, psychological reason for their feelings, and that must be respected. An incremental introduction to the mechanics of firearms, stories of firearms being used for good, and, eventually some hands on training works well here. You’re not going to change this person’s mind in one sitting. Be patient, be considerate, and be unbiased.
Type 3: The Follower
This anti-gunner is anti gun because their chosen political party, religion, family, celebrities, media outlets or other influential group in their life says they should be. These people do not think for themselves and rarely do their own research or come to their own conclusions.
Trying to change The Follower’s mind is difficult. They will often repeat the talking points they’ve heard from the group they are following without verifying or researching those points. Your only hope is to calmly and patiently present overwhelming data that proves their talking points wrong. Most of the people in this group will still ignore that information, and almost none will admit they’ve changed their mind, but a good, rational argument may plant a seed that will eventually change a mind in this group.
Type 4: Those Who Want To Control
This is probably the most dangerous type of anti-gunner. They know exactly why they oppose firearm ownership and self defense. They want to control as many people as possible. Unarmed people are easier to control than armed people. It’s as simple as that. These people want more and more rules, laws and regulations placed on everyday life, gun laws included.
You will not change this person’s mind. They know the same information you know, and it scares them. Their opposition of gun ownership, pro gun laws and self defense is strictly for their own personal gain.
Type 5: Those Who Are Dependent
This group usually supports Type 4 people in positions of power. They feel their lives need to be controlled by a 3rd party. These people would never dream of taking their personal safety into their own hands. They are more likely to rely on the police for protection instead of a gun. They are more likely to rely on the fire department to save them in a fire instead of having a fire preparedness plan. They are more likely to rely on government or charity handouts than their own ability to provide for themselves and their family.
Reasoning with Type 5 people is all but impossible. The fact that some people want to take responsibility for their own personal safety scares them because they are unwilling or unable to take responsibility themselves.
Conclusion
Well, there you have it. These are the 5 types of people we feel that most “anti-gunners” fall into, one way or another. Sure, there will be some outliers, but generally people who are anti-gun will fit into one of the groups above.
When trying to change someone’s mind, always remember to think about their reasoning and react accordingly.
With California’s socialist agenda, and the upcoming release of thousands of hardened criminals back onto the streets due to overcrowding and budget cuts, it’s seems only fair that neighborhoods of all those anti-gun activists be the first choice for such a release.. let’s see how long they remain anti-gun after that.
If someone is uneducated about firearms there is hope you can change their mind, but I find it very difficult to change the minds of those who have become anti gun in any sort of political way. Most of these people have already made up their minds and new data just doesn’t seem to sink in.
I love this website though. It’s great to be able to quote recent events where guns were used in self defense.
There are some who dont know, and may change their minds. Then there are those who do know, yet choose to be the pathological lying, sadomasochistic, schizophrenic projectionist communist control freak with a sexual fetishsim of firearms who deserve neither compassion, compromise, or politically correct discourse because they make so much money on the lie, or are just wired so completely defective they will NEVER change their damaged demented minds.
Add another to the list: the individual who projects his own apprehension has been mentioned, but these people are angry to begin with. Old wounds. They know – deep down inside – that they cannot control themselves, and it is this they project onto others.
These are people who know darned good and well that they will shoot another person in anger. 90 million gun owners may shoot in response and in purpose, and not in anger. Liberals are all about anger and they know they cannot control themselves, so they appeal to others (Politics) to control them for them. It’s their own “Stop me before I kill again” mirror message written in lipstick kind of thinking.
Gun Control.
Spot on as usual, John. Your explanation, combined with #3, explain Toby Hoover of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence. She, and those like her, suffer from a mental disorder, but refuse to admit it to themselves. That, combined with the anger they experience because they cannot get their agenda enacted, prevent them from ever being able to accept cogent, logical thought processes necessary to understand the illogical nature of their position.
They are like spoiled little kids when they don’t get their way: they lash out at innocent parties or objects (guns), giving these objects mortal qualities that they don’t possess so as to have someone (guns) to blame, because they subconsciously identify with the criminal element, and become disgusted with themselves by realizing that they are capable of violence, and thus with such an internal conflict in their confused minds, and because they project their own fears upon others, demand “gun control”, mainly because THEY DON’T TRUST THEMSELVES, and being unwilling or unable to accept responsibility, don’t trust others to do so, either.
Whoever wrote this deserves credit.
I see ‘GSL Editor’. Who is that?
You forgot about how to reason with zombies.
It’s encouraging that gun owners are coming to grips with the enemy, although I do feel that the types of anti-gin people should be further clarified. Here is a list I compiled earlier.
Know your Enemy – The Principle types of Gun Control Advocate
D. William Spinks
1. Nominal Adherent.
“I don’t know anything about guns except that I hate them”
This category accounts for the majority of people who profess support for gun control, the ‘silent majority’. The Nominal Adherent is someone who does not follow the gun control debate closely, and is largely ignorant of guns and shooting, aside from what they hear in the mainstream media, which is mostly wrong anyway. These people are invariably open to debate and correction when presented with the facts.
2. Pacifist.
“I would NEVER use a gun because I’m above using violence to solve my problems”
The Pacifist is someone who fears the wider world, and hides behind a pretense of superior moral standards to conceal the fact he is a quivering coward.
3. Hoplophobe.
“EEEEEEEEEEEEEKITSAGUNITSAGUNITSAGUN GETITAWAYGETITAWAYGETITAWAYEEEEEK!!!!”
Often in practice indistinguishable from the Pacifist, The Hoplophobe is a true gun phobic, and will go into shrieking fits in the presence of a gun or someone they know to be a gun owner. The proper noun ‘Hoplophobe’ was coined by gunwriter Col. Jeff Cooper in 1960, and has ever since been used by gun owners as a term of derision used on gun control advocates. Thankfully, actual Hoplophobes are very uncommon. These people are suffering from a psychological illness, likely as a result of a traumatic incident earlier in their lives involving a gun.
4. True Believer.
“Guns KILL, gun owners ARE psyhcopaths and we NEED to ban guns NOW!”
The True Believer is someone who has come to the conclusion that guns are the principal source of violent crime and that anyone who would want anything to do with guns must invariably be a criminal or violent killer. Much like Creationists or Climate change alarmists, as far as the True Believer is concerned, the debate is settled, so arguing with them is an exercise in futility, as any evidence that does not support their view is either summarily rejected, or twisted into a justification for more gun control.
5. Statist.
“Only the Army and Police should have guns. Civilians cannot be trusted with guns”
The Statist is someone who believes that the state is benevolent and always has their best interests at heart. The Statist is essentially a weak-willed person who is comforted by the idea that someone they percieve as more “competent” is protecting them and running their lives, and believes sincerely that life is better for everyone that way. Essentially, the Statist worships the state as their god.
6. Elitist.
“Only WE should have guns. The little people cannot be trusted”
Someone who believes only the ruling class should have access to firearms, the Elitist is a person in a position of power and influence, such as a politician, police officer, judge, academic or just plain stinking rich, and as such, generally believe themselves to be of superior worth to those over whom they exercise power.. These people do not neccessarily hate guns, and may in fact own guns themselves, it is simply that they percieve that gun ownership should only be the privilege of the ruling class – their own, and they consider armed civilians to be a potential threat to their power base.
7. Social Engineer.
“Disarming the people is a necessary step to implementing our progressive social reforms”
A dreamer and an idealist, the Social Engineer is someone who has lodged in their head an idea of how the world should be. It is no coincidence that they are ideologically opposed to gun ownership, and freedom in general. To the Social Engineer, gun control is essential to neutralising the threat of armed resistance from the people they seek to dominate, as many of the changes they are working toward will be deeply unpopular among -and economically and socially destructive to- the majority of people. In their ideal world, a citizen does not need a gun of any type for any reason. Period.
I wish you could have interviewed some anti gun people for this post. It would be nice to hear it from their own lips why they have their stance. I would love to hear Bloomberg’s reasoning to see his reasoning though I suspect it’s about control after his stupid soft drink ban.