Posted on 07/24/2018 5:44:04 AM PDT by marktwain
A criminal justice researcher from New Jersey recently wrote an article that encouraged people who were reflexively for more restriction on gun ownership to explore the online gun culture. She had done so. Her view of gun ownership and of legislation involving guns was transformed.
I also realized that despite being married to a gun owner, I knew very little about gun subculture, either in real life or online. But I could learn.
Guns, part of fabric of life
For all the noise around gun control versus gun rights, there was a story that was missed by non-gun owners like me: how much these guns mean to those who own them.
Delving into gun subculture online – which in some, though not all, ways reflects real-life gun subculture – can provide a perspective that may be, for non-gun owners, very different from their own.
Americans live in a time of political polarization on a variety of social issues, gun rights among them. Both gun control and gun rights supporters would benefit from understanding how those with opposing political and social views see their identity and their culture.
The Conversation is a publication with a decidedly population disarmament point of view. I was surprised they published Dr. Hasset-Walker's article. The good doctor inserted a deft virus into the gun debate. She called for those in the reflexive anti-gun culture to educate themselves. She called for them to reach outside their comfort zone and consider the possibility that ownership of guns might have positive aspects.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
Education is the cure for indoctrination.
I couldn't agree more. On a sad side note, it's ironic that our public school system these days is the source of, rather than the cure for indoctrination.
Gun Rights supporters have done so. We have come to the conclusion that those who support Gun Control laws are living in a delusion bubble that restricts their ability to absorb rational thought. They see the problem as being the tool de jour, today it is guns, tomorrow it is knives, ad nauseum. We see the tool as a means to prevent what history has demonstrated time and again, that those in power seek to increase their power and that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
We are the vanguard against tyranny.
“She called for them to reach outside their comfort zone and consider the possibility that ownership of guns might have positive aspects.”
Cries of “Traitor! Child-killer! Racist! Trumppie! Misogynist!” from the other side in 3, 2,1...
Seriously, as much as I agree with her, the anti-gun crowd will drown this women in hate and venom. They’ll pound her until she apologizes and retracts her statements. She’ll be lucky to have a job and a un-burned down home when they get finished with her. If you are a Leftie, there is no such thing as “reaching across the aisle”.
Sorry, but in the eyes of the Soros-funded astroturf organizations such as Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety, just being married to a gun owner disqualifies you from having an opinion.
As soon as I read the first few sentences, I figured that Hickok45 was a factor here. Checked the source article and sure enough, the gentleman from Tennessee was featured prominently. He used to be a teacher, you know.
” I knew very little about gun subculture, either in real life or online....”
It’s not a “sub-culture” sweetheart.....it is THE culture! Gun haters are the “sub-culture”.
Why does that guy in the photo hate children?
She may have also noticed that guns weren’t going off constantly by themselves down at the police station.
The real problem is that some people seem to be immune from being educated.
My brother in law went from typical Bushie support the troops republican to weepy emo Libtard and now suddenly has developed an affinity for gun control.
IMO he has gone to his little libtard rallies, seen the crazies there, heard them and figured out, 1; they are too crazy to have guns, 2; his allies are literal authoritarians that would commit murder in a heartbeat if they thought they had a chance to escape the consequenses.
Since when is owning a firearm a “sub-culture”?
How can this author be married to a gun owner? Do they never talk? Is she somehow removed from the topic?
“Education is the cure for indoctrination.”
Except I read the article. Her husband is a gun owner and she is obviously FIRMLY in the gun control camp, aka anti-2A. She is also obviously educated in psychology (hint).
The entire article is an exercise in manipulation. Suggesting that gun owners watch videos of the gun control crowd to “bring people together” is asserting that a compromise of 2A is possible.
Aka honey vs. vinegar to get 2A supporters to the table to discuss gun control.
Everyone needs to pause and reevaluate Ammoland’s article; Weingarten misses Hassett-Walker’s ulterior motive completely, as it has nothing to do with softening the gun control argument whatsoever.
My thought as well. I’m guessing she was moved by tragedy to become emotionally-involved in the anti-2A movement. Probably headed for divorce (kept her last name, she did).
“...how much these guns mean to those who own them.”
I get away from anyone who has that problem.
I work with antigunners who want to shoot all the time. Many of them have experienced a tragedy with an armed criminal. This article stinks. It seems like a lie.
She added “married to a gun owner”to somehow add credence to her ramblings.
The entire article is an exercise in manipulation. Suggesting that gun owners watch videos of the gun control crowd to “bring people together” is asserting that a compromise of 2A is possible.
The “gun owners should watch anti-gun videos” is obviously a throw away to appear even handed.
The reason is obvious. If someone watches both sides, they are moved to the pro-Second Amendment side, or toward nuetral.
It almost never happens the other way.
The reason is clear. The anti-Second Amendment side is trumpeted by the Progressive, main stream media daily. Second Amendment supporters cannot avoid it. Seeing more anti-Second Amendment videos has almost no effect.
I read you, but give me ONE name of an anti-2A activist who will read that woman’s article and watch a video of the gun culture without coming away more invigorated to their bias.
She knows EXACTLY what she’s doing and it’s referenced by Weingarten himself with his comment, “I was surprised they published Dr. Hasset-Walker’s article.”
The Conversation published her article for the reasons I outlined: To help mute 2A supporters, not the other way around.
There is a term for this and once you see it, you might agree with me in-total:
“Gaslighting” is her tactic.
Someone should ping Weingarten; he got caught with his pants down (but he’s human, too).
There’s a reason it stinks and Conversation printed it: She’s trained in psychology and it’s manipulative, but not of their side...it’s manipulative of those who are on the fence of pro-2A.
See my comment to marktwain...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.