Thoughts on anti-gun rights groups and politicians.

[LoboGunLeather]

Sigmund Freud (the father of modern psychiatry) is reported to have said that a fear of weapons was a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity. This is as good an explanation of the existence of groups like the Brady Bunch as I have found.

The Founding Fathers, particularly in the Federalist Papers, wrote at length of the benefits of an armed populace, particularly as a means of limiting government to its proper role.

Question: Does the existence of so many government officials wanting to disarm the populace indicate widespread retardation of sexual and emotional maturity, or is it simply a sign that tyranny is the ultimate intent?

 

[The Rabbi]

First, it is not at all clear Freud actually said that.
Second, anti gun politicians are not truly anti gun. I really think Obama doesn't care about guns one way or another and is probably mystified that the rest of us do.
Anti gun politicians are actually pro-re-election politicians. If they can be seen as "doing something" for their constituents about crime then they will play the anti gun card. If they can get elected from Southern states by being "pro-2A" then they will do that. How else to explain the influx of pro gun reps recently?
So as long as people believe that "guns cause crime" politicians will play to that. It is up to us to change that perception (human intent is what causes crime, the gun is merely a tool to that end).

 

[bk43]

In my opinion the rhetoric of all anti gun groups is irrational so by definition it is based on emotions. Politicians just mimic their constituents whether rational or emotional.

What causes a given person to rely on emotions rather than reason in this area is above my pay grade. Sexual immaturity, breast feeding, potty training and such sure could be in the running but who knows.

Bob

 

[The Rabbi]

I dont think the anti-gun groups have a lock on emotional argumentation.