Question of the Day: Are Gun Control Advocates Insane?

 MD state senator Brian Frosh courtesy baltimorebrew.com

When the Washington Post came to Rhode Island on a “fact finding mission,” I cautioned the rabbi not to say “liberalism is a mental disease.” The rabbi believes that people who agitate for civilian disarmament—making society “safer” by disarming law-abiding citizens—are irrational and delusional. “You can’t reason a person out of a position they weren’t reasoned into in the first place.” Here’s an example of demented disarmament logic [via washingtontimes.com]: “Dayvon Green [Maryland murder-suicide case] had no criminal history and spent an undisclosed amount of time in a mental facility, but [Sen. Brian E. Frosh, Montgomery Democrat and chairman of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee] said he thinks the governor’s bill would have at least made it harder for him to kill because it would ban the Uzi that he had but did not use.” Nuts or what?

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

57 Responses to Question of the Day: Are Gun Control Advocates Insane?

  1. avatarg says:

    Not insane, just fearful and ignorant. Most of my friends who advocate for gun control are:

    1) People whose experience with guns is limited to what they see on the news / movies.
    2) People who have never shot a gun / gone to a range.

    A trip to the range with me usually helps to cure both. And add some cognitive dissonance to make them consider that responsible gun ownership is something for everyone, not just cops / soldiers / rednecks / conservatives.

    • avatarPatrick says:

      A free basic firearm building class could do a lot in addition to the trip to the range, or if the range trip didn’t work. I’d contribute financially to pay for materials and an instructor, but I feel that working out the legalities of such a project is tricky. Maybe an anonymous instructional video would be easier, though less engaging. Personal contact is good to keep attention.

      By the way, to whomever may see red flags (and/or my IP address), I do not build homemade weapons or have homemade weapons, but just wish there was a way to demonstrate how relatively easily it could be done, if desired.

      • avataruncommon_sense says:

        Patrick wrote, “I do not build homemade weapons or have homemade weapons, but just wish there was a way to demonstrate how relatively easily it could be done, if desired.”

        These already exist on YouTube. Simply search for “home made gun” or “zip gun”. This particular video shows the simplest and most crude home made gun:
        VIDEO DELETED

        This video shows a home made gun that is a little more sophisticated and yet fast/cheap to build:
        VIDEO DELETED

        Sorry, but embedding videos in the comments screws up the mobile ap.

        • avatarPatrick says:

          Thank you, and I realize that these videos exist, but apparently the “gun control” folks don’t seem to grasp this concept. My point is that a little hands on experience would clearly demonstrate the ease of basic small arms construction.

  2. avatarSilver says:

    What else would you call the complete and willful ignorance to all facts, logic, rational thought, and natural truth?

    • avatarMr. Pierogie says:

      A Democrat?

    • avatarIn Memphis says:

      Memphis, TN?

    • avatarTama Paine says:

      Anti-science Republican?

      Seriously, I’m getting sick of equating “liberal” with “anti-gun.” Among my own circles there are as many “blue” as “red” voters, in fact most are a solid state of Independent Purple. In fact I’m heading out now on a shooting party to celebrate Presidents’ Day, and the count is 6 liberals even more liberal than I, 4 conservatives even more conservative than I, and 2 folks who are entirely apolitical except where the Constitution is involved.

      • avatarswampsniper says:

        Every damned bit of the anti gun crap we are now faced with is a direct result of RKBA democrats voting for Obama. I have a decent back yard range, people show up all the time and ask to use it. It is now closed to democrats. Maybe they didn’t all vote for Obama, but I’m not taking any chances, I’m not sharing my hard earned little piece of land with backstabbers.

      • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

        Nice try Tama, but all the gun grabbers are liberal. WTF else would you have us non-liberals do? It’s your freakin fault. You guys fall for a bunch of progressive pablum and vote with your feelings. This is just the beginning.

        • avatarswampsniper says:

          I see no reason to be nice to liberals anymore after all the hateful abuse they’ve dumped on conservatives. I remember clearly when liberals were calling for civility, but they obviously didn’t think it applied to them. Liberals use ridicule and name calling in an attempt to censor other people’s speech. They simply can’t debate issues with facts and don’t want facts to be heard.
          I’m tired of election rigging, vote stealing and propaganda about voter suppression. If they didn’t gain from crooked elections we would have “common sense” election laws.
          I don’t want to hear a single democrat whining when his gun gets confiscated, they asked for it!

        • avatarpat says:

          There can be no excuse EVER, to vote for an effing democrat libtard, EVER. You morons who voted democrat last time should have been smart enough to have not done it in the first place.
          Dont effing do it AGAIN.

  3. avatargloomhound says:

    Well yeah.

  4. avatarDrVino says:

    At best, the two are co-morbid conditions.

  5. avatarbrian10x says:

    Its like we are living in some twisted version of the Twilight Zone as gun owners. Whenever I think things have reached the peak of insanity up comes another monumental nutbag. The thing that scares me, really scares me, is these insane nutcases are in positions of power. Please make this episode end soon so we can get back to something close to normal. I ‘ll even watch the commercials.

  6. avatarDon says:

    I think it is a fear and laziness based delusion. They have two psychological agitations they want reconciled 1) fear of violence, 2) fear facing hard and unanswered questions about violence.

    To provide themselves relief from this psychological agitation they can choose to proceed along the hard path of facing their two great fears or the easy path of creating a delusional world where they can put all of their fears into a token object and wage ritualistic war against said object.

  7. avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

    Neither insane nor illogical. It’s just that the goals toward which they are working have nothing to do with the stated goals (i.e., public safety). That’s the leaders. The rank and file grabbers are often just misinformed (which is according to design as well).

  8. avatarSGC says:

    There are different kinds of crazy. Some are dangerous, some are just funny.

    I don’t think they are insane for the most part, just ignorant by choice or design. There is a lunatic fringe that you will never convert, but some middle of the road folks are like what G describes above…just in need of education.

    Hell, thier side says we’re crazy too…it’s a matter of perspective…or as Obi-Wan says “from a certain point of view…”

  9. avatarPwrserge says:

    What’s the definition of insanity? Repeating the same action expecting a different outcome? (AWB supporters anyone?)

  10. avatarCliff says:

    It is very easy to quote bumper stickers, easpecially when they have a grain of truth to them. The problem is semantics. Classic “Liberalism” is not a pejorative and liberals, per se, are not the enemy, at least not in this fight. I think we need to look more to the problem of Progressives who feel that our Consitution is a living and breathing (though antiquted) document that needs to be interpreted to reflect changes in society that meet their standards an approval.
    To say “Liberalism is a mental disorder” is not entirely accurate, but to listen to Progressives, who base their political assumptions on emotional appeals to the way the would LIKE things to be, even when those ideals fly in the face of demonstrated reality, would tend to classify them as at the very least delusional. Is that a mental disorder? Maybe – the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, each time expecting a different result. How many times do they need to enact useless civilian disarmament legislation before they admit it doesn’t prevent criminals from getting guns? So liberals, while they may often be wrong on social and economic issues, may not be insane, but the historical record of Progressives leaves open the possibility that sdherence to that philosophy may in fact represent a mental disorder.
    Democrats are not the problem, per se. Progressive Democrats need to be monitored.

  11. avatarPulatso says:

    While many disarmament advocates do so out of ignorance, fear, or unrealistic worldview, there are also the statist and would be ruling class that advocate disarmament to better enable controll. They are not insane (sociopathy, maybe) but advocate these ideas to suppress freedom. These are the minority, but the yare the greatest threat to freedom, because they know what they are doing and act rationally to advance their agenda. You cannot argue with them, but you can certainly argue against their agenda with others who may buy into it.

  12. avatarWilliam says:

    Uninformed, disinformed, irrational. But a certain percentage ARE actually crazy.

  13. avatarUSMCVeteran says:

    Are Gun Control Advocates Insane? In a word, yes. Gun control advocates are liberals that suffer from an absence of logic and a total disregard for facts. I believe that it’s a genetic defect.

  14. avatarMatt in FL says:

    “[Sen. Brian E. Frosh, Montgomery Democrat and chairman of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee] said he thinks the governor’s bill would have at least made it harder for him to kill because it would ban the Uzi that he had but did not use.”

    It’s a shame we don’t have real journalists anymore. We don’t need the Washington Times to simply report that he said this. We need someone to, after he says it, immediately ask him, “How?” If he dodges the question, ask it again: “How would it have helped to ban that gun?” Another dodged answer, then, “If I snapped my fingers and made that Uzi never exist, how would it have changed the outcome of this situation?”

    All most “journalists” do anymore is parrot the talking points. They don’t ask incisive questions, which makes them nearly useless.

    • avatarDaveL says:

      This. These days journalistic objectivity means pretending there are no such things as facts. If you’re interviewing someone and they happen to opine that 2+2=3, you’re expected to nod thoughtfully, and maybe give equal time to someone who disagrees, framing it as a debate about arithmetic.

    • avatarChainsawWieldingManiac says:

      Also worth mentioning is that it wasn’t even a real Uzi – it was one of those .22LR Uzi clones that Umarex produced. That might explain why he didn’t use it…

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      +1000. I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve read an article like this and been left wondering why the reporter didn’t ask the NEXT question, aka the only one that really matters.

      But then I remember that “relationship-building” and “access” are more important than challenging those in power. {sigh}

  15. avatarDave S says:

    Those that wish for a utopia avoid facing the realities of life. They prefer their version of reality.

    Practical people with common sense remind them of reality and make them uncomfortable.

  16. avatarLeo338 says:

    Things have gotten so bad I don’t sign into Facebook anymore. Every week another idiot creates some anti gun page like Ban all Guns Now, Stop concealed carry, Occupy the NRA, or Mikeb302000. Some of them only have 50 or less fans but the stupidity is astounding. They create these pictures with nothing but lies like no one is coming for your guns, and only paranoid gun freaks think so. Guns are the only thing preventing us from World Peace. Guns are responsible for climate change etc.. It would be hilarious except liberals buy into this and actually believe it, then they go around spreading it and they say we are the delusional ones that don’t believe in facts, unless those facts come from the NRA. Then, if you try and have a conversation with proof in the forms of links to articles they delete your comment and ban you from the page. Ughh, I HATE liberals!!!

  17. avatarcrndl says:

    the ones at the top of the food chain are crazy like foxes, know exactly what their agenda is and figure time is on their side; there will be plenty more crises that they will be able to “not let go to waste…” the others farther down the chain who snap up the crumbs they are thrown [15 minutes of fame on tv, photo ops with their higher ups etc.] maybe they actually believe their illogical nonsense. sadly, this is a marathon, not a sprint…

    • avatarswampsniper says:

      The top level of the democrat party consists of the most dangerous predators on Earth. They pretend compassion but they are all about control.

  18. avatarLance says:

    Amen for that Rabbi. Good to se jewish people fight the media stigma and come out for liberty.

  19. avatarsupton says:

    Not insane, just, err, the opposite of knowledgable (trying not to say ignorant). If anything, I sympathize with them: I’m fine with background checks, perhaps waiting periods even., License to carry, even a license to own? Sure, why not, guns are dangerous and we need to keep them out the hands of a good number of people, for a good number of reasons (read that as, “bad” people, or mentally unstable people). ‘cept for that pesky 2nd Admendment which precludes that–and more importantly, the reasons why the 2nd was put into place. I’d be fine with all sorts of restrictions if wasn’t the fact that I think we’d wind up with full confiscation as the end result — so, despite what liberal leanings I may or may not have, I find it hard to budge an inch.

    I suspect that most control advocates are stuck at believing the government is their friend, while a good deal of anti-control advocates believe otherwise. One side believes laws can control and alter human behavior, the other disagrees.

    • avatarswampsniper says:

      It is the nature of all governments to grow, increase in power, and abuse that power. Anyone advocating any more government than is absolutely necessary is insane.

  20. avatarRoss says:

    Not Insane, evil.

  21. avatarAPBTFan says:

    My brother and I had a recent conversation about gun banners and his contention (and I wholly agree) is their true outrage is the fact that people own guns, not the deaths themselves.

    There are thousand and thousands of senseless preventable deaths every year but it’s only when a gun is involved that the fiery outrage comes out. Families are wiped out by drunk or texting drivers and hundreds of children drown in residential pools every year but we see no sweeping “preventative” legislation packages from our governments at any level. We don’t see any proposed specific taxes on booze, car insurance or monthly cellular phone bills to offset the destruction they cause. We see no groups of children that survived a drowning or car accident paraded in front of the cameras.

    Are the GCA’s insane? Not at all. Insanity is a complete detachment from reality and the inability to discern the difference between what is real and what isn’t. On the surface the definition seems to fit well but their level of selective outrage and incredible capacity to strategize and immediately seize any and every opportunity to further their agenda shows they’re well within what is real.

    I think the average non-politician GCA steeps everything they do in idealism with no measurable temperance of reality. Idealism is a great and much needed part of progress. Everyone on some level is an idealist and there isn’t a damn thing wrong with that but unfortunately there are a lot of folks that confuse their idealism with realism and in doing so they believe in “click your heels and all the bad things will go away” types of legislation and by that lose the capacity to make a tangible difference on any level.

  22. avatarTama Paine says:

    I am ever amazed looking around the world by how my lefty/Progressive/liberal/Democrat friends seem less to believe the mainstream media’s liberal–or conservative–proclamations than my righty/romanticist/conservative/Republican friends.

    Most of what gets quoted by yall commenters is sound bites from the MSM echo chamber. Step away from the keyboard, go talk to actual people in the meatworld, and I’d say you’d find that opinion is a bit more complicated than some claim.

    Obviously I choose my friends like I choose my politicians–they must be pro Bill of Rights, especially the First, Second, and Fourth. Other than that, I have no time for reading nonsense from the mainstream or counter-mainstream media. That’s how I have so much time to go talk to actual flesh and blood people, and discuss how to strategize about the current Constitutional crisis. Rather than sitting around e-mailing amygdala hijacks and ad hominem glop-flinging.

  23. avatardin says:

    for the umpteenth time, not all liberals are pro gun-control. plenty are not. I will agree with the rabbi that anyone promoting civilian disarmament is insane, but it’s not as cut-and-dried as saying liberals hate guns, conservatives love guns.

    • avatarBrad says:

      Din, I suppose you may be right. Not ALL liberals hate guns and not ALL conservatives like them. But I live in the DC area and truthfully, I’ve never met a pro-gun liberal. I’ve met pro-gun democrats, but not liberals. There may be some out there, just none I’ve met.

      • avatarJason Lynch says:

        I’m a pro-gun liberal. Even got my second degree from University College London, which was established by arch-liberal Jeremy Bentham (and his mummified body still sits in the hallway & is wheeled into key meetings).

        However, I do not think that when you say ‘liberal’, you mean what people outside the US understand by ‘liberal’, indeed it seems to have warped to the direct opposite (just as most “people’s democratic republics” are statist nepotistic pseudo-monarchies where the people have neither votes nor rights).

        I like low taxes, a smaller rather than larger state, free trade and hostility to vested interests and protectionists, and personal and national responsibility; which is neither hugely fashionable nor well-represented by current politicians. (In the UK it’s become synonymous with our third party, whose position has always been… confused, especially now they’re a partner in government – but they too no longer conform to classically liberal policies, though in a very different manner to the US interpretation)

        • avatarswampsniper says:

          Our Bill of Rights is “liberal”.
          Liberals in the democrat party are anything but liberal. They want to return mankind to a feudal system. When a liberal talks about freedom they mean government license of hedonistic impulses. If you behave the government will “allow” you to do something, just like your daddy did when you were 5 years old..

  24. avataruncommon_sense says:

    By and large gun control advocates fall into two categories:
    (1) Those who have an irrational fear of firearms
    (2) Elitists who wish to disarm everyone so they can by tyrants

    I am sure there are a few who actually believe gun control will make us safer. The rest, a huge problem.

  25. avatarMilsurp Collector says:

    Don’t you have shelves to fill at your bookshop or some speech to give advocating the mass murder of people who think differently than yourself? You die-hard Communists are just like the Neo-Nazis; a distinction without a difference advocating two ugly shades of misery.

  26. avatarRalph says:

    Question of the Day: Are Gun Control Advocates Insane?

    Clinically or legally? There’s a difference.

  27. avatarRetired 3rd Infantry Grunt says:

    If $hit were brains, these people would be geniuses. But the fact of the matter is their heads are just filled with $hit. The more these insane people talk, the more they reinforce the notion that liberalism REALLY IS a mental disease.

  28. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Brian could try to get toasters banned, that should help with gun homicides. Randy

  29. avatarRenel H. says:

    Very well put. Are you a psychiatrist, psychologist or do you study human behavior? Your comments have helped me understand why gun control advocates act in such a seemingly agitated manner. If someone is at all introspective this information may help.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.