The modern anti-gun rhetoric isn't coming from the government, its coming from the people.. Mostly, from what I see, frightened and panicked mother bears looking to protect their cubs and using the threat of their votes to influence law makers.
You are seeing those "mother bears" because that is what is being shown to you. They call it "speaking for the victims" I call it "dancing in the blood of the innocent".
The "push" is not coming from the government, as a whole, it comes from individuals IN government, with personal anti-gun agendas. Study the history, its plain to see certain individuals, holding office, who have pushed for gun control, as the saying goes "in good times and in bad".
They are always there after every gun involved tragedy, with new bills ALREADY WRITTEN OUT, within hours. They push gun control when there is no public outcry for it, as well as when there is.
These people are in a different class than the politicians who support gun control when they think the majority of their constituents support more gun control.
Trying to enact gun control when a majority of people don't want it seems like a bad career move to me. Since most politicians seem to be more interested in their careers than anything else, it doesn't add up.
I'm not saying you're wrong, just that your take on it doesn't make sense as I see it.
The reason it doesn't seem to add up is that you are only looking at the short term. They aren't. Or at least the leadership of the movement isn't. If you look at a number of the legislators who make gun control one of their personal crusade, you see they are often multi term, with very politically secure districts.
They are "safe" from the threat of not being re-elected either because the majority of their district actually agrees with them, or because the people of their districts benefit enough in other ways that they put up with the "gun control nonsense". Some of these folks come from families with generations of office holding, pushing these same "family values". They behave as if they are blood nobility, with a moral duty to "protect" the lesser folk from themselves.
And on the subject of protection, take gun control to the desired end of those politicians. NO guns in the hands of anyone other than government (military & police, or "approved" private security).
This is the ultimate job security for a politician. Bottom line, if they refuse to leave office, what are you going to do? Hope their court will uphold our rights?
It might happen...but if not, (or if the politicians disregard the court??) the options come down acceptance of the "new order" and our place in it, OR active resistance, which has a much lower chance of success when the public is disarmed.
