Psychology, gun control, and politics

Freetacos

New member
Psychologists note that the self image is the core of one's personality, which in turn affects all of one's actions, decisions, and boundaries in life.

In regard to people who want an outright ban on all gun ownership, what do you feel is their core self image. Do you feel that they are well adjusted individuals who simply don't understand the realities of firearms for self-preservation, or do you think there is more of a deep underlying pathology involved?
 
I'm sure there are plenty of qualified psychologists on this board, especially the ultra conservatives who despise the idea of "liberal" higher education. That being said I highly doubt anyone can earnestly claim that being anti-gun is anything more than an opinion on how things should work. Just because we understand and appreciate gun ownership doesn't mean others have to. Those that want to ban guns may have an overly optimistic view of the world or may simply not understand the ramifications. Some people would simply be comfortable living in a society where government is trusted to keep the peace and no one had guns.

The idea that there's some kind of underlying pathology is just wishful thinking. You want to give credence to the argument against gun control by falsely discrediting the ideas of others. Sorry dude, you can't win a debate by calling your opponent crazy.
 
"Sorry dude, you can't win a debate by calling your opponent crazy."

First Redworm you seem to have a deep resentment of people on the right. That is interesting because I didn't even point out any specific party. Also, "crazy" is not considered a valid psychological term. So maybe, you should think before you post next time.
 
I have a resentment toward those who feel that being educated is a sign of liberal brainwashing.

Crazy is not an accepted term but that's pretty much what you're suggesting. :p If being anti-gun were due to some pathological condition then you're suggesting that the two thirds of the country out there which is anti gun - outnumbering us 80 million gun owners - is somehow insane.

Maybe we're the ones with the problem since we're in the minority. No? Well I hope people here recognize that just because someone has a different opinion of the world and the people around them does not make that person wrong, bad, evil or mentally abnormal.
 
Redworm, since you are debating words that I have not even used or brought up, the only person's mental health I'm concerned about is yours. Good day.
 
ooooook, just because crazy isn't an accepted medical term the point is you're suggesting that folks who's opinions differ from your own are in some way abnormal

let's take a look at your OP

Do you feel that they are well adjusted individuals who simply don't understand the realities of firearms for self-preservation
That's where you went wrong. If you're going to base the argument in genuine psychology, as suggested by your first sentence, then you must be willing to use neutral and scientifically based facts. There is no "reality" of firearms for self-preservation. We all share generally the same opinion of it but the simple fact is that if our opinions constituted the realities of firearm ownership then there would be no debate in the first place.
 
Personally, in my amatuer opinion, i think that people who look to the government (or other people) to solve\fix problems feel incapable of solving their own. Most successful people i know, focus the majority of their energy on themselves and their own endeavors, rather than trying to force people to change their behaviors, minds, or opinions.
Heck, even the successful counselors/therapists i know, are successful beause they dont impose their own personal beliefs on the people they work with. They help people come to a more realistic conclusion through an effort to expose the inconsistencies of an irrational idea, such as "Nobody should own guns"
 
Crazy?

I think your use of the word pathological opened a can of worms. See, pathological means "sick" to most poeple, and crazy is also "sick", and since the definition of what is or isn't "sick" changes with whatever is in societial vogue, it is not the sort of argument we wish to be associated with. Neither for nor against us.

50 years ago homosexuality was still considered a medical condition. An illness. They poor people were sick. Today that is not the case, generally.

If majority (or at least he vocal portion) opinion can be influenced and shifted to where guns owners and self defense advocates are considered sick we are in deep trouble. Because sick people need help. They can't help themselves, they're sick. Their opinions don't matter, they don't know what they are saying, they are sick. They must be cared for. Mentally ill. Do you see where this is going?

There are already people who think we are sick. Framing an argument (even one which is to our benefit) in these kinds of terms just re-enforces their beliefs about us. And that does us a disservice.

As to the root question you posed, I personally have no interest in other people's self image. What I feel they do have is a simplistic world view that ignores objective reality. Why they hold this view, I do not care.
 
I think people who are in favor of gun control tend to be elitist in their views, yet at the same time have a real lack of confidence in themselves. Almost invariably they argue how it is safer to not put up a fight, how it is dangerous to have guns around, etc. This shows they 1) trust the...goodwill(?) of the bad guy more then they trust their own abilities to protect themselves; and 2)they do not want or can't handle the responsibilities of possessing/owning a dangerous weapon. They also tend to project this poor self image on others, since they figure if they can't handle the responsibility, then no one can. The elitist outlook gives them a lack of understanding - they feel everyone else thinks the way they do - or should, and if not, you are a pyscho, just plain stupid, or both. This fits in well with their tendency to not understand why, since they don't like guns, anyone else would. Also, they think since they are loving, caring etc., it is unbelievable that there are plenty of people out there who are quite the opposite...leads to thinking things like criminals are just mis-understood, and its the NRA that is evil.
 
I think what freetacos was looking for was the psychological coping mechanism of denial. "If I carry a gun, it's because something bad might happen to me if I don't. Therefore, if I don't carry a gun, nothing can happen to me. And, logically, if nobody carrys guns, then nothing can bad can happen."

It's the reason that prosecutors hate to see women on juries in rape cases. Too often, the female juror's thought process is, "If she wasn't doing anything provocative, that means I could be raped! Therefore, she must have been doing something to provoke the defendant."
 
Of course, one could delve deeply into the psyche of certain gun owners that live in armed fortresses in suburbia, carry 6 guns, kevlar vest, 5 reloads and a surefire...or delve into those Walter mitty types who post TEOTWAWKI threads on message Boards under names like "Phantom Operator" or "Mad Dog Killing Machine", or even my personal favs, those wonderful types who have shrines to Uncle Adolph, carry only Waffenampt marked guns and have as their gratification assistance photos of the dead at Belsen.....

But hey...

"you can't win a debate by calling your opponent crazy."

WildortheywillcallyoucrazybackAlaska
 
Very true

But hey...

"you can't win a debate by calling your opponent crazy."

WildortheywillcallyoucrazybackAlaska

And that IS what you did in the wording of your OP, FT.

Besides, "self image" isn't really relevant to political choices. People choose a political view based far more on a host of external variables, including what party they grew up with, where they go to school and what views their educational mentors pass on to them, and their core values. None of that has to do with "self image" at all.

Springit'spoliticspoliticspoliticsnotpsychologymom
 
It is hype to gain more CONTROL that is solely what it is about. Once that is understood then you can understand that surveys, studies, ect. are selective to make points for the control they desire that is the long and short of it.
 
I agree with REDWORM on this one. I don't see any psychological basis for ones opinion, either way, on gun ownership. As a matter of fact, the argument could be made that people who never leave the house unarmed lack self confidence & show signs of paranoia. Or that it's a form of compensation for a little pee-pee. I don't think so, to me it's just a matter of personal choice, nothing more, nothing less. Attacking someone because they disagree with you, and trying to attach some kind of psychological defect to their thinking just might be a symptom of some kind of mental shortcoming. But who am I to say?????
 
Asking for info on personality characteristics based on psychological concepts on a gun list gets as reliable info as asking for instructions for your own do it yourself brain surgery.

I suggest one goes to the library (place with books) - log into a psychological data base like PsychInfo and type in the key words. The answers will come forth. Much more worthwhile than spouting an opinion based on little knowledge of the literature. :D
 
Back
Top