The SECRET Reason That Anti-2A People Support Gun Control


One of the most frustrating things about having a conversation about guns with an anti-2A person is their blindness to other information that they’ve never considered.

For example, there is an abundance of information, both throughout history and from research on the topic controlling for the specific variable of gun control, that shows that gun control does not reduce either violence or murder rates where it is implemented unless those trends were already on a downward trend in that culture (and, in those cases, gun control did not change the rate of the decline of violence or murder rates).

But anti-2A people’s unwillingness to look over information which contradicts their support of gun control isn’t the entire reason why they support gun control. No, the big reason is anti-2A people’s lack of self-awareness. Patrick Carroll writes,


Consider, for example, someone who’s from a wealthy, safe neighborhood. They know very little about what it’s like to live in a high-crime area. They have probably never been robbed or threatened with violence from a total stranger. And if they do face threats, they have no qualms with calling the (armed) police who are usually responsive and happy to help.

Now compare that to the experience of someone from a rougher part of town. First, the cops there are probably not as responsive. What’s more, the cops can often become antagonistic, poking their nose where it doesn’t belong […] and sometimes arresting the very people they arrived to help. 

Unsurprisingly, confidence in police is noticeably lower in these communities.

So what do you do if you live in a high-crime area where you can’t trust the police to help you? For many, the answer is to buy a gun. Indeed, 88 percent of gun owners cite crime protection as one of the main reasons they own a gun, and people who have been recent crime victims report higher rates of gun ownership than those who have not been recent victims.

This brings us to the point about privilege. To many people who grew up in these rough neighborhoods, saying “just call the cops” is like saying “let them eat cake.” It isn’t actually helpful advice. It just demonstrates how little we know about their circumstances and how unqualified we are to speak to their issues.

To be sure, the people in these communities are often divided over the issue of gun control themselves. Even so, if someone is buying a gun, there’s a good chance it’s because they don’t feel safe without it. So before we tell them they are better off disarmed, perhaps we should take stock of how privileged we are to not need guns ourselves.

That’s right, the real problem driving a support of gun control is that those who push it nearly always fail to realize that the reason that they can say that guns are unnecessary for self-protection is because they are privileged enough to live in a situation where safety is high and the likelihood of violent crime is relatively low.

In other words, anti-2A people need to check their privilege because they, obviously, haven’t.



  1. Gun control is all about “hitting what you aim at” and crime control is what the left is really after and requires a completely different mindset. Simply put, taking the gun out of my hand does not stop Joe Blow (apology to all Joe Blows) from blowing your brains out with his gun or stop the child sitting in the back seat of the car from being hit by a stray bullet from a gang shootout. Three things must happen: 1. Empower the POLICE to do their job, 2. Pass a law that states ANY CRIME that includes a gun and a death results in its activity is an automatic death penalty, 3. Support the POLICE and enforce the law to its maximum. Crime will go down either by respect for the consequences or attrition both are acceptable options.

    • I like your solution, the only thing I will add is any crime where a gun is used to intimidate results in a minimum of 20 years in prison.

      • While it is a good idea, I’m afraid I have to disagree with your solution. I.thinj ANY crime that a firearm is used is an immediate death penalty. The problem with the idea of 20 year sentence for intimidation is that you likely will be taking an amateur violent criminal and sending them to Violent Crime University, aka State or Federal penitentiary. Then that amateur will not only learn many more methods of committing violent crimes,.but likely will join a network of criminals whereby they are able to get whatever they need to commit and get away with more heinous violent crimes that resulted in their scholarship to Felon University. I say “Whack ’em and Stack ’em.”

  2. Your article also reminds us about the difference between “prejudice” and “Intolerance.” Prejudiced persons can be persuaded to look at both sided and see what works and what doesn’t; an intolerant person will never listen and doesn’t want to hear any words of disagreement. An intolerant person most likely hates America and likely wants power over the people and won’t settle for anything less.

    Death penalty carries a special responsibility and has been abolished by some states after innocent persons were executed. Where it is still allowed, the authorities have a responsibility to leave no stone unturned to ensure that “Whodunit” is the one executed; not “hanged by mistake” like the unfortunate George Johnson in Tombstone AZ. More recently, a man was locked up for killing his wife and it took 25 years to find the real killer and the original prosecutor fought tooth and nail against the Innocence Project. Fortunately there was no death sentence. Not only was he innocent but also the Sheriff even had the evidence! Apparently they made the Keystone Kops look like Scotland Yard. The guilty party was a neighbor. When there is a possibllity of capital punishment then do the job right or take capital punishment off the table.

  3. Are there really any totally safe areas that owning a gun is not an advantage?
    Even what people believe to see as safe neighborhoods behind locked gates are not going to stop criminals.

Comments are closed.