Top Menu

How The Anti-Gunners Brainwash America’s Outlook On Gun Ownership

Have Americans been ‘brainwashed' into thinking about guns in a vastly different way than ever before in history?  The answer to that question is unequivocally … Yes.

First, what is brainwashing?  Here is what dictionary.com defines brainwashing as:

Brainwashing
[breyn-wosh-ing, -waw-shing]

noun

1. a method for systematically changing attitudes or altering beliefs, originated in totalitarian countries, especially through the use of torture, drugs, or psychological-stress techniques.
2. any method of controlled systematic indoctrination, especially one based on repetition or confusion: brainwashing by TV commercials.
3. an instance of subjecting or being subjected to such techniques: efforts to halt the brainwashing of captive audiences.

Indoctrination:

Pretty scary stuff right?  After all, words like indoctrination and totalitarian countries are used in the very definition.  There is no way this could be happening in our great Republic, could it?  Well yes, it has been and it continues to happen.  It wasn't a long time ago that kid's Christmas lists included things like bb guns, nerf guns, and GI Joe action figures.

Kids routinely played cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians, and my favorite as a kid, Army.  I am not sure about you, but I have been unable to find any reputable study linking these toys and games to a generation of bigoted, gun-crazed, violent, and murderous psychopaths.

Movie companies, news organizations, and actors, however, have always profited from sensationalizing violence.  But the violence in older movies was low-tech and unrealistic.  When film production advanced, so did the realism in the violence experienced by the audience.  Violent mob and gang culture began to be glorified in movies and in music.  This sensationalized violence caught on.  Anyone out to make money realized violence sells.

Matt Damon makes money by depicting violence.

Americans enter 1999 and those who would make fortunes off violence: Hollywood, Actors, News Organizations, musicians, and criminals continue to pad their pockets.

Then Columbine happens.

Two disturbed teens illegally purchase and arm themselves with a 9mm semi-auto, and shotgun each.  They fabricate explosives, make their way to the High School and murder 12 students, one teacher and injure 21.  Not only does the senseless violence destroy lives and affect survivors and the families of so many, but this incident sparks the gun control debate that rages nearly 20 years later.

Gun Control Methods:

There are a lot of tentacles involved in the gun control debate: background checks, registration, firearm, ammunition and magazine restrictions, denying one of due process in stripping them of a constitutional right to own firearms, the use of firearms solely for military (militia) or hunting, as well as outright gun confiscation.  More insidious tactics are backdoor regulatory laws that take aim at any company that is involved in any way with firearms.

One example of this technique is Operation Choke Point (OCP), which was aimed at making it more difficult for illegal businesses to operate.  Well, not by mistake, any business associated with firearms was also included in its net.  This had terrible ramifications for countless small and large businesses who were now unable to get loans or use banking and credit card services.

Where does this type of thought process begin?

People labeled as in favor of gun control may agree with some or all of these methods.  And I truly believe that many do so thinking that these efforts will stop what tragically happened in Columbine.  They may be genuinely opposed to guns or possibly ill-informed on the substance of the laws.

For these folks, it feels good to say: let's end gun violence, let's limit how many bullets someone can fit into a magazine.  I get it, but that's like saying, let's end all war, and live in peace.  Who doesn't want that?  It's a little more complicated to address the actual issue, instead of speaking in fantastical platitudes.

There is another group of pro-gun reform people who undoubtedly are interested only in satisfying lobbying groups and staying in a position of influence.  These are hypocritical people who have no moral bearing and believe the ends justify the means.  An unlikable group in my opinion, and ironically these are many of the people we have elected to make laws.  They believe different standards apply to them, and they deserve special protection.  I'll get back to them a little later.

Our Constitutional Protection:

There are those who are against gun control 100%.  Backed by something called the 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights, it goes a little something like this:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
And in the very significant U.S. Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), it was decided that the 2nd amendment does indeed cover the individual's right to own firearms for self-protection.
Heller

The Second Amendment applies to self-protection

Even with the 2nd Amendment, and the Heller decision, guns continue to be blamed for the ills of society.  Not the mentally unstable person using the gun.  Not the 6th-time convicted felon who is illegally in possession of the gun.  Not the straw purchaser of the gun used to inflict death or injury.  Not the actors and musicians who promote violence, make money off violence and then are sure to be spotted in every march and rally for ‘common sense gun laws.'

Nope, the gun is to blame.  And further, anyone who owns a gun is dangerous, unstable, paranoid and, shall I say, even deplorable and irredeemable.   Stories of law abiding citizens, saving lives and stopping mass shootings are not reported or buried on the back pages.

Am I a Conspiracy Theorist:

For some of you, I am preaching to the choir, others believe I am a conspiracy theorist and probably have tinfoil over my skull and windows to keep the aliens from reading my thoughts.  For the latter, let me present you with a blast from the past.

Let's flash back to January of 1995 to a speech from the then U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia gave.  In the speech, Eric Holder, yes the same man who went on to become the most powerful law enforcement officer in the country when he was appointed United States Attorney General by President Obama, said the following:

“What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that it’s not acceptable, it’s not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we changed our attitudes about cigarettes,” … “We have to be repetitive about this. It’s not enough to have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it Monday. We need to do this every day of the week, and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

Holder did not differentiate between the illegal use of firearms, or changing the way people glamorize violence and gang lifestyle.  Holder, and the people who push the same agenda want to change the way people think about guns in general, all guns.  Choice of words is extremely important and no one knows this more than an attorney like Holder.  So I am not buying the idea that Holder slipped up when he chose the words he used in that speech.

Holder called on influential celebrities and leaders like Jessie Jackson who has done some good, but also has many times used his influence to stoke the fires of racial division rather than using the opportunity to unify.  Another one Holder called upon was the late Marion Barry, a former 2 time Mayor, convicted crack user, perjurer, and felon.

These seem like odd choices right?  Not really … look at who are the champions of many of the current progressive movements.  A truly grotesque fact is that sadly and oddly enough, this brainwashing and attention to gun control agenda has a blind spot for the tragic violence problem in places like Detroit.

Holder calls on Barry and Jackson to push brainwashing agenda.

Gun Paranoia affects us all:

Perhaps a zebra can change his stripes, but I don't believe that happened in Holder's case. I don't believe his gun control mantra changed upon being sworn in as United States Attorney General.  What happened is that Holder and those pushing for this type of ultra-restrictive gun control realized that the Bill of Rights is a powerful document, and firearms are part of Americas DNA. Unable to change the decision in Heller, there needed to be another way to disarm the population and push a European style of gun control.  It had to be accomplished by any method of controlled systematic indoctrination, especially one based on repetition or confusion: brainwashing by TV commercials, exaggerated and inaccurate news reporting, portraying gun owners as fanatics, conflating criminal use of guns with law abiding citizen's rights to merely possess firearms. Oddly enough this is the very definition of brainwashing and exactly what Holder so plainly stated in his speech.nd the list goes on and on and on.

Is it coincidental that Holder was tapped for the United States Attorney General position?  I know there are many other qualifications and skills that Holder possesses, that appealed to President Obama.  But perhaps among these other reasons, Holder's ‘brainwashing agenda' sounded good to the President, his political party and other people making big decisions.  Perhaps, the country has been subjected to this agenda for the last 8 years and longer.

Need some proof?  How else does one explain the ultra-ludicrous expelling of grade school kids for things such as pointing their finger like a gun, biting a pop-tart into the shape of a gun, bringing a bubble blowing toy gun to school, ‘liking' an Instagram picture of a gun, etcetera etcetera etcetera?  It wasn't that long ago kids could dress up like a cowboy for Halloween and go to school carrying a toy gun or bring a squirt gun to school and not have the police called.

suspended for toy gun

Should bringing this to school warrant a suspension?

How else do we get to a point where doctors are routinely asking patients if they own a firearm, and noting it in their medical file?  How about a fully qualified couple denied adoption rights, because they own a firearm?  How does the topic of gun control, and not the horrifically deranged mind of someone who would commit murder, or the importance of personal self-protection get brought up, when two terrorists arm themselves and commit mass murder?

It wasn't too long ago rifle and archery marksmanship skills were taught in school.  Firearm safety class consisted of learning how to safely handle a firearm, and Apple would never even think about having to change an emoji from a cartoon-looking gun to a more cartoon-looking squirt gun; you know … because guns are scary and bad.

What about the public acceptance to single out any business or person associated with firearms?  They agree with suppressing their ability to advertise, post or operate on many social media platforms such as Facebook, and YouTube.  There are few industries that receive such blacklisting.  Arbitrary lists are created in order to strip citizens constitutional rights without due process, meaning folks can't appeal being placed on these lists and losing their firearms.  Or, when they do it is so lengthy and burdensome they give up.

Royalty and the peasants:

Politicians, actors, and athletes lauded by the mainstream media are all activists.  They make it a point to tell us how we should live our lives, and repetitively tell us how bad guns are.  But they don't tell you that they are protected by armed guards, their children go to schools protected by people with guns and they make billions of dollars glamorizing guns in their movies.  Did you know that many of our politicians, even those who don't think you should carry a firearm, are concealed carry licensees?

Why would someone want to limit your right to carry a firearm for protection, but want one to protect themselves? Because they understand that there are bad people who may do harm to them or their families.  They understand that many, many times the only thing to keep them from being killed is using a firearm.  The celebrities, and athletes that dare speak out in support of gun ownership … well we know what happens to them.

Believe it or not, there are gun control advocates who believe that people should be able to protect themselves with guns.  The sad thing is that they just do not believe YOU have that right.  See, they are special, smarter and more important than you or I.  Our families should simply accept that bad things happen.  We should look the other way at all this hypocrisy, after all, we are not smart enough to understand their complex reasoning.

Don't believe it?  Congressman Charlie Rangel of NY was interviewed by Kerry Picket of The Daily Caller in an interview on 6/22/2016. The audio of that interview was published on the Daily Caller website.  Among other disturbing things Rangel said in the interview when asked why wealthy and connected people, including those politicians like himself, deserved to be protected by firearms, and others should not, Rangel laughed and said:

“Well that’s a little different.  I think we deserve–I think we need to be protected down here.”

Rangle is half right, politicians do need to be protected.  But guess what Congressman, so does every other citizen of this great Country!

Listen to the audio from the interview with Rangel.

Rangle doesn't believe average people should have guns.

All of this sounds grim for the future of gun rights … right?  Actually, while firearms have become demonized and their owners attain pariah status, gun rights, in general, have become stronger in some ways.  Over the last 20 years, many states have adopted concealed carry license laws, where previously they had none, and carrying a firearm concealed was prohibited.

Additionally, more states move toward constitutional carry and laws protecting gun owners have been gaining acceptance across the country.  In the midst of this brainwashing attempt, the undeniable truth that self-defense is an unalienable right seems to shine through.

I believe there is one effective way to combat this push to ‘brainwash' the public … education.  We must ensure youth are introduced to firearms in the right way.  Teaching the safety and responsibility that accompany firearms is important.  Instilling respect for the firearm, the benefit that comes from sport or self-protection.  The history associated with firearms, and humbling realization of the genius of our founding fathers and why our bill of rights is so important.

We must raise our children with good values and morals, so they will respect others and value life, turning away from the sensationalized violence they see in movies and hear in music.  Give them positive things to do with their lives, and ensure they follow positive role models, in fact, be that positive role model.  We don't have a problem with guns, we have a problem of morality.  Just like Alan Ladd said in the movie Shane, teach them this:

“A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.”

Shane had it right.

Are we safer without guns?

If you are in favor of gun reform in part or whole and have continued reading to this point, I genuinely thank you for sticking with me so far. I would like to take a moment to address something specifically towards those readers.  As a Marine, former LEO, father, husband, son, Christian, firearms instructor, and responsible gun owner, if I believed that these gun control laws would end all suffering, anger, and the senseless loss of innocent people's lives, I would say go for it.

The truth of the matter is that things like magazine restrictions and 10-day waiting periods don't do that.  Instead, they unfairly penalize law abiding citizens, and have people who report a caulking gun to school officials, prompting that school to be shut down.  They deny students the right to attend school because they point their hand like a gun.  The pendulum has swung to hysteria, and it is neither healthy nor beneficial.

What would I suggest as an alternative to more gun laws?  We have laws on the books that punish people and punish them more harshly for using firearms in the commission of an offense.  Use these laws and stiffen the punishment.  Impose mandatory sentences and eliminate plea-bargains on weapons charges.  Make the punishment for being arrested with a firearm a deterrent.

Are we really safer with strict gun laws?

As a Police Officer, I often had the opportunity to ask gang members and those being arrested for illegally possessing firearms.  Almost all answered ‘better to be caught with one than without one.'  Meaning the punishment is not a deterrent to them.  This is the mind that must be ‘brainwashed.'  This is the shift in thinking we must have.  We must get to a point where prison or jail time is considered worse than life on the streets.  Let's influence the hearts and minds of young people to do good instead of blaming an inanimate object for the breakdown of society's morals.

Educate yourself and your family.  Protect yourself and your family, and continue to do the right thing.  Stay safe and God bless.

Oh, and if you agree with my rant, make sure you sign up for our FREE newsletter so you never miss anything we've got going on. 

 

 

, , ,

11 Responses to How The Anti-Gunners Brainwash America’s Outlook On Gun Ownership

  1. BC June 19, 2017 at 9:05 pm #

    I wholly support gun control legislation as it pertains to guns used in criminal activity. Harsher sentences should be given to criminals using a gun in the commission of a crime. Let’s attack the wrongful use of guns and those who illegally own and use them, instead of attacking John Q public’s 2nd Amendment Right to legally own and carry a gun.

  2. oldshooter July 10, 2017 at 8:39 am #

    The NRA lobbied for, and got, a federal law that mandates a 5-year federal prison sentence for conviction for using a firearm in the commission of a crime. That’s been on the books for decades now. The problem is that it is virtually never enforced. Why not?
    Two reasons: First, it is a federal law, and that requires that the local police who arrested someone for, say armed robbery, to coordinate with the federal prosecutor to bring those charges in federal court, in addition to the local DA pressing charges for armed robbery in the state court. In many places (Chicago and San Francisco are good examples) the locals and feds simply do not cooperate; indeed, they are often antagonistic towards each other.
    Second, the local DA can offer NOT to call the feds and charge the armed robber with that crime (which, remember, carries a mandatory 5-year federal prison term), which is obviously an included offense if the robbery was committed with a gun, IF he will plead guilty to the armed robbery charge. This saves court time and money, makes the DA’s statistics look good (ie, he gets a higher “conviction rate”), and is a lot less trouble for the DA.

    • Matthew Maruster July 10, 2017 at 8:58 am #

      Absolutely 100% true. The real way to attack crime (regardless of what object is used) is to hold people accountable for their personal actions and enforce the laws that already exist, instead of demonizing and criminalizing an entire segment of law-abiding citizens.

  3. Eric Bruns July 10, 2017 at 9:45 am #

    Those who fall into the field of anti-gunning generally have dual thoughts running through their heads. (1) Guns must be banned and (2) those poor robbers had a bad upbringing and should be given a break. The can hold two opposing opinions in their heads at one time.

    As for the pols, I would like to see anti 2nd amendment pols labeled with “pro crime” – which they are. I’ve never understood why pro 2nd amendment people and organizations seem to be so damned careful as to what words they use. The antis don’t truly give a damn about crime rates (think Chicago) and only wish to control the public and dominate their thoughts.

    We’re just too damned “genteel” for our own good!

    • Matthew Maruster July 11, 2017 at 4:31 pm #

      I definitly see a more passionate and focused effort by pro gun groups to stand up for their rights and educate people. Unfortunately, the major media outlets, as well as social media companies are very anti-gun, so it is an uphil battle. Fight the good fight and continue to educate when possible and I am sure good will prevail.

  4. MASTERMECH48 July 10, 2017 at 7:01 pm #

    I definitely agree with many of the previous comments. Add this as a potential, Commit a crime with a gun, forfeit your thumbs. True, absence of thumbs will not stop gun use but it sure slows things down. Radical idea, I did not commit the crime so lets show accountability, WHACK.

  5. Gary Beimer July 10, 2017 at 9:29 pm #

    A super great article. I am a 23 year law enforcement officer vet and I have seen some of the worst and best in people. It is to bad they all don’t read articles like this one. Changing attitudes is difficult at best only by education will we ever succeed.

    • Matthew Maruster July 11, 2017 at 4:25 pm #

      Hi Gary, thanks for your service to the community, and for reading the article. I completely agree with you!!

  6. Chris July 11, 2017 at 6:52 am #

    I have to agree with much of what you said. The biggest problems acting against understanding guns are; the new overwhelming political correctness that has been embraced, the mainstream media’s refusal to acknowledge that citizens everyday use a gun for self defense in a safe way, and lastly the loss of common sense when discussing guns and their place in society.

Leave a Reply