Apparently, as this thread demonstrates, there are as many close-minded pro-gun folks as there are close-minded anti-gun folks. 'Tis sad, yet not entirely unexpected.
Somebody I knew once had a bumper sticker that said, "Brains are like parachutes: They only function when they're open."
Another friend had one that said, "Don't have such an open mind that your brain falls out!"
I am a very open-minded person, or perhaps simply classically liberal/libertarian, and there isn't much that I truly will not question or welcome alternate views on. But I've hashed out the gun control issue for so many years, and so deeply thoroughly, that I will accept, if need be, the label of being now "closed minded" about RKBA.
It isn't truly accurate, but it is
practically so, as like a good chess player, I see the turns of the debate coming far in advance -- I know the moves, the motivations, the targets, and the outcomes by the end of the opening sentences. I certainly will take the time to discuss and debate with folks if they seem to really want to understand, but it is tiresome to walk the same path again and again to the quasi-inevitable end of frustration and emotional lashing out that usually attends a studied refutation of an acquaintance's received "reasonable" position against RKBA.
Closed minded? Hmmm, well, so be it. I'm sure I have worse flaws than that.
As a previous poster noted, some who are anti-gun simply are that way because they've never been introduced to firearms, the shooting sports and the concept of self-defense. Education can make a difference. But if folks decide to never even attempt to get to know someone on the other side of the fence, the education will never occur.
Ahh, well, this then leads back to the same question as I hinted at before: Namely is this "getting to know someone" a matter of conversing with folks you meet and being a good ambassador of RKBA to those around you?
Or is this "dating?" Dating, biologically speaking, has a purpose. You don't
date your pals and co-workers. You
date potential mates and spouses. And that's a very important distinction.
It doesn't much matter if you can never discuss political issues with your co-worker or bowling pal. It doesn't matter if you are diametrically opposed from him/her on matters of financial expenditures and contributions to support a shooting hobby, or to support RKBA lobbying organizations. It doesn't matter if you can't agree with him or her about whether your kids should be around guns, or whether there should be guns in your home.
It matters VERY much to the person you emotionally and legally and fiscally tie yourself to through romantic and potentially progeny-producing relationships.
We can say, "Oh this isn't MARRIAGE! It's just 'dating.' Don't be so closed-minded! What about
LOVE?"
But despite a pretty open-minded view of life, I don't think I see a moral high-ground to be held in casually ... "dating" (with all that implies, both physically and emotionally) ... others with whom you would start the difficult road of a successful union burdened by an enormous impediment like a foundational conflict of views on RKBA.
Shall we say, "It's ok that we have this vast impediment to happiness together -- our relationship has no future -- we're just sating our lusts together for temporary pleasure?"
Is that morally superior to saying, "I choose not to emotionally and physically entangle myself (and very possibly have a child!) with someone with whom I would have to overcome very serious KNOWN obstacles (before we even begin to face the inevitable UN-known ones) to achieve a peaceful and happy marriage?"
With a 40%-50% divorce rate throughout the land -- that's a lot of damaged people and a lot of irremediably hurt kids.
Frankly, given the attitudes I'm detecting here, it seems that we -- the folks on the side of RKBA -- are as much to blame as the folks on the other side for the polarization of views with regard to the state of gun rights in this country.
The "polarization" buzz word gets thrown around a lot. Sort of like "partisanship."
All it means when someone accuses others of either one is, "You jerks won't give up what you want and
COMPROMISE!"
It is only through the blessed "radicalization" of the pro-gun movement in the last two decades that we ever withstood the assault after Sandy Hook, that we saw the sunset of the AWB, that concealed carry has expanded in so many states, and that we're generally in the positive place we now stand.
The next time some supposedly pro-gun pal complains that people are "polarized" on the gun issue, and that people should be "reasonable" -- smack him upside the head and tell him to say that with PRIDE!