Thread by @primalpoly

The gun issue isn't just a problem of diverging partisan values. It's also a problem of widespread, basic, empirical ignorance about guns, especially among many gun control advocates.

Let me explain in this thread....

Until about 10 years ago, I thought we needed much stronger gun control. I'd been a registered Democrat most of my adult life. I hadn't fired a gun since age 12 at summer camp. I was ignorant about firearms, & I was ignorant about my ignorance.

Then I co-taught a class at NYU with @JonHaidt, & read his book 'The Righteous Mind'. It inspired me to re-examine some of my partisan biases....

After the Sandy Hook shootings (Dec 2012), I posted some pro-gun-control stuff on social media. Some gun rights advocates respectfully challenged my level of knowledge about guns, & gently suggested I should learn more. I realized that maybe they were right.

So, I challenged myself to learn more. I joined my local shooting range. I took the concealed carry qualification class. I did Simunitions combat training. I took all the other classes I could. I subscribed to the gun magazines. I read the gun books.

I took friends & colleagues to the shooting range. Many were pro-gun-control, & had never fired a gun before. They usually found it a vividly educational experience. (Firing the SRM 1216 semi-auto shotgun does leave an impression.) They often started to re-think their views.

I realized that a lifetime of watching action movies wasn't enough of an education for me to have had an informed opinion about gun policy. Years of 'discussing' gun issues with like-minded partisans in one's social media bubble isn't enough of an education.

To have an informed opinion about gun issues, you actually need some first-hand experience with guns. You need to know the difference between a .22 LR & a .223 round. You need to know the difference between semi auto & full auto.

Maybe most importantly, you need some realistic combat training, like with Simunitions or 3-Gun competition, that releases some real fear & adrenalin. Otherwise you can't understand real-life gun violence.

You also need to do some serious, deep, non-partisan reading about gun laws, constitutional rights, crime statistics, & first-person accounts of gun violence by police officers.

Whatever you think you views on gun control are at the moment, this kind of deeper gun knowledge can have two benefits.

First, the more you know, the more realistic & helpful your policy views will get. You will update. You will realize you were wrong about some basic facts.

Second, the more you know, the more credibility you will have, & the better you will be able to convince others. To most pro-gun people, most gun control advocates sound painfully, utterly ignorant. They look like foolish virtue-signalers. I'm sure I did, back in the day.

Analogy:
Imagine there's a national debate over traffic deaths & road safety, but half the country hates cars, doesn't know how to drive, & is never on the road. The anti-car people make suggestions. But the drivers can't take them seriously because they know nothing about cars.

This is where we're at with the gun debate. If you're a gun control advocate who wants to effectively convince people who don't already share your views, you need to level up your gun knowledge. Otherwise your ignorance will undermine your arguments in ways you don't even realize

But of course, the risk is that if you learn more about guns, you might actually change your mind about a few things. Just like I did.

PS in case my main point wasn't clear:

If you want different gun policies, but you know _far_ less about guns than the people you're trying to persuade, they will see through your ignorance very quickly, & you will fail to persuade them.

And rightfully so.