I was hoping you wouldn't mind expanding a bit on what I've quoted above. I had asked a question in the thread on the Sandy Hooks shooting regarding the basic appeal of gun ownership. Why do guns and the right to own a gun mean so much to proponents, especially when the human cost of collective gun ownership outweigh any discernible benefit?
I didn't get a satisfactory answer to this question in the other thread. But what I've inferred isn't all that positive. People who have a genuine passion for gun ownership appear to be driven by fear more than anything else.
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts.
You ask a good question, and it is not a question that is answered easily since gun owners across America have certain aspects of gun ownership that they feel a connection with. From my quote, you can see a bit of my personal connection to gun ownership.
One note to your question, however. The very fact that within it you insinuate that collective gun ownership is automatically connected with a loss of life would typically be met with opposition from proponents of gun ownership. And its due to the fact that its a very black/white interpretation. Gun ownership cannot be treated as a black/white issue. Not saying that guns and loss of life cannot be connected, but for proponents of gun owners, firearms are more than a tool used for killing. They are a piece of history, culture, a tool, and a hobby.
Let's start with the most basic appeal. Do I think that there exists a Freudian connection with certain people for firearms. Absolutely, especially among our youth. Why is this? Honestly, I really can only look at Hollywood and video games. These media outlets focus on the assault aspect of firearms. Even in zombie movies, the heroes are frequently equipped with modern style black synthetic stocked weapons such as AR-15s, etc. It creates a romance behind these firearms, because they are associated with these Hollywood fantasies. Can this association be treated as a healthy hobby? Absolutely. For example, I own an M4 carbine. Of course, I'm also in the military and so I have other reasons for owning such a firearm.
But the desensitization of violence using these weapons also possibly has an effect on certain youths. It cheapens the value of life, etc.
But this Hollywood association with firearms is nothing new. For example, being a reenactor and Western Action Shootist, I frequently associate with older gun owners from a much older generation, including my own father and grandfather. These men grew up watching Westerns in their heyday and other series such as Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone, etc. Their interest in these firearms and to a greater extent history in itself grew from their early association with Hollywood. Contrary to the ultra-senseless violent media today, these films/series projected a different mood. Rather than long extended grotesque scenes of violence (think Quentin Tarentino), the conflicts in these films were often concluded very quickly (the quick draw in the street). More than that, they emphasized the use of violence for a just cause and de-emphasized the glory of violence in and of itself. In other words, there was a set a values projected and a clear sense of morality. They also emphasized a very individualistic nature, which was also prominent in American culture. Now, were these films historically accurate? Hell no. Were they an accurate reflection on the complexities of life? Once again, no. But as far as their treatment of violence and firearms go, they provided some sort of stable code for how they were presented that I believe clearly had an influence on older gun owners today.
It also sheds light on the firearms that these men are most interested in. Rather than AR-15s, they prefer sixguns, black powder rifles, and to a lesser extent firearms from the WWI-WWII era. These are not the high capacity firearms that are receiving so much negative light today.
Is this interpretation the root cause of appeal? No. But it might be worth looking at.
Aside from that tangent, lets look at the historical appeal. And this is where I believe you might find an answer to your question
Also inherent within this older generation, was an indoctrination in consensus history. I will not go into the intricacies of the historical field, but consensus history was a proponent of that very 1950s feel of supporting and loving your country. This ardent patriotic indoctrination combined with the Western/pioneer films helped solidify the connection between guns, individualism, America's greatness. An individualistic America created for civil liberties and good wholesome values. Idealistic, yes?
Now, this is very overly simplified and I do not wish to insinuate that gun owners passion for their 2nd Amendment rights has been manufactured from 1950s ideals, but it definitely helped solidify the notion in the minds of older gun enthusiasts today. I believe that these aspects helped to develop the passionate pro-gun opposition that anti-gun proponents face.
I must include a dose of historical reality. The ideas of individualism and gun ownership are older than this era, however. Although many historians have tried to prove otherwise, gun ownership was a common aspect of American life during colonial periods and Western expansion. Not only was it an aspect of self defense, but it was a tool for survival. Most importantly for the Founders, the American people as a whole was considered the militia, which is why a full time regular army as we interpret it was not truly formed till around the War of 1812. Prior to that, much of the military force was thought to rely on the militia. Of course, if you look at the definition of militia today, even the US government today still considers as a last resort every male between the ages of 18-60 to be the militia. How likely is this? Not very, but its there as a last resort.
The Founders also recognized the possibility of a government gaining too much power. The 2nd Amendment was also formed to counter this. Once again, is another revolution very likely today? No, its not. But gun owners still believe that their loss of guns is a symbol of that fear that stretches back to the 18th century. This fear is held on to, and it maybe the fear that you refer to.
The fear is there, I'll grant you. Because loss of gun ownership is symbolic for gun owners as a loss of a right they've always had, and therefore, further loss of the individualistic America many believe it to be. Any loss of a right is interpreted as a loss of power. Not the literal power to combat the government, but symbolic power. When it comes down to gun ownership as a staple of freedom, it is symbolic security. Will gun owners rise up in revolution? No. Even if they did, all the semi-automatics AR-15s in the world would amount to nothing against the government's arsenal. But knowing they could is a sign to them that they still retain the rights that the Founding Fathers laid down.
But the self-defense aspect is a very real power, and that power to protect oneself and one's family in the absence of police (which according to the 2005 Supreme Court do not have an Constitutional duty to protect people anyway) I believe is a very natural instinct. Gun owners are not cheering on these mass shootings. They fear them just as much as any anti-gun enthusiasts. But they do not interpret the solution the same way. They see a means to protect their loved ones. Rather than the inanimate object, focus is placed on the person. In the end, its a different interpretation of values that I believe some may have to agree to disagree on.
The fear exists because the threat exists. If there was no threat to restrictions on gun ownership, you would never hear the passion for the principle of gun ownership in the first place. You WOULD probably hear about their passions for hunting, speed shooting, reenacting, etc. The focus would be on the hobby itself, rather than the gun.
Once again, I apologize for my rambling narrative. And I cannot say that my answer should be taken as a universal answer to your question. If there are any other gun owners who share a different interpretation, I hope you will enlighten us with it.