> Apparently the dividing line between pro- and anti-gun isn't left versus right, but pro- versus anti- state-monopoly-on-force. If you think it's a good thing

> Apparently the dividing line between pro- and anti-gun isn't left versus right, but pro- versus anti- state-monopoly-on-force. If you think it's a good thing for only cops and the military to have guns, you probably think that the government tends to be a pretty good deal. If you think they should be balanced by an armed populace, you probably think that it tends to be an oppressive force. I'm guessing there's another factor: belief in the stability (and friendliness) of the status quo. If you believe "the cops and the military" will always be on your side (whether through genuine belief or lack of imagination), then I think you'll be more receptive to gun control. If you don't take that as a given, then you'll be less receptive. Personally, I think the election of Donald Trump should cause Democrats and cultural liberals to question their assumptions about gun control. It's not inconceivable to me that a right-wing authoritarian leader could tip the police and military towards being politicized forces with a little finesse (take an small existing bias, expand it through controversial actions around "the line" to trigger principled resignations, then cement control through purges and ideological recruitment). Add to that the fact that right-wing civilians are better armed and have proven to be receptive to a cult-of-personality. Such a leader could potentially win a civil war without firing a shot. America was lucky Trump wasn't a "hide your strength and bide your time," kind of leader.