The argument for gun control never includes the actual causes of violence. Of course, gun grabbers want to make it look like the cause of the violence is the gun. However, the truth is, causes of human violence stem from many different psychological and societal issues. For instance, what causes a crazed person to shoot up a school would likely be different than a radicalized political activist attempting to kill a President, and both would likely be different from a gang member committing a drive-by shooting. The problem is, none of the causes of violence are being addressed, and some are being perpetuated by dishonest, politically motivated media outlets and anti-gun lobby groups like Moms Demand Action.

The idea that more gun legislation will stop any of these types of violence is preposterous. We have seen how gun laws exacerbate the problem when good people are disarmed and unable to defend themselves.

There are many ways the political left gets around discussing the actual causes of violence. One of which is implementing the term “gun violence” into society. This is a way of implying that the gun is the cause, when in fact, logical thinking people understand that to be a false implication. Because there are many in society who don’t think about the gun control debate at an in-depth level, they can be easily persuaded to believe that there is such a thing as “gun violence.”

If the media were to encourage thoughtful debate and report on this topic honestly, those who typically don’t think for themselves would likely be more inclined to explore the topic on a deeper level. People would be more inclined to entertain the idea that maybe there are other causes to violent behavior that, if addressed, would result in saving lives.

As would be expected, left-wing politicians and gun grabbers in general will do everything they can to avoid this type of exploration because it does nothing to serve their political agenda of regulating firearms. For them, if the act of violence can’t be blamed on a gun, they don’t want to waste their time discussing it. This is why we can see a violent stabbing attack on a train car, and Democrats ignore it. But they are quick to scream for gun-control laws before the ambulance even shows up if a firearm was involved.

To vilify guns, the political left has made it a point to attach human traits to firearms, for the purpose of animating them. They do this as often as possible. They understand that when a human element is involved, causality and intention can be used for emotional leverage. In other words, by attaching the word “violence” to the word “gun” and attaching the word “assault” to the word “rifle,” the anti-gunner can peddle the notion that the firearm has behavioral tendencies.

By adding a human element, they believe they can easily place blame on the inanimate object. By creating the term “gun violence,” they can take accountability from the person committing the act of violence and assign it to the firearm. Logically, we know it is impossible for an inanimate object to have behavioral tendencies, but this strategy has a strong influence on people emotionally.

Political left propagandists will also take the human element out of things when it doesn’t suit them. For instance, the conversation of abortion always includes pro-abortion advocates reducing the humanity of the baby. They do this by calling the baby a zygote or a clump of cells. Removing the human element makes it easier for some to view the topic without empathy. By inserting humanity, it’s much harder to disengage the empathetic portion of the brain.

Anthropomorphism is the tendency to attribute human characteristics or emotions to non-human entities, including animals, objects, or even abstract concepts. When we anthropomorphize inanimate objects, we tend to treat them as if they have human-like qualities, which can evoke a much stronger emotional response from people with respect to the object.

Anthropomorphizing objects influences people’s emotional responses. When people perceive objects as having human-like qualities (e.g., a sad teddy bear), they respond with empathy, as if the object has human feelings. Attributing human intent to non-human animals, spirits, robots, or other entities, real or imagined, is one way that people make sense of the behaviors and events that they encounter.

This is why the political left created terms like “gun violence” and “assault weapon.” It is the easiest way to evoke emotion in people and get them to attribute that emotion to an imagined behavioral tendency of guns. Again, logically, it makes no sense, but emotionally, it can be extremely motivating for those who are easily misled.

It’s easier to blame humanity or human elements than it is to blame an inanimate object. So, if we ask the anti-gunner to define “violence,” for instance, they are forced to acknowledge that violence is a behavior. If we help them understand that an inanimate object cannot behave on its own, we can start to get to the core causes of violence and help the anti-gunner see where they have been misled. At this point, we can discuss all the different reasons people act out violently. Now, we’re getting somewhere. Exactly where the anti-gunner doesn’t want to go because it undermines their entire argument.

Exploring the reasons someone would commit a drive-by shooting, or the reasons why someone would murder innocent Christian children at a church school, gets to the place we need to be in order to solve the problem of violence in our society and save lives. However, this type of sociological and psychological exploration does nothing to serve the gun grabbers and their firearm legislation agenda.

This is why the left will avoid these things at all costs and do everything they can to implement as many propaganda terms as possible as a way of influencing society to ignore the real causes of violence in favor of supporting gun control. The political left understands that the only way to place blame on guns is to add a human element and make the gun appear to be the cause of the violence.

This is why the term “gun violence” is used repetitively while the term that should be used, “human violence,” is completely avoided.

Baltimore Mayor is Forced to Address “Human Violence” But Still Blames Guns

The Left’s War on Reality: Normalizing Madness While Demanding Your Disarmament

About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy

Dan Wos is available for Press Commentary. For more information, contact PR HERE

Dan Wos is a nationally recognized 2nd Amendment advocate, Host of The Loaded Mic and Author of the “GOOD GUN BAD GUY” book series. He speaks at events, is a contributing writer for many publications, and can be found on radio stations across the country. Dan has been a guest on Newsmax, the Sean Hannity Show, Real America’s Voice, and several others. Speaking on behalf of gun-rights, Dan exposes the strategies of the anti-gun crowd and explains their mission to disarm law-abiding American gun-owners.