In my time, I’ve been accused of all manner of vile things. When you write about politics, any kind of politics, that’s going to happen. It’s never particularly pleasant, but you build up a kind of thick skin about it. Especially when you realize that the things you’re being accused of are often more indicative of the other person than of yourself.

Take the vehement anti-gunner, for example.

While some anti-gunners are true believers for whatever reason, there is a large percentage who seem to be latched onto this idea that gun owners are perpetually unhinged and represent a clear and present threat for all.

Now, this flies in the face of evidence to the contrary. Especially with regard to concealed carry.

Anyone who runs in pro-gun circles on social media has seen the screenshots. Some rabid gun control advocate saying that if they see someone carrying a firearm, they’ll commit assault and then theft by knocking the law-abiding gun owner down, then taking his gun to hold him until the police arrive.

Of course, we all know how that will go.

This thinking is motivated by the idea that people with guns will become angry and unable to help themselves. This will lead to spontaneous mass shootings all over the nation.

Nevermind that there’s no evidence of this being a thing, despite billions if not trillions of man-hours of people walking around with concealed carry weapons. This is what people think.

Why?

While I’m not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, it sure sounds like projection to me. They take their own psychosis and reflect it onto others. They’re violent so they label everyone else as violent.

Now, this could be considered unfair if we didn’t have evidence. We do, though.

Just a couple of weeks ago, an anti-gun activist of sorts killed her children and herself with a firearm. We didn’t cover it here because, well, this activist was a small fish and really seemed to be more of an armchair activist anyway, someone who’ll put a filter over their profile picture and talk a big game but don’t do much of anything. This wasn’t Shannon Watts we were talking about, so Cam and I decided not to make a thing of it. Besides, the family was already hurting enough.

However, I can’t help thinking that part of her reason for being anti-gun was because of her own mental health imbalances. She simply saw the world as being full of people just like her and figured it was only a matter of time before they all killed people. She projected it onto other people.

Of course, she’s dead now and we can’t ask her.

Yet she also represents another group within the anti-gun circle that really annoys me. Namely, those who never met a gun control law they didn’t like while simultaneously owning guns.

This woman we’ve been discussing appears to have fallen into this camp. She’s not alone, though.

For example, we have anti-gun crusader and actress Alyssa Milano.

So what gives?

Well, for one thing, she doesn’t actually believe in the Second Amendment. She likes being able to own some guns, but that’s far from the same thing as believing in something that says “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

More likely, though, she’s a hypocrite much like the Texas mother in the murder-suicide we’ve already talked about. They support gun control because they don’t really think it will apply to them. It’s not that Milano doesn’t think she shouldn’t have whatever gun she wants, she just doesn’t think you should have them.

So, she supports laws that would make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to buy and sell their guns while doing nothing to stop criminals.

Such is the way of the anti-gun activist, it seems.

Even if it’s not meant this way, it’s sure as hell what people on this side see. If anti-gunners want to change our perceptions, the first thing they need to do is make it clear they at least have hard and fast limits to where gun control can go. For example, if Milano made it clear she opposes mental health screenings for firearm purchases (this is a logical point since she’s been open about her own mental health struggles). At least then we’d know they’re not just calling for a ban for everything.

Regardless, though, it’s not like anyone over here is really going to take them seriously.

Especially when we have every reason to believe there aren’t any limits to how far they’re willing to go. After all, Milano lives in California and hasn’t managed voice opposition to anything being pushed there.

It’s because she’s a hypocrite, much like many of her anti-gun followers. Many others are like the woman in Texas, they’re projecting their own fears about themselves onto others, convinced we’re just one moment away from snapping and killing everyone.

Those comments are often more reflective of them than anything we on this side of the fence have done or said.