Social and economic ideology is often split. One's authoritarian/libertarian stance is very important. "Gun control" is rather inherently authoritarian. It basically says, "the government doesn't trust you with this power, so you must give it up." I think we need to examine WHY we desire to give the government certain authorities to limit our rights, and where we draw the line.
The only way I seem to be able to understand a "liberal" (meaning libertarian on social policy here) supporting gun control would be to invert the perspective. If one views gun control as affecting the other party, it becomes more attractive. If person A doesn't own a gun, keeping BG Y from having one would increase person A's ability to make free decisions. Sadly, this leads people to support restrictive policies inconsistent with their stated philosophy.
...unless one assumes "liberals" are authoritarian in nature. Given current economic policy, this may be true, but it does not match with "classic liberalism" nor the DNC's social goals...
It's an odd paradox to me.
In the first paragraph, I totally agree.
You're losing me in the 2nd paragraph.
As you yourself point out, there is an authoritarian/libertarian access for both the right and the left. Those on the authoritarian left, will almost certainly be anti-gun. They are, in general, looking to the state to make good choices for people rather than permitting individual autonomy. Its the so called "nanny state" liberalism.
On the other side, authoritarian conservatives want to legislate morality, generally in accordance with god. In the US, there is also a tendency for conservatives to believe that people need to stand on their own two feet...and that notion would go along with being in favor of 2A.
I can actually build anti and pro gun arguments for both liberals and conservatives.
The DNC and GOP present a more polarized picture. Most of us folks are more nuanced.