The first the elitist who thinks gun should basically be regulated out of the hands of those poorer/darker/whatever than themselves or those they feel they control(military, police, etc.). . . . This group terrifies me and includes people like Mike Dewine, McCain, and my Father. Many if not most are "conservatives."
First, notice I never put "conservative" or "liberal" labels on people. It's whether they support or oppose the right to defend one's self by ownership of firearms.
I don't know about your father. I do know that John McCain is no conservative. He may be a Republican, but that doesn't make him conservative. I had to look up Mike Dewine. Pretty obscure reference. Again, just because someone puts a big R by their name and candidacy doesn't make them conservative.
But, again, I'm not labeling people conservative or liberal. The issue is whether they support gun rights or not. It is the "elitists" to which I refer and who believe the masses cannot be trusted, only they can.
The second is idealists. They actually think a gun buster sign makes them safer. They think criminals will not be able to get guns if they are illegal.
This is where I disagree somewhat. I don't think they are necessarily idealists at all. Rather, they are naive and unrealistic. They are the same sort of people who believe a government can continue gigantic deficit spending indefinitely because they want
to believe it. Perhaps they even need
to believe it. Many posters have referred to them as "sheople" and that is as good a term as I can think that describes them. They are less dangerous themselves because they do have to be led.