Friday Assignment #2

A social movement can explode with popularity or die a quick death depending on how its particular argument is framed. According to Goodwin and Jasper, “frames are simplifying devices that help us understand and organize the complexities of the world; they are filtering lenses.” (Pg. 55) Frames are used to attract potential recruits and also keep people committed to a particular movement. Collective identity, or “who” a group actually is, is also important to any social movement. “Feeling part of a broader group can be exhilarating, providing a major incentive for collective action.” (G&J Pg. 105) A collective identity for a particular movement can be as simple as being a member of an organization. The gun rights movement, or pro-gun group’s collective identity, lies with the National Rifle Association. The NRA is the largest Second Amendment support organization in the United States. There are two primary frames that the NRA has used in order to recruit members. First, gun rights are seen as a deterrent to crime. It is believed that with more gun control there will actually be more crime because people would not be able to protect themselves. In 1934, Ken Frederick of the NRA stated, “We oppose crime partly through the organized forces of the police and law enforcement agencies, but we also oppose crime by the resistance of the victims of crime.” Second, the NRA has framed gun ownership as patriotism, part of being a U.S. citizen, and as a freedom. (Goss 114) Wayne LaPierre, the Vice President of the NRA, in interviews constantly calls gun ownership an American freedom. These slogans and ideas are what attract people to join this collective identity.

The framing of the pro-gun movement can actually be compared to other movements such as the pro-life and environmental movements. The pro-gun movement is actually very similar to the pro-life movement. Both of these movements use cultural and emotional approaches to their framing. While the pro-gun movement uses ideas like freedom, American pastime, and empowerment through self-defense, the pro-life movement uses issues of morality, higher powers, and values to convey their message. Both the pro-life and pro-gun movements usually do not use empirical evidence when framing their arguments. They go after people’s core feelings about being American when it comes to guns, and the meaning of life when it comes to abortion. On the other hand, environmentalists use scientific evidence constantly. While they do use emotional frames sometimes, most is in terms of global temperatures, yearly ice cap degradation, or percentage of rain forests cut down each year.

The pro-gun movement, up until recently, had one of the most famous iconic supporters, Charlton Heston. He was a three-time president of the NRA, and an honorary life member, one of the highest honors the NRA gives. No one else in the pro-gun movement even comes close to what Heston did to popularize the NRA and the Second Amendment debate. Although not to the same degree, Heston is to the pro-gun movement as Martin Luther King Jr. was to the Civil Rights Movement, or Cindy Sheehan to the anti-war movement.

The pro-gun movement, which is essentially the NRA, has several strategies for attracting and retaining members. If you have ever been to a gun show, then you will see the NRA there; they are oftentimes at the front gates with a table, free shirts, stickers, and membership sign-ups. The NRA also conducts many interviews on TV, radio, and online to discuss their views, and make the NRA known to possible recruits. The NRA also conducts its own conventions offering education, firearms, and accessory displays. There was one in Arizona not too long ago; it was free and open to the public. The NRA appears to also be successful at retaining members with several strategies. The main strategy is membership. There are several levels of membership, which cost different amounts of money. Recruits will feel a sense of participation because their money goes to fighting anti-gun legislation, plus keeping the NRA up and running. With membership, there are several benefits. These benefits range from free shirts to hunting insurance, accidental death insurance, subscriptions to one of the NRA’s publications, discounts, and invitations to NRA special events. Pro-gun supporters can also view news, NRA programs, and legislation alerts on the NRA web page.

It should be clear by now who is primarily responsible for framing the pro-gun movement--the NRA. Since the 1930’s to the present, it has been the main force coming up with the frames, and reframing certain aspects in order to keep up with the gun-control movement. Because the NRA has primarily framed gun ownership as patriotism and an American freedom that should not be taken away, certain people have been attracted to joining the movement. Primarily gun owners are part of the movement; this makes sense because usually people who do not own guns are probably against gun ownership in the first place. Since gun owners would be the primary members of this movement, we can look at who owns guns to see who is part of the movement. It appears that white men, people in the South, and conservatives are the main gun owners. Also, high school graduates who make more than $60,000 a year are more likely to own guns. (Glaeser & Glendon 1998) This gives a general picture of who might join the pro-gun movement.

The main consequence of framing the pro-gun side using the NRA is that people who do not own guns would probably not join. Many people who do not own guns see the NRA as a radical extreme right-wing group, not moderate, because often the NRA does not want any gun control at all. Also, the NRA frames gun ownership as a defense against crime. If a person lives in a generally safe area and does not experience crime on a personal level, they may view gun ownership as unnecessary. The pro-gun social movement can be re-framed to possibly include more people, even non-gun owners. In the 1980’s, the Surgeon General and the CDC began to frame the gun violence problem as a health issue, specifically to children. This became even more prevalent in the 1990s with the highly publicized school shootings. The gun control movement re-framed their argument from one of crime to one of child safety, which helped to include more people in the movement. (Goss Pg. 117) The NRA could re-frame their argument somehow to deal with child safety, or the safety of the white middle-class America. Instead of gun control at schools and colleges, the NRA could advocate that students, or possibly teachers, should be able to carry guns to protect themselves and/or the children in their classroom.


Goss, Kristin. Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America. Princeton University Press, 2006. Print.

Glaeser, Edward, Spencer Glendon. "Guns? Criminals, Victims, and the Culture of Violence." American Economic Review 88(1998): Print.