Attempts at shaming only work when you have credibility with those being shamed

[friendly_iconoclast]

14. Bluster and bravado. You lot are demonstrably prone to false consensus effect

You're great at providing op-eds, reposting editorial cartoons and YouTube videos, and piss-poor
at finding voters that agree with you and vote accordingly.

A phrase I've used before is still true:

Gun controllers take to their keyboards, gun rights activists go to the ballot box

Remember the recall election in Colorado, where you had the free-spending support
of a multibillionaire, outspent the pro-gun and pro-recall types about 5:1 -
and still lost? I do.

Even an article in that hotbed of right-wing thought Mother Jones has
pointed out this inconvenient truth:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/10/gun-controls-biggest-problem-most-people-just-dont-care-very-much

David Atkins writes about the problem of getting gun control legislation passed:

There is a broadening schism in the activist community between those who focus on nuts-and-bolts electoral and legislative politics, and those who spend their energy on issue-area visibility and engagement....Election work and party involvement is increasingly seen as the unhip, uncool, morally compromised province of social climbers and "brogressives" not truly committed to the supposedly "real work" of social justice engagement by non-electoral means....

....There is certainly great value in persuasion, engagement and visibility model....But gun politics in the United States shows above all the weaknesses and limits of the engagement model. The vast majority of Americans support commonsense gun laws....Numerous organizations have engaged in countless petitions and demonstrations to shame legislators into action from a variety of perspectives, but it essentially never works...

There are lots of polls, and some of them probably show a greater intensity among those who support gun control. A lot depends on question wording. But that's sort of my point: If you get substantially different responses because of small changes in question wording or depending on which precise issues you ask about (background checks vs. assault weapons, gun locks vs. large-capacity magazines) that's a sign of low intensity.

Atkins is certainly right that Democratic legislators won't act on gun control until voters are mobilized, but that puts the cart before the horse. You can't mobilize voters on an issue they don't really care much about in the first place. In this case, I think the folks who prioritize issue-area visibility and engagement probably have the better of the argument. Until voters who favor gun control feel as strongly as those who oppose it, all the field work in the world won't do any good.

This article was discussed at some length in this very group, and real-life examples of
how gun owners succeeded where gun control control advocates failed were given:

"Mother Jones has a revelation"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172176990

By all means, do continue on with the "Women's Christian Temperance Union" approach-
I'm sure it will work as well in the future as it has in the past...