I recently encountered an alternative to "gun control" that I immediately embraced as a better term: "victim disarmament." Most political attempts to restrict access to firearms do not "control" criminals very well, leaving the rest of us at the mercy of armed aggressors. "Victim disarmament" thus describes such policies more accurately than "gun control" does. And, not incidentally, "victim disarmament" focuses attention on the policy failure that should worry us most: Harming innocent citizens who want only to uphold the law and exercise their rights to self-defense.
I thank Professor Michael Huemer, of the University of Colorado's Philosophy Department, for introducing me to "victim disarmament." The term has been around a while, apparently. I don't think, however, that it has won the wide use that it deserves. Please help me change that!
(Long-time readers will recognize this post as yet another example of my interest in honest and effective rhetoric. In earlier posts, I argued for such terms as "lawmakers," "leftist," "drug war," and "statism." In those and other cases, I've tried to follow a policy choosing words that persuade because they reveal important truths.)