70% of Americans favor restrictions on guns ...

H

Hook686

New member
... and about the same % favor the right to carry guns for personal protection.

Nearly seven in 10 Americans support the idea of placing strong or moderate limits gun ownership following the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said on Thursday.

But laws that permit citizens to carry concealed weapons or use lethal force for protection while in public were just as popular, the poll said.
Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/newtown-americans-want-guns-restrictions-232939287.html


Any ideas how to bring these two concepts into one viable plan ?
 
Last edited:
Im in the dark here,but im sure someone can fill in the blanks. How many gun laws are in effect already. The problem is ,They are never enforced. Bad Guys are always going to be able to get guns no matter what you do and how hard you try to stop it. It is a very sad and hard to understand thing ( this last shooting) I am one for arming Teachers. I know this is a touchy point here,but we have to do something. I don't see any thing else working. While even with armed teachers this last shooting would have still happened,but would it have been stopped sooner?. Banning assult weapons is not going to make any difference. When one becomes good with a pistol which there are a lot of people in here like that. How long does it take to swap out a empty piestol??? I am not a pro and i can do it in less than 3 seconds. I wish there was a good answer for this nightmare,but unfortunatly it will continue to happen as it always has. All we can do as good people is try to limit how often it happens.

I am for every law abiding person to be able to carry and not feel bad about it. One does not try to hyjack a bus when he knows everyone else in that bus is armed too.
 
Also consider, they know where to call and poll to get answers more responsive to what is in their interests.... I actually had to help run a local phone poll, and this was a trick I learned...
 
Any ideas how to bring these two concepts into one viable plan ?
Click to expand...

More restrictions on guns is not a viable plan. We need less restrictions. Not more. For example, teachers must be allowed to be trained in firearms combat and armed in schools. Gun free zones/restrictions are counterproductive.
 
The cited poll contains powerful information, which will be more valuable when Reuters/Ipsos releases the entire poll results rather than the partial narrative approximations used in the article.

The most recent poll covers the period 12/23-27 and prior polls covered the periods 12/11-13 and 12/14-17. The timing of the polls is incredibly lucky, with the first poll ending the day before the Connecticut shooting, the second poll starting the day of the shooting, and the third poll about 10 days later. Taken together, the three polls will reflect a baseline, capture the height of emotional reaction to the incident, and show how quickly or to what degree emotional reactions fade or persist.

The results of the three polls are shown below.

==========

"Placing strong or moderate limits on gun ownership"
12/11-13 poll = 59%
12/14-17 poll = 69%
12/23-27 poll = "Nearly 7 in 10"

"gun ownership should have strong regulations or restrictions."
12/11-13 poll = 42%
12/14-17 poll = 50%
12/23-27 poll = 48%

"strongly supported or somewhat supported laws allowing law-abiding citizens to get a concealed-weapon permit"
12/11-13 poll = 74%
12/14-17 poll = 73%
12/23-27 poll = 69%

"strongly supported or somewhat supported laws allowing ... citizens to use deadly force to protect themselves from danger in public places,"
12/11-13 poll = 68%
12/14-17 poll = 66%
12/23-27 poll = 68%

"laws requiring background checks before someone purchases a gun"
12/11-13 poll = 88%
12/14-17 poll = 91%
12/23-27 poll = "Nearly nine in 10"

"limits on the number of guns someone could purchase in a particular time frame."
12/11-13 poll = 67%
12/14-17 poll = 69%
12/23-27 poll = "just over seven in 10"

"supported allowing law-abiding citizens to bring a firearm into a church, workplace, or retail establishment,"
12/11-13 poll = 33%
12/14-17 poll = 38%
12/23-27 poll = "nearly four in 10"

POLL QUESTIONS NOT MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE:

Support for "Laws allowing citizens to use deadly force to protect themselves from danger in their own home"
12/11-13 poll = 86%
12/14-17 poll = 86%

Support for "Laws limiting the sale of automatic weapons (i.e. machine guns)"
12/11-13 poll = 73%
12/14-17 poll = 77%
 
70 % of the people in this country are essentially brain dead but they still get to vote.
Click to expand...

We have a winner here! Bingo!

Plus stats are really easy to manipulate and it can be hard to determine if the conclusion fits the data in reality, ie opinions can and do change
 
The questions asked are always the heart of any poll.
If I ask, 'Do you favor preventing convicted felons from possessing or owning guns?' ' You will likely say yes. Then I report that according to my poll you favor restrictions on the possession and ownership of guns.
 
Ok, so they had a poll...Results are what you make of it.

I didnt see where the article mentioned who was polled. Im sure if I ask someone from a large city like NYC they will favor gun control alot more then say someone from very country MS or NC.
 
70% favor gun control, and the other 80% do not favor gun control. Maybe they polled only the 142% who voted for the current president the second time.
 
Also consider, they know where to call and poll to get answers more responsive to what is in their interests.... I actually had to help run a local phone poll, and this was a trick I learned...
Click to expand...

And how to get the answer they are looking for by wording the question in such a way as to produce the response they want.
 
I have a hard time believing that you can get an accurate sample of 300,000,000 people from asking 1100.

See how well that worked during the election. Even the ones that did work, weren't reliable because you can manipulate the sample to mean whatever you want.
 
Skewed statistics based on leading questions and small sample sizes of biased responders are tools of the media and politicians to claim there is widespread support for whatever BS they're spewing at the moment.
 
Wow. Not a lot of love for polls here...

I think that at least in this given sample, what this tells us is that people don't understand gun laws at all, and have the impression that you can just buy a bazooka at your LGS. I've been amazed talking to people the last few weeks who favor gun control but know nothing about current gun laws, including that their is a background check at all...

I think people can be against a certain type of weapon if they see it as unneccisary; my uncle, a lifelong hunter, is. He's been taken in by the idea that "no one NEEDS that." As if need matters as regards a fundamental right enshrined in the constitution. At the same time though, I think that the license requirement puts people's minds at ease. Our society is quick to trust those who have "credentials." So, in their minds, a licensed person is safe (which is true) because of the license, but doesn't need certain types of guns...


It also gets me how many people think you can but automatic weapons willy-nilly...
 
This is a pretty vague poll, after all, it doesn't ask specific questions about what new firearm laws the public might support.

For example, I support moderate regulation of firearms, but I don't believe in any new laws...just the ones we already have. I guess I'm in the "almost 7 in 10", although, I definitely would not support a new AWB or limits on magazines.

Someone pointed out the lack of understanding about gun laws, which is a serious issue for this type of poll.

For example, I was talking to a group of people at work the other day. They believed that long guns needed no background check to purchase!
 
People just don't get what the law is, they don't understand that their are protections in place and that convicted gangsters can't walk into "Bobs guns and tackle" or what have you and load up on automatic M4s and AK47s straight from So or armories.

On the same token. Some people seem to think guns are all but banned. I once had a friend insist to me that there was no way I could buy a glock I was walking about buying because those were, according to him "only for cops."
 
4runnerman,

You said "...The problem is ,They are never enforced."

Can you explain what you mean by this? I'm trying to figure out what gun law there is that law enforcement know is being violated, but ignore. At least that's what I'm assuming you are saying here.
 
"Not a lot of love for polls here..."

No doubt about it. People lie. And polsters make mistakes.

When they did the telephone poll they forgot that a lot of voters didn't have phones.

tumblr_mcvclsekch1r2u8sso1_1280.jpg
 
Polls mean almost nothing. I can't tell you how many polls I saw in October that indicated that the President would lose his reelection bid. As we all know, he didn't, so I'll take my polls with a pound of salt...
 
This is basically old news.

Real scholars of opinions who are not motivated to produce results for political reasons have pointed out on guns that:

1. For most of the country (not Mayor Bloomberg), gun control means keeping them from criminals.

2. For most of the country (not Sen. Feinstein), they support the right of law abiding citizens to own guns for self-defense.

There are nuances about weapons type driven by tragedy but the core is what I said - known for a long time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top