In line with another thread about TFL's usefulness, I used ideas/comments here and wrote to them because they made the error of saying: "Tell us what you think." at
http://www.abcnews.go.com/service/Help/abc_contactus.html
"Gun Control Support Muffled
Analysis By Dalia Sussman contains misleading, if not erroneous interpretations of the graphs. In some places it was inconsistent, in others, to the point of incoherence.
"53 percent say the best way to reduce gun violence is simply to enforce the laws already in place. Forty percent favor creating new, stricter laws, or both."
Hello? OR BOTH? Where's the percentage for just new stronger laws? Was it so low the pollsters had to add the two together in order to bring the "stronger law" figure higher?
"Just a quarter think stricter gun control laws would reduce gun violence “a lot,” down a tad from 30 percent last fall."
A 17% drop (30 to 25) is a "tad"???
"Indeed, 53 percent say the best way to reduce gun violence is simply to enforce the laws already in place. Forty percent favor creating new, stricter laws, or both."
??? That bogus 40% again.
Below that, "Strength of Support - Despite these doubts, 64 percent of Americans do favor stricter gun laws, ..."
??? Support? What support? It was a bogus 40% just a few sentences ago, now it's 64%. It's as if the writer refuses to face the hard facts.
"A plurality of Americans, 44 percent, say the National Rifle Association has too much influence over gun control laws, while 32 percent say it has the right amount of influence. Only 18 percent say the NRA’s influence is too little."
??? If 32% say it has the right amount and another 18% says it has too little, that comes to 50%, yet 44% is a plurality?
This article earns a nomination for my
"Josef Goebbels Award for Excellence in Propaganda".
I could go on, but you get the point. The analysis is flawed, skewed if you will, in an attempt to nullify the sad truth that the public hasn't been swayed by the media's anti-gun propaganda blitz.
A couple of observations relating to some other figures:
1. People who live in cities are the first to surrender their freedom for a perceived safety.
2. People who don't own or use an item to be controlled or confiscated are indifferent to it's loss. Try applying gun controls to golfing and you'd have an insurrection on your hands, especially from the same elites who want to disarm "the masses".
The blurb beneath this box says that you take my (generic) concerns seriously. I surely hope so, for if you are to retain ANY credibility at all, you'll have to filter out the anti-gun bias and tell it like it is, in the professional journalistic manner you're supposed to."
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.