Finally, we're moving up in the polls. Maybe we've hit bottom against the antis!
Gun Control Support Muffled
Gun Control Support Muffled
Some good poll numbers from ABC News
- Thread starter Joseph
- Start date
Gopher a 45
New member
Say, what kind of pistola is that in the background when talking about "gun violence?"
buckskinner
New member
This is the most unbiased reporting I've seen in a long time.
It's still not perfect, as alot of the wording is still prejudiced, but at least the headline is good for us...
Let's see how long the headline stay up...
------------------
Treason doth never prosper. What's the reason? For if it doth prosper, none dare call it treason." - John Barrington
It's still not perfect, as alot of the wording is still prejudiced, but at least the headline is good for us...
Let's see how long the headline stay up...
------------------
Treason doth never prosper. What's the reason? For if it doth prosper, none dare call it treason." - John Barrington
The "pro gun control" side INCLUDES people who want BOTH "enforcement of existing laws" and "stricter laws" which could mean a LOT of things.
I think they upped the numbers by including people who want "or both".
If they JUST asked for people that want stricter laws only, then the numbers against us would have been quite a bit smaller.
It does seem like a reasonably fair article though. I am glad to see that gun control is 9th in importance out of 15 items polled that are most important in the upcoming election. We are at a state in this country where gun crimes, accidents etc are at an all time low. But, with the media generated fear, I am glad to see that people are still reasonable enough to not see gun control as a top issue. The fact is, in this country we don't have a "gun problem", and we don't have a "crime problem", as other countries rise steadily to surpass us in crime rates, as ours fall year after year.
[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited April 06, 2000).]
I think they upped the numbers by including people who want "or both".
If they JUST asked for people that want stricter laws only, then the numbers against us would have been quite a bit smaller.
It does seem like a reasonably fair article though. I am glad to see that gun control is 9th in importance out of 15 items polled that are most important in the upcoming election. We are at a state in this country where gun crimes, accidents etc are at an all time low. But, with the media generated fear, I am glad to see that people are still reasonable enough to not see gun control as a top issue. The fact is, in this country we don't have a "gun problem", and we don't have a "crime problem", as other countries rise steadily to surpass us in crime rates, as ours fall year after year.
[This message has been edited by Red Bull (edited April 06, 2000).]
Friends, I disagree that it is unbiased. Note that the opening chart does NOT agree with the first line in the second paragraph, which begins the numerical explanations.
"Nearly two-thirds of Americans do favor stricter gun laws, a number that’s held roughly stable for the last decade."
The opening sentence here emphasizes the 'two-thirds' whether we like it or not, although the chart shows 40% - a good distance from 2/3. Unfortunately, a sheeple will retain that 2/3 number quicker and longer than the picture directly above. If we add that to the relatively safe assumption that most people only read a portion of an article, we still gots problems.
This is just how I see it.
"Nearly two-thirds of Americans do favor stricter gun laws, a number that’s held roughly stable for the last decade."
The opening sentence here emphasizes the 'two-thirds' whether we like it or not, although the chart shows 40% - a good distance from 2/3. Unfortunately, a sheeple will retain that 2/3 number quicker and longer than the picture directly above. If we add that to the relatively safe assumption that most people only read a portion of an article, we still gots problems.
This is just how I see it.
Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say the NRA has too much influence, as are non-gun owners, women and better-educated Americans.
Oh well I guess I must be a total MORON then!
Indeed, 53 percent say the best way to reduce gun violence is simply to enforce the laws already in place OK, now the next paragraph says Despite these doubts, 64 percent of Americans do favor stricter gun laws. Now don't those 2 paragraphs contradict each other?
All in all I at least like the title and most of the content.
Oh well I guess I must be a total MORON then!
Indeed, 53 percent say the best way to reduce gun violence is simply to enforce the laws already in place OK, now the next paragraph says Despite these doubts, 64 percent of Americans do favor stricter gun laws. Now don't those 2 paragraphs contradict each other?
All in all I at least like the title and most of the content.
The "better-educated Americans" part is another instance of media elitism, as far as I'm concerned, and is intended to reinforce the Neanderthal image of gun owners that the media like to portray. Even if the stats were correct, gun control would still be one of those "ideas so stupid that only an intellectual could believe them," as George Orwell supposedly said.
Anyway, one of the regular customers at the local gunshop has three college degrees and a Phi Beta Kappa key--and he's 100% pro-RKBA. I doubt if there are too many Americans better educated than he is, so to heck with ABC!
------------------
"The eye of television is drawn to violence as the normal eye is drawn to the light in a jewel."--Larry McMurtry.
[This message has been edited by jimmy (edited April 06, 2000).]
Anyway, one of the regular customers at the local gunshop has three college degrees and a Phi Beta Kappa key--and he's 100% pro-RKBA. I doubt if there are too many Americans better educated than he is, so to heck with ABC!
------------------
"The eye of television is drawn to violence as the normal eye is drawn to the light in a jewel."--Larry McMurtry.
[This message has been edited by jimmy (edited April 06, 2000).]
Bobbalouie
New member
Here's another little statistical manipulation from the study:On the question, "Is the NRA too influential?
", the report stated:
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.
Analyse it now, folks. In a vote which offers a choice of more than two options, a plurality is awarded to the option which has the most votes if it doesn't have more than one-half of the votes. 44 percent say yes. But the factual content of both the other options offered is NO. Both "it has the right amount of influence" at 32 percent and "the NRA’s influence is too little" at 18 percent are negative responses to the question. If, therefore, you add them, as you should, the statistic for those who DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE NRA HAS TOO MUCH INFLUENCE is really 50 percent! That is half of the respondents and as near to a majority as you can come without actually arriving at it.
It's a cute manipulation by not drawing the obvious conclusion.
Bobbalouie
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.
"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.
Got this reply: "Thank you for contacting us.
We appreciate you pointing this out to us. It will be passed on to the appropriate department for review.
Regards,
Lisa
ABCNews.com"
IE: The Circular File. I'd surely like Ms.
Sussman to reply, hopefully in a heated manner. I just ran over my small toe with the chair and am in a proper mood.
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
We appreciate you pointing this out to us. It will be passed on to the appropriate department for review.
Regards,
Lisa
ABCNews.com"
IE: The Circular File. I'd surely like Ms.
Sussman to reply, hopefully in a heated manner. I just ran over my small toe with the chair and am in a proper mood.
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.