Jim, thanks for reminding me. And, thanks to everyone for their help - you're gonna love this!
My 'plea' regarding Arizona State University's (ASU's) poll was at:
http://www.thefiringline.com:8080/forums/showthread.php?threadid=32998 .
Their poll was at:
http://www.statepress.com/spress/forms/poll.html
And, their question was quite simple: 'Is more gun control legislation needed in the United States?'. Available answers were 'Yes', 'No', 'I Don't Know / Don't Care'.
Here is the link to the poll results:
http://www.statepress.com/survey/index.html#results
And, since they will probably overwrite that file soon, here are the results as published on that web page:
Last Week's Results
Results
Yes 6
No 185
Don't Know/Don't Care 2
Breakdown
Students 38
Faculty/Staff 11
ASU Alumni 21
Site Visitors 123
As a avid anti-gun activist, I declare that all guns should be forever distroyed. My friend was able to end their life, simply by pulling a trigger. The beaurocratic bastards that rule our country should all have a serious reality check. (Student, voted yes)
More gun control legisltion will only affect the law abiding citizen in th US. People who want guns will get them any way they can, laws or not. As far as children who get guns from family members, Parents need to take responsiblity for thier safety be locking up guns and amuntion. (Student, voted no)
We have 22,000 gun laws now. What possible good would more laws do when the ones we have now are not enforced? What good would another 1000 laws do if criminals don't really give a damn about another 1000 laws? If someone comes to rape my daughter or wife, rob us or kill us..how are more LAWS going to help me or my family? (Site visitor, voted no)
It all starts with parenting. If they spend more time with their kids as they grow and love them and teach them responsibility, chances are they won't get into trouble as they move toward adulthood. (Site visitor, voted no)
There has been talk of extending background checks to gunshows. However, the idea of a backgroud check bothers me. It means the government is releasing people from prison that the government thinks will kill or rob again. It also means that they are releasing people from mental institutions that they think will pose mortal danger to them selves or others. If they release people they think are dangerous, why do we pay taxes for police and prisons? (Student, voted no)
Gun violence and violence in general is only a symptom of a deeper problem. Taking away guns will not stop violence. This was made evident here in Houston when a 3rd grader stabbed and killed a classmate with a screwdriver. If you wnat to stop the violence, treat the CAUSE, not the symptom. I put a lot of the blame on the entertainment industry and erosion of family values. How many times have you seen some one on TV shoot someone and then make some smart remark afterwards? Killing someone is not to be taken lightly, yet TV and movies do it all the time. Children are being told that killing is not a big deal. There are already many gun control laws on the books, but they are not being enforced. Why not? We do not need more laws. We need to enforce the ones we have. Passing more laws will let the politicians look good and let them claim how much they are doing. If we want to really fix the problem, it means teaching our children responsibility. Teach them that killing is wrong. Tell hollywood we are tired of all the violence. This can't happen overnight. That's why you don't hear any of this from the politicians. They can't take credit for it, and it will take too long for it to help them in the polls. (Site visitor, voted no)
Prohibition didn't work for alcohol, isn't working for drugs, and won't work for guns. (Student, voted no)
If the bad guys do not care about the consequences of the law when they are commiting a rape, murder or burglary, why should they care about the lesser consquences of another gun control law?(Site visitor, voted no)
With the possible exception of extending background check requirements to all gun sales, the existing laws would be more than adequate, if properly enforced. (ASU Alum, voted no)
Q. A crazed gunman enters a school to shoot students. Which is more likely to save lives? A. A new gun law. B. Ten new gun laws. C. A thousand new gun laws. D. A teacher with a concealed carry permit, a handgun in her purse, and the training to use it. Answer honestly (this may not come easy, but try), and you will come to the correct answer about gun control laws. (Site visitor, voted no)
250,000 Brady law purchase rejections by the FBI in 1 year and only 1 person charged with violating the statute? 5 years of a assault style weapons ban and 4 people found and convicted of violating the act? What's wrong here? Only the demand fore and enforcement of existing laws will help reduce the numbers of criminals who use guns, NOT more laws that aren't enforced! (ASU alum, voted no)
The very first time that I see a gun jump up off a table and shoot someone, I'll become an INSTANT anti-gun activist FOR LIFE. But unless that happens, we need more HUMAN control, not GUN control.... (ASU alum, voted no)
If criminals are not worried about breaking the law by killing someone, why are they going to worry about breaking a gun control law? Gun control laws only keep honest people from having guns. And if they don't keep honest people from having guns then they criminal out of honest people, because they are now breaking the law by owning something that they should be able to have. (Student, voted no)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I love the comments of the 'avid anti-gun activist' - they're so insightful.
So if their friend was able to end their life just by taking a few pills or turning the steering wheel, I suppose they would have felt better? '... beaurocratic bastards ...' (sic) must be good looking government workers, eh?
We only 'won' this one with 95%. Perhaps we can do better next time.
Thanks again. Regards from AZ
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited November 17, 1999).]
