Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Thursday, December 20, 2012

New Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly Support Stricter Gun Laws

Posted by on Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 12:17 PM

A new Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey conducted on behalf of Daily Kos and SEIU has found strong support for stricter gun laws, spanning partisan and geographic lines. An overwhelming 92 percent of respondents support requiring a criminal background check before all gun purchases, and at least 63 percent support banning the sale of both assault rifles and large capacity ammunition magazines... including a majority of both Republicans and gun owners!

The survey of 1,000 registered voters was conducted December 18-19, and has a ±3.1% margin of error. It should also be noted that gun owners appear to be substantially overrepresented in the sample, so support for these reforms is likely somewhat stronger.

"Do you think assault weapons are necessary for hunting, or not?" Only 18 percent of respondents say yes, including only 27 percent of hunters.

Yes, this is a poll taken in the immediate wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre; no doubt support for such reforms will gradually fade a bit along with the sense of pain and urgency. Which is all the more reason for lawmakers to act now, both at the state and federal level, while public support is at its highest and the powerful gun lobby is most vulnerable.

 

Comments (37) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
this is always what instinctively i think everyone has believed for a long time, even when there was a rise in gun sales the day after the school shootings in newtown, i would bet the spike in sales wasn't new gun owners, but rather the small majority of these gun-addicted citizens purchasing more weapons, is there any information out there on that?
Posted by wondering on December 20, 2012 at 12:35 PM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 2
New Poll: Americans Overwhelmingly a Bunch of Fickle, Short-Sighted, Reactionary Dullards.

Apparently, Americans are completely incapable of anything unless it's violently beaten into them.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on December 20, 2012 at 12:40 PM · Report this
3

One thing that we could everyone to agree upon...no assault rifles for anyone under 25.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://_ on December 20, 2012 at 12:51 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 4
@3

It's so funny whenever you use the word "we".
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on December 20, 2012 at 1:03 PM · Report this
Goldy 5
@4 When he says "we" he's referring to his own multiple dissociative personalities.
Posted by Goldy on December 20, 2012 at 1:29 PM · Report this
Fnarf 6
@4, shh, the voices are trying to talk.

The problem with this is the disconnect between what even most NRA members support and what their organization works for. It's a bit of a covering mechanism, where the members can spread out and assure everyone that "sure, assault weapons, background checks, we're reasonable" but in actuality they not only do nothing but actively work for LOOSER gun laws. Most NRA members don't support the right to carry a concealed weapon into a church or school, but they continue to send a billion dollars a year to an organization that works very hard to allow exactly that.

Maybe if opposing Obamacare is rebounding against Olive Garden, the current stance of the NRA will cause a big chunk of their membership to say "fuck this shit, I've had enough" and quit. I doubt it, but I hope so.

What would be really awesome would be a new organization arising called something like "Sensible Gun Enthusiasts of America", that wanted to work towards sane gun control measures while continuing to support the right to keep and bear arms. That's what all the gun owners claim they really want, but the group never appears. Hmmm. Tell me why.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 20, 2012 at 1:37 PM · Report this
7
"Assult weapon" is vague to the point of meaninglessness. Quite probably (it depends on the particular attachments, such as whether it had a scope or bayonet attached) the AR-15 used at Sandy Hook was not an assult weapon under the expired federal ban.

On the spectrum of bans, the real inflection point where you should expect to see the impact changing from "silm to none" to "readily apparent" would be banning semi-automatics. But the majority of weapons sold in the US today are semi-automatics. Given these facts, gun control advocates, please, openly espouse one of the following positions: (A) Typical, law-abiding gun owners, I do want to take away your guns. Deal with it. That's the only way to have a meaningful impact on mass shootings. (B) I want to make some marginal tweaks to the law that will not impact typical, law-abiding gun owners, and these tweaks will have little to no impact on mass shootings.
Posted by David Wright on December 20, 2012 at 1:38 PM · Report this
wingedkat 8
I still think we should use the reaction to make some real movements toward a universal mental healthcare system that does not require a criminal conviction to qualify for treatment.

But since most people don't want to talk about that, fewer fully-automatic weapons wouldn't be a bad thing.

More licensing and screening for semi-automatic weapons would also be nice, not to mention mandatory safety classes. Ideally, I'd like to see periodic inspections to ensure that all guns are stored properly locked in a gun cabinet or safe.

While I'm dreaming may as well re-institute the citizen militia and require all weapons to be stored in a civic depot, to be checked out for practice, hunting, and muster days.
Posted by wingedkat on December 20, 2012 at 1:45 PM · Report this
Geraldo Riviera 9
I don't understand the push for background checks. Every recent mass-murderer didn't have a criminal record. Every recent mass-murderer would have passed. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Posted by Geraldo Riviera on December 20, 2012 at 1:56 PM · Report this
emma's bee 10
@6: I have a couple (retired military) facebook friends who have done just that--i.e., quit the NRA after years of membership, even before the Newtown carnage. I think the pace will only accelerate.
Posted by emma's bee on December 20, 2012 at 1:59 PM · Report this
11

Ok so what do you do about:

The first open-source 3D-printed gun

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/14226…

There's no way you are going to keep the more diabolical ones away from these weapons with advanced technology becoming commonplace.

One thing that I would want even before gun bans, is a lot more oversight on the Web. I would want to adopt stronger standards for an "Internet License" which must be used for all communications, words, tweets, utterances. We need to start knowing were all these words come from, who is saying them, how did they come about, and to back trace the more threatening speech with identity.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://_ on December 20, 2012 at 2:29 PM · Report this
12
@11: You're espousing some scary/self-conflicting shit there for someone who presumably doesn't want more intrusive government.

Also, it's become pretty obvious from the recent debate about gun control that the anti-regulation argument is basically: because the problem is difficult and multifaceted, there should be no attempt to address the problem whatsoever.
Posted by Vitriolforbreakfast on December 20, 2012 at 2:42 PM · Report this
Fnarf 13
@7, I would accept EITHER of those if I thought they had a chance in hell. The fact is that people like you want both mass shootings and the thousands of other shootings that are not en masse to continue, and will ALWAYS find ways to block anything. Anything at all.

Australia begs to differ with you on the question of whether assault weapons can be defined or not. Will your definition meet every example? No. Will it meet some? Yes. Half a loaf is not the same thing as no loaf at all, no matter how many times you insist it is.

And it is becoming obvious that a large majority of Americans want something to happen, whether you say it's acceptable or not.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 20, 2012 at 2:57 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 14
@9

Because this isn't just a hysterical reaction to mass murders? Because it's also about the 30,000 people killed every year in mere "ordinary" shootings?

And you're wrong about whether they all would have passed because you haven't defined what kind of background check you're talking about. No doubt the watered down background check the NRA will champion would have given them all guns.

It's funny how the gun lobby keeps saying gun control is ineffective when it's the gun lobby who works so hard to make every law toothless.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on December 20, 2012 at 3:02 PM · Report this
15
@7
"Given these facts, gun control advocates, please, openly espouse one of the following positions: ..."

Excellent points.

@9
"I don't understand the push for background checks."

It's a "feel-good" band-aid.
It MIGHT have some value if mental health professionals were involved.
But to do that there would have to be massive improvements to the mental health system.
Which would be a good thing on its own.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced on December 20, 2012 at 3:09 PM · Report this
16
Fnarf@13: Australia didn't pussy foot around with some non-word designed for maximum political palatability. It banned semi-automatic weapons. If you want something like Australia did, you are choosing A. That's fine, just be honest about it.
Posted by David Wright on December 20, 2012 at 3:09 PM · Report this
17
Fnarf@13. By the way, you are mistaken about my own preferred policies. I don't own a gun or have much interest in doing so. If I were starting a country from scratch, I wouldn't have something like the 2nd amendment and I would have gun control something like Australia's. But I don't live in that imaginary country. I live in a country with a 2nd amendment and massive ownership of semi-automatic weapons by perfectly decent, law-abiding people who want to keep them. I believe in being honest with gun-owners about what a given policy means for them and honest with gun-haters about what a given affect a given policy is likely to have on the body-count.
Posted by David Wright on December 20, 2012 at 3:15 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 18
Wow 6 days of nonstop misinformation spread by the news media to capitalize on tragedy for political ends has changed the opinion of the short sighted and easily paniced American people?

Better strip some more rights. Dear leader already took away the 4th 5th 6th and 8th with the partiot act.

"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen."

-- Samuel Adams
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on December 20, 2012 at 3:25 PM · Report this
Max Solomon 19
i'm starting to like the idea of references - 3 family members and 3 non-family members to support your application for a gun purchase/ownership.

at least it might stop some the schizo loners like in the aurora, giffords & cafe racer shootings.
Posted by Max Solomon on December 20, 2012 at 3:59 PM · Report this
Fnarf 20
@18, I'll see your Samuel Adams and raise you Antonin Scalia, the most hardcore right-winger to ever sit on the Supreme Court and the author of the majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, which established that the 2nd Amendment applies to individuals:
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

[...]nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
That's the rabid wingnut side. When you are well to the right of Scalia, you're in a pretty dark place.

I'm still waiting for you or any other gun nut or libertarian like David Wright to make a serious proposal that would control access to guns in any way shape or form AND THEN ACTUALLY FOLLOW THROUGH ON IT in any way shape or form.

Instead all I hear is "nothing, nothing, nothing" or occasionally "here's a few fake little crumbs, but I'll block it if you try to enact it".

America is tired of that bullshit. It is bullshit. You are bullshit.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 20, 2012 at 4:04 PM · Report this
Geraldo Riviera 21
@14 Take your pick. What kind of background check would've worked for any of these people? Name one of these mass killers that was under psychiatric care. And watch your tone motherfucker.
Posted by Geraldo Riviera on December 20, 2012 at 4:59 PM · Report this
22
The NRA ONLY has 3 - 4.3 million donating members and there are between 60 - 120 million gun owners (depending how you define "gun" and "owner" and whose poll you count).

NRA is not even close to ALL gun owners and therefor it's policies cannot possibly be said to reflect all of America's gun owners.

The Brady Campaign's surveys showed a remarkable flexibility and progressive attitude on gun policies held by the majority of gun owners surveyed.

The vast amount money that supports the NRA's politics come from industry lobby groups not from individuals. Total member revenue is only around $200 million.

The NRA is literally dying. The average member is white and over 45. Not exactly a growth demographic.

None of this points to an unbeatable organization by any stretch.

All this bullshit about how we'll never get any meaningful changes is just that: BULLSHIT.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/
Posted by tkc on December 20, 2012 at 5:06 PM · Report this
Cascadian Bacon 23
@20

I never said that restricting the mentally ill and felons from firearms was unreasonable, in fact it is the current law and I agree with those provisions. I also agree with licensing gun dealers, which is also current law.

I am a lawful firearms owner, my last NICS background check was successfully completed Saturday. I have successfully passed an extensive FBI background check to obtain my WA License to Carry a Concealed Pistol. I have completed Safety training through both The State of Washington and The NRA, as well as handgun safety training in CA. I also secure my firearms in a safe when I am not present. What else do you want?

Gun owners have been granting the gun banners the "middle ground" for some time not, and each time they want to meet at a new middle ground with more restrictions than before. You have stated that you want all guns banned, and all gun owners are, "pieces of shit" which leaves no room for compromise.
Posted by Cascadian Bacon on December 20, 2012 at 5:28 PM · Report this
24
"Gun owners have been granting the gun banners the 'middle ground' for some time not, and each time they want to meet at a new middle ground with more restrictions than before."

I believe that it is because some of them ARE out to ban guns.
Even though they claim otherwise.
The fact is that there is no gun control legislation that would have prevented the shooting at Sandy Hook short of a 100% ban on all guns.

If they were honest then they would acknowledge this and either:
1. Not try to use the death of children to pass some half-measure anti-gun-owner law that will do nothing to prevent this in the future.

2. Publicly commit to a 100% ban. Including the confiscation of current guns. Including hunting rifles, shotguns, "assault weapons" and all handguns. It will take a lot of work and money and time to remove the 2nd Amendment. But at least be honest about your goal.

If you understand #1 then you can look at options to mitigate this in the future. And the suggestions range from improving mental health care to requiring armed male teachers.
Posted by fairly.unbalanced on December 20, 2012 at 9:02 PM · Report this
25
No, you're wrong.
Only Nazi's and Communists love gun control laws.
Because criminals just don't follow laws.
Gun control laws disarm good citizens & they become crime victims.
2nd Amendment - is Our right to defend ourselves against the door being broken down in the night.
Laws only impact the lawful...
Don't wait 45 minutes for the police to show up
AFTER you've been violated by a drugged up AIDS positive rapist & purse grabber.
Defend Yourself NOW. Get concealed carry & training.
Don't Be a Victim.
Don't be a sheep waiting for the wolves...
Protect yourself, & defend your family.
Posted by CeaJay on December 20, 2012 at 9:09 PM · Report this
26
No, you're wrong.
Only Nazi's and Communists love gun control laws.
Because criminals just don't follow laws.
Gun control laws disarm good citizens & they become crime victims.
2nd Amendment - is Our right to defend ourselves against the door being broken down in the night.
Laws only impact the lawful...
Don't wait 45 minutes for the police to show up
AFTER you've been violated by a drugged up AIDS positive rapist & purse grabber.
A shotgun saved my family member - didn't even have to shoot the criminal - the attacker surrendered at gun point.
One 911 call & the police picked up the perp.
Defend Yourself NOW.
Get concealed carry & training.
Don't Be a Victim.
Don't be a sheep waiting for the wolves...
Protect yourself, & defend your family.
Posted by CeaJay on December 20, 2012 at 9:17 PM · Report this
27
Hope Obama strikes while the iron is hot. This is the perfect time to enact some sensible gun control legislation.
Posted by Patricia Kayden on December 21, 2012 at 4:35 AM · Report this
Fnarf 28
@23, you are willfully misrepresenting my position.

Yes, it's true, if I was King of the World, I'd take all your guns and melt them down, and if you so much as thought about acquiring a new one I'd have you ground up into pellets for the stove to heat the Capitol with, just like people who don't use their turn signals. But I am not King of the World.

I recognize that you bastards have won. You've got your amendment, and you've got your DC v. Heller. You've got everything you've ever dreamed of. It's settled law. You've got the right to keep and bear arms. Bully for you, big tough man.

But it's not enough for you. You want more, and you use this technique of pretending that stasis is progress, that the moderate, reasonable position is "gun laws already cover that, we've already given up the middle ground". Which allows the gun lobby room to stretch for more if they can get it, and if they can't, well, you've got almost everything already.

This is why your "moderate" position is a complete lie. You are not moderate at all. You are an extremist.

Look who your fucking friends are. You're with Pam Roach. The gun lobby in the State of Washington is packed with the most despicable pieces of shit in the entire state, people who wave guns around on the floor of the Senate, people who think carrying concealed weapons into movie theaters and schools and churches and the legislature is a damn good idea. Ought to be mandatory.

Don't tell me you don't believe those things, because your actions say otherwise. You shoot down every conceivable proposal before the words are out of people's mouths, and you throw out nonsense fakery that smells of bullshit no matter how often you insist it's the delightful aroma of frying bacon. Not a word of what you have to say on the subject is remotely capable of being codified into a workable law, and you know it. It is by design.

Fortunately a large majority of Americans -- a large majority of GUN OWNERS -- is as sick of your bullshit as I am. And maybe something will get done this time.
More...
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 21, 2012 at 5:26 AM · Report this
Fifty-Two-Eighty 29
Nope, Fnarf. Nothing's going to happen this time either. We've still got the votes in the House to defeat it. But let the dreamers dream. It doesn't hurt.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on December 21, 2012 at 5:55 AM · Report this
Fnarf 30
And another thing: if we fail, we will know why. We will blame you.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on December 21, 2012 at 6:02 AM · Report this
Fifty-Two-Eighty 31
By all means, feel free. We're pretty used to it by now.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on December 21, 2012 at 7:05 AM · Report this
32
@30 If?

Three days ago you were in full Fnarf Internet-Know-it-all mode proclaiming there was no point, that the guns nuts had won - all was lost, and there would never be any gun control legislation passed. This is what you said.

Anybody who disagreed with you was a murderer, you siad. Even those who didn't own guns.

RAAAAGE was our only righteous weapon, you screamed.

A statement so tone-deaf in the wake of slaughter as to astound a thinking person.

Because that same sentiment appears in every lunatic murder manifesto, and no doubt some justification like it will be uncovered from the computers of this latest lunatic.

I guess rage... and a coordinated political effort of public pressure, compromise and reason are our only weapons. And this lamp. This lamp... rage, and a coordinated political effort of public pressure, compromise and reason are our only weapons. Oh. And this ashtray! This ashtray, this lamp, rage, and...
Posted by tkc on December 21, 2012 at 10:42 AM · Report this
33
How are more gun laws going to stop someone from illegally buying assault weapons and ammo and sneaking into a school and doing the same thing again? Criminals can sell you anything you want, laws can’t stop that! Only armed citizens guarding our precious children can help stop the violence. Gun laws just make it safer for criminals to operate as they please, despite what the law says. WAKE UP AMERICA! Crime is less in states where carry permits are issued! Law enforcement wants citizens to carry and have in our homes, because they know criminals don’t want to get shot! We need harsher laws against criminals who sell guns and ammo illegally, not law abiding citizens. we need required care for mentally ill, prevent them from having legal access to firearms in the home, i.e.gun safes made affordable to all. There are so many things we can do that DO NOT include what the president and our law maker plan on, think of any country that have an outright ban on weapons and the average crime rate in those countries, I for one do not want my family to live in that kind of fear, that at any time someone, including law enforcement or the military, can just bust in and shoot everyone because they can, do you want to live like that, because thats where our government wants to take us!
Posted by freedomfighter on December 23, 2012 at 1:18 PM · Report this
34
actually you're wrong. crime is less in england and japan and canada and inside the usa gun deaths are highest in places like lousiana and texas.

also, if your gun is in the safe, how is you gonna stop the thief with a gun, don't you need it cocked and loaded under your pillow?

think of any country with outright ban...well there are few, but let's take japan and england....1. crime is far less. 2. massacres are far less. 3. they're not exactly not free either, so your whole position is flawed isn't it? oh wait, hyou fear the gummint, I guess you also want a tank, bazooka, tactical nukes and mustard gas in your home, too, to stop the tyrannical government if it decides to you know, collect taxes from you force you to use the city sewer system or get a permit or you know, ask you to license your guns.

btw in the red dawn scenario, won't the commies just go get the nra database and use that to find out who to take guns away from? you think it's not vulnerable to hacking ? silly.

btw lanza used guns criminally, do you want harsher laws against him, maybe put his dead boy in a cage or string it up outside town walls to you know, shame him more?
Posted by gun owners: our problem on December 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM · Report this
35
now the people of United Sates of America we are going to piy the price of one stupid mentally ill kid son of a mentally disturb teacher , when she knowing her kid have mental problems teach him how to use a ar 15 carabine and handguns. This is not my problem and is not somebody else problem . It is Lanzas mother and his family than knowing the fact never call the authorities to stop both of them. I feel sorry for the inocent victima but as a citizen of the United States of America i have the right to defend myself at all cost from any person that tries to harm me or my family. In a normal incident of assaults home invasion or personal disputes the police is always late by 6 minutes. The Goverment want to punish the responsible gun owners of America when we dont have nothing to do with that incident in Sandy Hook E.S. As an individual i will protect from anyone and if i need to neutralize it i will doit. Banning ar 15 is not the problem., banning high capacity magazines is not the soliution. Remember guns dont kill people... People kill people, and Mr Biden and his political potatoes need to stop using Sandy hook as a political milage gain for the goverment of Barrack Obama. Stop the bullahit. america will never be lose the right to bare arms !
Posted by Don Al on January 6, 2013 at 7:16 AM · Report this
36
BEFORE you post an ignorant comment supporting gun control you shouldunderstand what gun control means for society what gun control did to many societies much like ours only thousands of miles away AMERICA IS NO DIFFERENT AMERICANS ARE NOT EXEMPT

DONT BE A FOOL

http://libertycrier.com/front-page/innoc…
Posted by angellike on January 12, 2013 at 10:24 PM · Report this
37
BEFORE you post an ignorant comment supporting gun control you shouldunderstand what gun control means for society what gun control did to many societies much like ours only thousands of miles away AMERICA IS NO DIFFERENT AMERICANS ARE NOT EXEMPT

DONT BE A FOOL

http://libertycrier.com/front-page/innoc…
Posted by angellikee on January 12, 2013 at 10:25 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy