Support for gun control waning
RICHARD S. DUNHAM, Houston Chronicle:
Amid a wave of publicity about drug-related gun violence along the Mexican border and police killings in U.S. cities, an increasing number of Americans oppose new government efforts to regulate guns.
Recent nonpartisan polls show shrinking support for new gun-control measures and strong public sentiment for enforcing existing laws instead. So strong is the shift in public opinion that a proposed assault-weapons ban — once backed by 3 in 4 Americans — now rates barely 1 in 2.
Frank Newport, the editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll, told reporters Tuesday that “every bit of data is showing us that Americans are getting more conservative about gun control.”
A CNN poll conducted in April found that 39 percent of Americans wanted stricter gun-control laws, down from 50 percent in 2000.
Forty-six percent said the gun laws should stay as they are, while 15 percent said they should be loosened — up from 9 percent in 2000.
I emphasized the info about the assault weapons ban for a reason. Seems to me that, despite the all out media assault and lies regarding what the ban on weapons that look like assault rifles covers, that our message is getting through. The ban is based on aesthetic features and nothing more. Not an overwhelming shift but good news, nonetheless.
May 7th, 2009 at 9:55 am
If the CNN poll can be believed (a really big IF), 61% of Americans now support gun rights.
That’s great news, much better than the NBC/WSJ poll.
May 7th, 2009 at 10:10 am
I disagree. This is a huge shift in opinion and the media and politicians realize it.
While the numbers being reported might not seem great – remember how biased the sampling is and all the questions are HEAVILY weighted to derive an answer as supportive of complete ban on all guns as possible. The fact that the very best case the gun banners can make – on their own turf – is that they no longer enjoy the benefit of people saying simply “sure, maybe government can help out a bit more” is huge. It means actual support – how people really feel, is hugely in our favor.
May 7th, 2009 at 10:56 am
A change from 3 in 4 to 1 in 2 may not seem like much but it _is_ substantial: that means 1/3 of those with the “wrong” opinion have seen the light. I’m thinking 1/3 of a large number is still a large number. Now if we could just sway 1/2 of the remainder :-).
May 7th, 2009 at 11:13 am
The real danger is in the states and locals.
D. Patrick in Mass trying to demonize gun owners and get more restrictive laws.
NY state with 25 new laws designed to restrict gun owners on being debated.
Ammunition bans and taxes and other craetive methods to cost money and restrict ammo. California for example.
A foreign treaty on the federal side that supercede our xonstitution perhaps.
Per VCDL email alert,
* An international treaty that could override our laws, and possibly
even the constitutional protections, for the right to keep and bear
arms. Reloading could become illegal, registration would be
implemented, even attaching a sling to a rifle without a government
license to do so would be a criminal act! The President is pushing
this treaty because of Mexico’s inability to control its own criminals
These are what we have to defeat, especially the treaty and local issues. We have more impact on local level when we have bodies at city and state sessions.
The Blue Dog democrats need to be targeted in Congress on the treaty. Visits to the local offices and flood the phone and snail mail letters.
Find you US Reps and Senators and hound them about no treaty that impact our gun rights can be approved.
We are wining the PR war Heller helped, but local CCW laws helped to create a new attitude about guns. OC is the new push on changing attitudes.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
This is actually a radical shift considering that these “non-partisan” polls are conducted almost exclusively by agencies that are located in places like NYC and DC, and they seemingly always poll populations in areas and districts where the overwhelming majority of the population is comprised predominately by Democrats.
“An international treaty that could override our laws, and possibly even the constitutional protections, for the right to keep and bear
arms.”
No, it couldn’t. The constitution simply acknowledges natural, god-given human rights in the bill of rights. These are Civil Rights and CANNOT be overturned. They are laws of nature, even if the world’s despots fail to recognize these rights, they do so at their peril.
The US is NOT compelled by any history, precedent, case law, or legal treaty to comply with ANY foreign action, law, or convention. If such a precedent exists in US case law, it is patently ILLEGAL and violates the sovereignty of the American people. Any efforts made by the federal government to comply with any such law against the will of the people would be illegal, and unenforceable. The Federal Government’s sole power and authority exist because of the Constitution, and the acquiescence of the American people, and it cannot exercise power and authority it does not now, nor ever rightfully will possess.
Example, the US is a NON-SIGNATORY of the Geneva Convention, the Hague Convention, and various other treaties and conventions that govern the rules of war, commerce, etc. We comply with these conventions as a matter of courtesy and convenience, not out of some compulsion to do so under the fictitious guise of international law. If there actually was a such thing as “International Law”, who would enforce it? The UN? Please.
The only laws that are enforced in this world are natural laws, like the free-market, and laws that a compelled by the actions of Occidental Governments, such as the US. The world cannot force the US to do something it refuses to do. They have neither the balls, the audacity, the organization, nor the resources to take on the American people.
May 7th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
A couple points:
“… Americans are getting more conservative about gun control.”
— That’s an interesting way to phrase that. The use of the term “conservative” has a connotation. Curious. If it wasn’t a member of the Liberal Media, I’d think I was reading too much into it.
The Mexican gun canard actually works against them, as a recent post of yours illustrates – ‘another way to increase gun sales is to lay off police’. Well, ~another way to increase gun sales is to scare people by telling them that the nation directly south of them – with *huge* numbers of it’s citizens illegally streaming into the US – has gotten enormous amounts of heavy weaponry.~
— Gee, do you think people might be arming themselves because they are worried about civil war in Mexico? And do you think advertising how violent the place has become due to all of *their* guns might have an impact on the neighboring nation’s citizens?
— The people in DC really are morons….
May 7th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
A follow-up point I thought of after hitting submit:
I would love to see the exchange between a politician and a citizen regarding shutting down the (supposed) flow of weapons to Mexico from the US:
Citizen: “If you prevent us from buying weapons, how will the Federal Government protect us from the criminals in Mexico who already have these weapons?”
Politician: “We’ll patrol the border.”
Citizen: /falls off chair laughing
May 7th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
“Barely 1 in 2” is still a majority. And a one-person majority is an absolute mandate from on high for ANY proposed weapons ban, whereas 61% wanting no additional, or even less, anti-gun laws are simply misguided fools. At least to every politician out there with an anti-civil rights, anti-gun agenda.
We need something on the order of 3/4 supporting civil rights, the human right to self defense, and the right to keep and bear arms before we can even start to avoid having to fight against the socialist wave of anti-rights laws.
May 7th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
[…] “Assault Rifles” and public opinion […]
The 3%’rs may not like it but to Prags it’s progress.
May 7th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
I have to agree with Jon. It would be more accurate to state that Americans are becoming more LIBERAL in regard to guns. When you say “conservative,” the unintended message is that gun control is the way of the future, and that Americans are just tapping the brakes here, prior to (somewhere in the future) once again slamming on the accelerator. In fact, liberty may win out in the long term as well as the short term.