Winning
A new Angus Reid Public Opinion poll reports that 85% of respondents believe that the second amendment means what it says, 15% delusional. 51% support shall issue concealed carry, which is good.
Based on that, I find this is odd: only three-in-ten respondents (30%) feel the same way about semi-automatic weapons, with a majority (61%) suggesting that only the police and other authorized persons should have access to them.
I’m guessing that means that a good portion have fallen for the anti-gun propaganda obfuscating semi-automatics and machine guns.
January 25th, 2012 at 12:27 pm
The last part is a shame if true. If the 2nd Amendment makes for no special treatment of Semi-Autos, then it doesn’t make for special treatment of machine guns either.
January 25th, 2012 at 12:41 pm
You know… I don’t care if they obfuscate semi-autos and machine guns. In the long run that will only help us.
January 25th, 2012 at 12:56 pm
Education beats Ignorance, but STOOPID is Forever. So we need some more Pro-Gun Education out there on a one-to-one basis. Perhaps Starbucks Appreciation Day on February 14th might help. If someone asks why you are OCing while waiting for a Latte, you can turn around and say, “Why, this is just in case some tries to Rob and Hurt us Customers while we’re here.”
Just don’t be “Manly” about it.
January 25th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
When police chiefs don’t know much about the department-issued firearms their own officers have stolen from their homes (as in a post earlier today) I don’t expect firearms knowledge from people who learned as kids that the Glock 7 is made of ceramics, is invisible in airport x-ray machines, and is fully automatic, shooting cop-killer bullets that pass through all known bulletproof vests.
January 25th, 2012 at 3:37 pm
“Just don’t be “Manly” about it”
They make take it as an affront against the “Grande”…or is it “Vinte”? FIIK, I don’t speak “Hipster” either.
January 25th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
I disagree with Uncle on this. The language “shall not be infringed” conveys an affirmative duty upon the Federal government to ensure that the rights are not infringed upon. The 2nd amendment requires the Federal government to prevent state and local government, the UN, and even private businesses and citizens from infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms.
In no other usage is the phrase “shall not be” deemed to mean less than an affirmative duty. If a Dad says to his daughter, You shall not be home later than 10 pm, every party understand that the daughter is responsible for being home by 10. If a judge says “the confidential information in this case shall not be leaked”, everyone knows what that means. If the officer says “the right of these folks to keep and bear their arms shall not be infringed”, the E6 and E7 know whose job it is to make sure the E1s don’t infring upon that right.
The 1st amendment orders the goverment to avoid certain actions. The 2nd amendment requires every action necessary and proper to fulfill it.
January 25th, 2012 at 4:08 pm
I think some of it is just that “semi-automatic” sounds scarier than “automatic.” Even our side isn’t clear: a 1911 can rightly be called either one. So yes, we do need to do more education, especially in terms of taking folks to the range.
January 25th, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Just what were the questions used and in what order?
See that is the trick to making polls say what you want them to say.
So a huge majority says 2md Amendment says what it says but a ‘majority’ says no simi-autos.
Now that does not compute… UNLESS they worded the questions to kind of force you to say no to simi-autos.
For you see, the 2nd Amendment is not about duck hunting. And simi-autos are the most prevalent form of defense for oneself and one’s country.
January 25th, 2012 at 11:10 pm
The question was asked:
then there were 3 columns titled “Handguns”, “Rifles / Shotguns”, “Semi-automatic firearms”
To the left were three rows: “Every American who is eligible to own firearms should have access to these weapons”, “Only the police and other authorized persons should have access to these weapons” and “Not sure”
There was no explanation of what the terms meant or that the term “Semi-automatic firearms” could be both that and a handgun or a rifle or a shotgun.
Frankly not a win, the question was rigged in such a way that it told exactly what they wanted it to say.
January 26th, 2012 at 3:08 am
OT, but serious (to me). Dammit, Uncle, why did you delete your blogroll?
January 26th, 2012 at 7:57 am
Okay. Try this.
If the 2nd Amendment only applies to 18th century flint lock firearms, then the 1st amendment only applies to quill pens and hand-set printing presses.
Apparently the Constitution is only a “living document” for issues the Lib-Cong favor.
January 26th, 2012 at 7:59 am
They can have my semis if I can have their scalps. My guns for their hair – that’s a fair trade. I mean, I’m not unwilling to compromise now, am I? Obviously not. I’m very reasonable like that. Give a little, get a little, that’s what I say. Sure, I’d have to put up with their bleeding and screaming, but I’m easy to get along with. No problemo! 🙂