Skip to comments.How Democrats Misread Polling on Gun Control
Posted on 03/23/2013 5:52:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Proponents of gun-control legislation, emboldened by the presidents call for stricter laws and overwhelming support in public polling, have been optimistic that proposals for background checks or a crackdown on weapons trafficking could pass Congress. Gun-control advocates have cited plenty of data to make their case, including surveys that show more than 80 percent of Americans support background checks.
Even a ban on assault weapons, which has been a more polarizing issue, still wins majority support in many surveys.
But these polls may gloss over some complexities in public opinion on gun control, and explain why Democrats are having so much trouble winning congressional support for even the most modest gun regulations.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on Tuesday said he would not include the assault-weapons ban in legislation the Senate will consider next month, an acknowledgement that he doesn't think that proposal could pass. Democrats fear that including the assault-weapons ban might doom the prospects for other measures such as background checks. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who authored the proposal, said she wasn't backing down and would try to tack on the assault-weapons ban as an amendment instead.
So, why aren't the polling numbers on gun control swaying more members of Congress? Many of the poll numbers don't capture the nuances of public opinion.....
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Heh, they sent out Obama’s online community organizing trolls to astroturf the polls, and then actually believed that those corrupted polls were accurate.
All we (this means YOU GOP weaklings) need to do is to DEFINE "assault weapon".
Ma and Pa Kettle even know that assault weapons are machine guns that are compact in size, and can be switched between full and semi-auto.
The Marxist/Democrat/leftists just love to pitch this argument with 1. Ignorance, 2. Fear, and 3., (most of all) Emotion. By eliminating the ignorance, we eliminate the other two (eventually).
For the average ignorant voter, ask them if they support a ban on assault rifles and they will say “YES!
But the Devil is in the details and the pollster never mentions the details.
Think of those polled about Obamacare.
Do you support government paid medical care? Answer: YES!
You realize you will be forced to buy government mandated insurance don’t you? Answer: WHAT!
It is like one idiot who learned he was being taxed for something. His reaction was....”Whey are we being TAXED for this! The GOVERNMENT should be paying for this!”
With Boehner in charge of the House, you can bet the farm the stupid party will blow the next election.
Don't know what the Vegas odds will be, but I'll bet 100:1 against the Stupid Party at this point.
So, why aren’t the polling numbers on gun control swaying more members of Congress? Many of the poll numbers don’t capture the nuances of public opinion.....
How about: I’m going to lie my *SS off when you ask me any questions about guns. I don’t trust you or your agenda.
Two poster boys: Aikin and Murdouck.
They may lose the senate because of this, although the stupid party will probably do something to forestall that.
Reid beat them to the punch. By keeping Feinstein's Bill off the floor, he has kept the roll call from exposing the Dems not liberal enough to vote for the measure and the others not conservative enough to vote against it.
Depending on the district, either could send someone home next election--there is no upside for either party in voting on a Bill so heinous when it can't pass. The only upside in that vote would be for the voters who would have the list of names slated for primary challenges and defeat in the next election cycle.
For the most part, there are only such “complexities” and “nuances” in the opinions of the pseudo-intellectuals of the political/regulator class answering surveys and aiding the out-of-touch imposers of pathological policies. The more technically inclined healthy thinkers (scary to contemporary cultured folks) targeted by the gun control laws are more in touch with realities than that and haven’t recently born and reared mass murderers (see incomes, demographics, social politics).
Example: severe retards, other extreme incompetents and maniacs—no firearms, nail guns, power saws, knives, hammers, etc. To avoid firearms when drunk or having a bad day is an individual responsibility. Accidents happen.
Even suicide and murder cannot be stopped in the whole population. Crime cannot be reduced to zero, although relatively more traditional morality in society in general would help. Common sense is a trait of people who work daily with the physical realities of life and refuse to listen to their insulated, indoor, rear-end-sitting, policymaking, pathological masters.
Actually, an “assault weapon” is any item used to commit an assault. If I stab someone with a pencil, that pencil is an “assault weapon”. The term is a made up term used to scare the libtards so they will wet their panties in a re-enactment of Pavlov’s Dog
You'll be foolish DUmmies.
The rats listened to their base of metrosexuals and very loud squawking hens, aka, “sucker moms”.
Meanwhile, the men and the real women sent laser beams from their eyes in the direction of the scumbag politicians.
...Who felt the heat.
Speaking about this very subject a couple of months ago with a Lib and they were shocked to learn from me that an "assault weapon" as presented in the media and purchased at a gun store was not a fully automatic weapon.
“Ma and Pa Kettle even know that assault weapons are machine guns that are compact in size, and can be switched between full and semi-auto.”
Ma and Pa Kettle are not LIVs. And believe me, low information voters are plentiful.
Apt - Pavlov's dog. Heh.
Smoke and mirrors. Universal background checks i.e. registration is what they are shooting for. Republicans talking about mental health prevention of gun ownership is a sure sign things are going bad. I don’t have problems with these checks if type of gun and serial numbers are not part of the check.
Just how do such findings square with the historic levels of gun purchasing by the American public over the last four years?
Well, of course, they don't.
The reason members of Congress are so afraid of voting for increased regulation on guns is because they look at the real world numbers, which say loud and clear, that Americans still have the blood of their forefathers running in their veins.
They could care less what the polls are, since they know best!
Treating the good and the innocent like criminals - isn’t this how the Germans treated the Jews before WW2?
Whew! Thanks, I feel much better now. I thought he was in the White House.
Looks more and more like No. 5.
None of the crap being done is legal, but these gun grabbers don't care. They are afraid that the American people have awakened to their schemes and treason. They believe the only way to implement their schemes is to disarm America. Americans are not stupid: they see what Obama has done and continues to do to the economy and they see his Santa Claus giveaways to looters from the productive will collapse on its own weight. That's why disarmament has to be done . . . to protect those in power, Democraps or RINOs.
Consider this, in just four months, the FBI Instant Checks processed 2.3 million gun sales in November 2013, 2.4 million in December 2012, 2.3 million in January 2013, and 2.3 million in February 2013. That's enough guns to completely re-equip both the Chinese PLA (2.3 million) and Indian (1.7 million) armies TWICE. There would be 1.3 million guns left over after re-equipping was done. Americans are arming for a fight and the assholes in DC and Donkey controlled state capitals know this. What more and more American are feeling is that our state and national governments have lost legitimacy and are gone rogue.
"The semi-automatic weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun can only increase that chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." -- Josh Sugarman, 1988, Violence Policy Center.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.