Skip to comments.Gallup: Opposition to handgun ban hits all-time high
Posted on 12/27/2012 9:11:41 AM PST by Nachum
So how would Piers Morgan fare with his proposed constitutional amendment to repeal gun rights? Amazingly, nearly three-quarters of Americans agree on handguns, anyway but not with Piers Morgan. According to the latest Gallup survey taken within days of the Newtown massacre, a record number of Americans oppose a handgun ban, 74/24:
Despite Americans willingness to strengthen gun laws in the wake of Sandy Hook and other deadly mass shootings, Gallup finds public opposition to a broad ban on the possession of handguns at a record-high 74%. Conversely, the 24% in favor is the lowest recorded since Gallup first asked the question in 1959.
How about the assault-rifle ban? Technically, an assault rifle is an automatic weapon, which is already banned. Gallup asks respondents whether they are for or against a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles, which is a badly-written question in several ways. Even so, a majority opposes such a law, by just a slightly narrower gap than a year ago:
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Gun Control is the unending Roadrunner Cartoon of the Democrat Party.
And the anvil is about to hit the coyote again.
They don’t even know half of the enmity they have spawned with their zealous arrogance in implementing their tyrannic gun-grabbing in the wake of this tragedy perpetrated by a truly sick individual.
Had the mother had a way to get this obviously disturbed psycho committed more easily, we would not be discussing the huge can of shit these gun-grabbing zealots are about to open..
Maybe there is hope for the American public after all.
Somebody needs to clue in the pansies on Varney & Co. about what guns are really about. The people on that show are generally very conservative, but they are stupid on guns, especially Varney himself. They should receive a raft of stories about people who have defended themselves or others by means of a gun.
A ban is a red herring. It’s all in the regulations which are de facto gun bans that make it virtually impossible to own a gun due to cost, red tape, etc.
Poor liberals, they won’t be able to get their useless assault weapons ban through the House of Representatives. And with Snowe and Brown and Lugar gone and Cruz and Flake and Fischer coming in and red state democrats up for re-election, they might not be able to get it through the Senate.
Poor, poor liberals.
“Maybe there is hope for the American public after all.
Somebody needs to clue in the pansies on Varney & Co. about what guns are really about. The people on that show are generally very conservative, but they are stupid on guns, especially Varney himself. They should receive a raft of stories about people who have defended themselves or others by means of a gun.”
Varney is a Britisher and thus has the typical British mindset on gun ownership.
I know flaming liberals here in NY that are stalwart 2nd Amendment defenders. More so than the “Golfers with Guns” at my shooting club.
This issue can and does cross ideological lines at times.
Conservative writers need to interview people FORMERLY in the mental health profession.
That’s where the truth will come out about the true state of crazies, Prozac as candy, and violence.
Because many leave over the laws libs created.
What guns laws that we don’t have now would have stopped Lanza?
“... typical British mindset on gun ownership.”
Next time Britain is threatened by a Kaiser or a Hitler and they beg for weapons and intervention, let’s send our very best wishes and go back to whatever we were doing before we were interrupted.
Libs always believe in feel-good laws over common sense. Armed guards in schools and other institutions is an excellent idea. Of course, libs don’t want to just ban hand-guns, they want to ban all guns. And as like in Mexico, the criminals will eagerly comply with the total gun bans. (snicker)
1 in 4 Americans think that, no matter what the 2nd Amendment says, we should be forced to give up our legally owned handguns.
1 in 4 Americans are easy picking for me in the upcoming SHTF era and I will take their stuff unopposed. Heh heh. I stopped wasting my money on some food stuffs for this reason I spend the money on ammo.
But isn’t this what the ACLU are all about? Create as much havoc as possible and exploit the criseses that they cause. Imagine if we could get statistics on all of the crimes and social problems caused by the ACLU. How many criminals have they protected from jail? How many mentally ill people are out on the streets? How many illegal aliens are in the country? It is the old Communist tactic of causing havoc against their enemies.
Thank God most Americans are still sane....
Gun control is putting both hands on the grip.
Varney, like Piers Morgan, is a Brit. The Brits have banned all guns and are now having to ban knives...
The armed guards in schools can be done without expense to the school system. Grandpa can be a guard—every community has retired police, retired military, retired emts etc., why can’t they be volunteer guards? After all it is their grandkids and their neighbors grandkids that they would be protecting. What greater motivation is there than protecting your own grandchildren and your neighbors grandkids. People live in communities, we care for each other. We do not have to have the federal government force TSA type guards on our schools. We do not have to have another huge corrupt federal program. Local communities just have to take control back in their hands and put local retired gun owners as security guards in their local schools.
And if the federal government tries to bribe local governments with federal grants that always have strings attached—we should just say no to Washington. No thanks, we can do it ourselves.
....and reduce the amount sent to the feds by the amount they were offering.
If they're offering money to induce something they obviously don't have the authority to mandate, they've taxed us by that number of dollars in excess of what's needed to complete their PROPER duties, so that amount needs to not be sent in any more (and the corresponding amount from previous rebated to the proper owners).
At one time about that many people opposed obamacare too.
“Next time Britain is threatened by a Kaiser or a Hitler and they beg for weapons and intervention, lets send our very best wishes and go back to whatever we were doing before we were interrupted.”
Nah, let’s be a little kinder. Let’s send em the same kind we sent under the lend lease program last time.
That was my idea as well. I imagine quite a few people have seen that on-line video of the armed old codger who chased away the punks in the Florida casino. The old guy moved pretty quick and was fearless. The punks ran like the cowards they were.
I hope the states start flexing their muscles as you have described. It is OUR money.
Like I said, Charles Bronson became a major American matinee idol for a reason. And it wasn’t his good looks.
Here’s DiFi’s latest Stalinist attempt:
From her website, so I assume I can post here:
Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation:
Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of:
120 specifically-named firearms
Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one military characteristic
Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds
Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by:
Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test
Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test
Banning firearms with thumbhole stocks and bullet buttons to address attempts to work around prior bans
Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by:
Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment
Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes and
Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons
Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include:
Background check of owner and any transferee;
Type and serial number of the firearm;
Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint;
Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and
Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration
A pdf of the bill summary is available here.
My wife, who grew up in a household of girls, has always been afraid of guns, and certainly didn’t want us to have firearms in the house. She is now contemplating purchasing a handgun, being trained in marksmanship and safety, and then applying for a concealed-carry license. She is still the same person. But we take our grandchildren and great-grandchildren to the movies now and then. No masked wearing bad guy is going to walk into a theater and shoot ANYBODY. He’s going down full of bullets courtesy of my wife.
We have thousands of communities who can't afford full time fire departments and have volunteer fire departments. There usually are plenty of volunteers.
I suspect there would be plenty of volunteers for this duty. Like volunteer fireman, they should have qualification training (the NRA has already offered that, free) and periodic drills so they can properly coordinate with school officials, each other and responding police. They could supply their own weapons. The schools would provide communications, maybe vests, and perhaps liability insurance (like the NRA insurance). There should be several armed volunteers on in-school duty at a time so there is backup. You could include CHL armed teachers in the mix as "permanent" members.
There are plenty of cheap and effective ways to do this without getting another Fedzilla bazillion dollar program using worthless TSA affirmative action hires, layers of lard ass bureaucrats, body search rules, and SEIU unions. This volunteer program could be up and running in minimum time at minimal cost. I'd bet there would be many more volunteers than would be required to comfortably fill a duty roster. I know I would gladly train and volunteer to help protect my grand children, and so would many others. But armed volunteers will be allowed nowhere near it if is is just another PC federal program that throws money around to the wrong people protecting the wrong things in the wrong way.
It is important these be totally local programs, in coordination with local law enforcement. But that's what the control freak feds and Liberals hate about it and that is why it would work wonderfully!
Saw a post from the Canadian Free something or other this morning - supposed mole in the DHS with some downright scary assertions about the “big plan”.
Exactly! While I do have some sympathy for LaPierre and his viewpoint, I was appalled that the first thing someone on the RIGHT thought of when the public was endangered, was more guns for the government and less restrictions on where they can carry them. D'oh!
The various levels of government already have far TOO MUCH power, all of it stolen from us, the rightful possessors of it. Any time there's a problem, why don't we look first at what kind of options for a solution exist that involve empowering the public, preferably in concert with disempowering the government. Even MORE power taken from us and given to our servants should be the last option we consider, not the first, and especially not conservatives.
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.