◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

(courtesy gallup.com)

“Nearly a year after the Newtown, Conn., school shootings spawned considerable U.S. debate about passing stricter gun control laws, almost half of Americans believe the laws covering the sale of firearms should be strengthened and half say they should stay the same or be less strict,” gallup.com asserts, summarizing data from its most recent gun control survey. Well, that’s their takeaway. Mine’s different . . .

I mean who says ‘No, I don’t want gun control laws strengthened when the nature of those changes are left unspecified’?

The good news: “Public support for stricter gun laws is down from 58% in the days after the December 2012 Newtown shootings.” Even better: “The new poll also finds public opposition to banning handgun ownership holding at a record-high 74%, identical to a year ago. One in four Americans think the law should limit possession to police and other authorized persons.”

Winning? Meanwhile, guess which demographic groups favor a handgun ban? The survey SAID:

(courtesy gallup.com)

The enemy of The People of the Gun: Democrats, liberals, women and non-whites. Who knew? You know; other than us. I reckon women and non-whites are the antis weakest link. Liberal Democratic women (e.g., Diane Feinstein and Shannon Watts)? Fuhgeddboutit. [h/t DrVino]

◀Previous Post
Next Post▶

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

65 COMMENTS

  1. I think most people knew from the beginning of all this that going after pistols would be unpopular. It’s easier to vilify the big scary asshalt rafles then it is to demonize the handgun even though that’s the firearms that is used in crime 98% of the time a gun is involved.

    • reason they were after ars an aks types cause a 30 shot magazine you can kill a lots of tyrants before they can get you—with pistols –pistol never kill its the person with evil intent an you can never find a cure for that

      • The reason for trying to do away with AR15s and AK47s is that it is a step in gun confiscation. They will start with semiautomatic rifles. When they will see little change in crime stats, the libs will claim they need to ban either all rifles or semiautomatic pistols. It’s just a way to just chip away at legal ownership of firearms. They know that rifles and shotguns aren’t used in the majority of crimes. Their objective is to have a disarmed public, so that a dictator can be put in place with little or no opposition.

    • Not likely.

      I think mostly they are sheeple who swing with the wind and who don’t much care unless the issue personally affects them, especially in the pocket book.

      Sheeple don’t have much…depth of thought.

      • what you say is right an sad part is the low thought people have let Obama the marixs destroy our nation an all it would have took to save her is for a few good patriots to have took a stand.–freedom is not free an no one wants to pay the price–other word no one really cares

    • The more NSA spies on our allies, the more the message of HOPE is revealed to be LIES, the small percentage of voters who decided the last election will wake up and see the error of their ways. I did.

      • JW don’t bet the farm on that hope–an for sure don’t hold your breath cause if you do you will become room temperature . these folk will only wake up when their free bees are took away an it want have anything to do about freedom or about being a tyrant

    • 51% will not wake up—till Obama bankrupt this country an then they will raise holly hell. but only because their freebees have took a hike waking up till then fat chance

  3. For Gods, sake…THE ADS! The goddamn autoplay video ads…won’t…stop… I’m going somewhere else for a while. This is ridiculous.

    And on topic… It’s not over by a long shot, but seems to me that this is what winning looks like.

  4. Robert,

    I can’t say a blame some women or liberals for feeling anti gun when there are 2a supporters on the internet who lump their entire group together and say “They are the ENEMY”

    Many of those opposed to gun rights are potential advocates for RKBA. If you don’t believe this look at the change in support for all out handgun bans. That’s a dramatic cultural change in 50 years.

    The amount of men and even conservatives who are opposed to new gun legislation is not so overwhelming that they can all be counted as 2a supporters.

    I expect a lot from this site and your comments in your last paragraph are really dissapointing.

    • Yeah, I wouldn’t generalize any large group as “the enemy” when 23%, 28%, 44% of them could actually be on your side of the issue. Those are hefty percentages of each group, and in absolute numbers they can easily make or break victory. We see this in the CO recalls.

      -D

      • And considering that the balance was 60% to 36% the OTHER WAY in 1959, I guess the members of the so-called “Greatest Generation” are also ‘the enemy’, eh?

      • When more than 50% of any specific group self-identifies as your enemy I believe it is entirely appropriate to label that group as your enemy. As to specific individual members of that group, THEY may not consider themselves enemies of POTG, BUT by their participation in, with and for that group they have aligned themselves with and given support, aid, comfort, money, and political clout to our enemies.

        You cannot align yourself with a political philosophy that advocates greater government control, income redistribution, and erosion of personal liberties and the Constitution of the United State of America and then complain when people who want no part of that sort of government view you as their enemy even though you like guns and do not personally support gun control.

        Is a Catholic who is pro-abortion really a Catholic? Is a Jew who eats pork really a Jew? (Religiously, not ethnically.) Is a conservative who supports Obamacare really a conservative? Is a Liberal/Democrat who supports gun rights really a Liberal/Democrat? You are and always will be judged by the company you keep, and:

        “He who lies down with dogs will most assuredly arise with fleas.” – Benjamin Franklin

        • >> You cannot align yourself with a political philosophy that advocates … erosion of personal liberties and the Constitution of the United State of America and then complain when people who want no part of that sort of government view you as their enemy

          Indeed! That’s why I hope you don’t vote Republican.

    • Yeah, give them some time to talk to friends or live in the real world for a bit, eventually trends start to emerge. When you and/or around 50% of your female friends have an assault/mugging/burglary/rape/sexual assault story you start to lose that “it couldn’t happen to me” attitude and figure out law enforcement showing up after the fact does jack shit to prevent what just happened.

  5. Think about this:

    There is no public support for banning handguns.

    There is no statistical support for banning semiautomatic rifles.

    woah!

    -D

  6. I like the way those trend lines are moving. I also have a problem with the wording of the question, who exactly is an “authorized person”? I live in a ‘may issue’ state so I am technically authorized, after all I was interviewed by a county supreme court judge. The term is a little vague, but moot anyway with the overwhelming opposition.

    Funny, you would think that if our government was operating as designed the tone of politicians would mirror overall public sentiment.

  7. Good to see my brothers and sisters in the young bracket favoring firearms over control. Considering my group sadly loved Obama… at least in the 08 election… that is a win to me.

  9. The Dems and liberals need to get their heads and asses wired up. They say they want more strict gun control but are generally against “banning” them. This shows they have no concept of the ramification of gun registries etc.

  10. I’m a little surprised that women and nonwhites (n general, not in the survey) are so strongly opposed to guns, considering their disproportionate representation among victims of crime. Otherwise, no surprises here. But of course, the anti-gun crowd has shown no signs they’re going to give up, whether or not they have a chance of turning America’s streets into a place where criminals and predators roam unopposed. If they DID succeed, it would be a powerful lesson in being careful what you wish for, but that doesn’t seem to be the way the trend is running.

    • I’m surprised it’s not higher. I mean, think about it: women tend to be a little more liberal then the alternatives (but more of them seem to recognize the virtues of gun ownership lately); Hispanics and first-generation Asians mostly come from strict gun control nations; many second-generation Hispanics and Asians are liberal or at least Democrats; many blacks are exposed to/victimized by violence and honestly buy into the Democratic lie that taking guns away will make that violence go away.

    • Dirk, I’m beginning to think that you may have an unhealthy obsession….

      As a heterosexual, happily married man I do not find Shannon Watts attractive in the least. And that statement is in no way influenced by my beautiful wife, who enjoys reading TTAG over my shoulder….like now….

  12. Surprised that a higher percentage of “Conservatives” support stricter measures than “Republicans.” Doesn’t really jibe with what we know about a lot of Republicans who would piss all over gun rights if it earned them a few votes.

    P.S. that other 26% can GTH.

    • You’re observation is interesting. I didn’t notice the discrepancy until you pointed it out, but I can explain it. The Republicans who would “piss all over” our gun rights to get votes are the ruling elite of the party. Although they are obviously powerful and influential they are few in number and unlikely to change the results of a legitimate survey, which would tend to reveal the views of rank and file Republicans.

      Also, there are a significant number of people who falsely self describe as “Conservative” because they are embarrassed to admit they’re Liberal or Progressive or because they are so confused they don’t know what the terms mean. There is a considerable amount of gray area in the meaning of these terms and that’s one reason why allowing survey respondents to self label is a bad idea.

      • John Wayne gave an interview once where he put it something like this:

        “I always saw myself as a liberal. I listen to other people’s opinions and use them to form my own. I was shocked when that article came out and called me a radical, right-wing conservative…”

        I have to agree with the sentiment. I form my own opinions based on a summation of fact, which I consider a classic definition of liberal. To me a conservative would be someone who is stuck in the thinking that was and is unwilling to change.

        Seems in actual practice those definitions are flipped…

        • “To me a conservative would be someone who is stuck in the thinking that was and is unwilling to change.”

          A ‘classical” liberal originally referred to a person who was politically oriented towards political liberty. At some point, probably early in the 20th century, the political left appropriated the term to replace their Progressive label, which had at the time become associated with fascism, and in so doing re-defined the term to mean “in favor of personal liberty” to engage in lifestyles not considered mainstream. This was a move calculated to create a coalition of diverse groups that felt ostracized by their conservative contemporaries. Seems to have worked for them and also distanced them from the stigma of Progressivism, fascism and socialism.

          As for conservative, the Liberals have worked long and hard to stigmatize that term to mean “the opposite of progressive or liberal”, in other words an old stick-in-the-mud fuddy-duddy. In fact, politically and socially, the term Conservative applies to people who desire an adherence to the original principles that founded this country as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States of America. Politically their intent is to CONSERVE those concepts and to conserve the idea of smaller republican form of government with specifically enumerated powers and limitations. Since people associated with these political beliefs also tended to be older, wiser, more mature and socially established they of course conflicted with the bohemian life style espoused by the Liberals and so it was not difficult to dismiss them as socially old fashioned rather than politically conservative.

          A major point in any propaganda war is to co-opt the terminology of your opponent and twist it to your own meaning.

    • where did you get your imfo.? democrat main office? I don’t know a single conservative that says that or agrees with it

  13. Its simple. 50 years ago, if you wanted just one gun for home and self defense, it was a shotgun. Now, people who want a single, inexpensive, and reliable gun go for pistols.

    Look at the TTAG polls; the most popular reviews are of pistols, and isn’t it like 75% of 1st time gun buyers get pistols before anything else? I’m sure women contribute to the stats a lot, because how many women would want a full sized long gun for their first gun, or a nice, compact handgun?

  14. Here I go again raining on everyone’s parade, but don’t feel too good about these numbers. It is noteworthy and alarming that 66% of non-whites support more gun rights infringements and fully 40% support a blatantly unconstitutional ban on handgun ownership. The numbers for Democrats are just as bad.

    This is troubling given that most immigrants are non-white and have higher birth rates than whites, who are a shrinking demographic. We are about to get 30-50 million more legal, mostly non-white immigrants when the Republican establishment sells out on amnesty and opens the chain immigration floodgates. When these non-white immigrants get the vote they will vote for Democrats overwhelmingly. That means more support for gun control. A lot more. This is a big problem. I hope someone has a solution because I don’t.

    • Raining or not, you speak the truth — an important element of this site.

      We need to get a broad case shoring up our 2nd Amendment rights through the United States Supreme Court before the liberal apocalypse of which you mention happens.

    • The solution is simple- tell the RINOs you dont support illegal immigration, or amnesty.

      Send money and give vocal support NOW to the candidates who challenge them –
      look at the success of regular citizens in the Colorado recalls, and how Sen Cruz attention in the “filibuster” resonated with ordinary Americans. This reaction shocked the national Dems.

      Thats the reason the MSM propandists and the Soros funded spinners and Nudge Team types at Talking Point Media went full-head-spinning crazy during the “shutdown”. They get it, and they know the limited government, lower taxes, end-the-ACA message of the Tea Party means the end of the 20 year campaign of progressism. Cruz was not some hypnotist- he simply spoke the truth to regular folks and it resonated, and it enraged the elite in the Senate like McCain, and Graham, who see their careers of priviledge and power evaporating- like Baucus in MT, who got out early- retiring and calling it a train-wreck.

      Adding 30 million new welfare dependents or low-income workers will make it that much more difficult for young people coming out of high-school or college to find jobs, or the roughly 20% of un-employed (see shadowstats) to get re-hired.

      People are already walking up to the con put over on us all by Obama, Reid, and Pelosi on Obamacare. Thats why Obama is desperate to get the immigration vote- he knows reality is about to hit even the low-info voters, and smart Dems in the House are already backing away.

      Put the pressure on and more will do the same. See Rubio on the news today – he is already backpedaling. Ryan needs to be convinced of the same. If you are a business person, tell the US Chamber of Commerce they don’t represent you. There is a sea-change potentially underway- but it wont happen if you sit back and just b1Tch about it- waiting for the RNC or someone else to do it is why Romney lost. You can bet the $$$ spent by the DNC and private groups like Soros will be ramped up for this- its the only base of power left. And dont forget not all “non-whites” are the same- talk to the Hispanic population, especially the legal working segment, who HATE the dependency culture of Al Sharpton types, and fear what happened to their relatives in Mexico, from gun-control of the little people.

    • For some strange reason it’s little known in America, but Mexicans (and other “Hispanics”) are mostly white. Just FYI.

    • As for immigration, the sky was always falling somewhere in America because of it. There was the catholic/Irish scare (“Know Nothings” etc), then there was a Chinese scare, and shortly thereafter the Indian scare. For a good half of 20th century – from Immigration Act of 1917 and until Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, US immigration laws have been explicitly racist, effectively restricting altogether (until 1921), or severely quota-limiting, citizenship applications to non-whites.

  15. Wait! When does the Pew poll showing the exact opposite come out? I’m sure the media want to get the jump on their write-ups about it.

  17. Two comments from this quick look before reading the entire survey:
    1. Handguns represent simplest way for self defenss for most new gun owners. So the low support for banning across the board especially women is the best evidence of the failure of gun grabbers to persuade citizens to give up that right. The highest numbers are Democrats whuch says something too that they are out of touch.
    2. I expect Robts glib use of “enemies” can offend some of those from the middle or left who are coming here to be educated and dont get his wit. Just as the over the top personal sexual comments would too. If we want this to be the an open tent to promote The Truth About Guns we can tone that stuff down or take it to a sub forum. My $.02 and YMMV.

  18. Now if only there were a similar graph showing the same numbers (75% approval) of concealed carry — kind of like if 40 out of 50 states were shall issue. Oh, wait …

  19. As I commented in an e-mail to RF the other day, I think there is a recognition by the antis that they are losing the gun ban battle. Attempting to reverse their fortunes, there has been a subtle shift in language which, I submit, is intended to lay the ground work to ban or limit pistols. Let me explain. The original battle was to ban “semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines that have high rates of fire and are rapidly reloaded….” There has been some success in vilifying the EBR as a “weapon of war” that “doesn’t belong in the hands of civilians.” Quite recently I have noticed that there are fewer references to “handguns” but instead to “semiautomatic pistols.” Why the change? Because semiautomatic handguns, just like rifles, have “large capacity magazines with high rates of fire and are rapidly reloaded…” Pistols are being conflated with EBRs, and thus the battle will be joined to limit magazine capacity and to push bans of the “unnecessary” firepower of pistols, guns “that only belong in the hands of the police and military….” The SAFE Act was one attack, California’s microstamping law (which has banned the introduction of any new pistols starting this past spring) will be joined by similar efforts in the northeast. This is the dawning of the age of the EBP.

  20. The Japanese knew not to invade America because most Americans are gun owners. 0bama is naively mistaken if he thinks that Americans will simply roll over for him. He’d had better consult the Japanese.

  21. Obama is not consulting anyone he has a plan for our roll over to his marixs ideas. an he is sticking to it–more that we can say. hell with thosands of truckers all we could muster is 24–that speakes for it self

Comments are closed.