Toggle sidebar

Gun Control Thread -- (Pros and Cons) -- Aftermath of Connecticut Shooting

lazlohollyfeld said:
As I've said here many times before, polls are skewed based on how questions are phrased. A number can be cherry picked out of a poll while leaving out the number for the follow up questions that would contradict the first result. https://www.ijreview.com/2013/04/47397-90-of-americans-support-universal-background-checks-really

"In every Quinnipiac University poll since the Newtown massacre, nationally and in six states, we find overwhelming support, including among gun owners, for universal background checks,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. “American voters agree with the National Rifle Association, however, that these background checks could lead someday to confiscation of legally-owned guns.”“The question is how many of these voters fear confiscation as an abuse of government power and how many are hoping the government uses confiscation to get more guns off the street,” Brown added."

So in the end, what do they truly support? It seems that many within the poll citing 90% think it could be a slippery slope leading to something they do not want; something CA and others have mentioned over and over.
Click to expand...
1. Poll after poll come up with the same results so it cant be blamed on skewed questions. If you believe the questions are skewed, please show some real examples.
2. NOBODY is coming for our guns, NOBODY! That is a ridiculous argument used to scare the scare-able. If they cant even pass a sensible bill like this one, how in the world can any sensible person draw a line from that to confiscation. Too many legislators are already bought and owned.
 
Bamaro said:
1. Poll after poll come up with the same results so it cant be blamed on skewed questions. If you believe the questions are skewed, please show some real examples.
2. NOBODY is coming for our guns, NOBODY! That is a ridiculous argument used to scare the scare-able. If they cant even pass a sensible bill like this one, how in the world can any sensible person draw a line from that to confiscation. Too many legislators are already bought and owned.
Click to expand...

It's not, for me at least, about them "coming to get our guns." It's about making it difficult or impossible for law abiding citizens to obtain them.

As for polls of the people, polls didn't seem to matter when the majority of the people did not want Obamacare to pass and yet it did.
 
Bamaro said:
1. Poll after poll come up with the same results so it cant be blamed on skewed questions. If you believe the questions are skewed, please show some real examples.
2. NOBODY is coming for our guns, NOBODY! That is a ridiculous argument used to scare the scare-able. If they cant even pass a sensible bill like this one, how in the world can any sensible person draw a line from that to confiscation. Too many legislators are already bought and owned.
Click to expand...

I quoted the dude who wrote one of the polls showing your 90%. What is skewed is pulling the figure you want out of a poll while ignoring the obvious caveat derived from the questions that follow, 90% want universal background checks BUT......

Go over to England and find a 100 year old man and ask him if he ever thought it would happen there. Firearms Act of 1920, Firearms Act of 1937, Firearms Act of 1968, Firearms Act of 1988, Firearms Act of 1997, Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2006. Pass a law and wait for everyone to get used to the new norm, then push for an expansion, then repeat with the next generation. That is how the 100 year old man wakes up one day, looks around and asks "what happened?"

You can learn from history.

And I left out the Pistol Act of 1903, I didn't think there was validity in asking you to find someone that old, so I settled for 100 and started with the 1920 Act.
 
Last edited:
With the events of today I wanted to share a friend's thoughts:
Heck breaks out in Boston
Liberal Solution: GO IN YOUR HOUSE AND LOCK THE DOOR!
Conservative solution: GO IN YOUR HOUSE, LOCK AND LOAD!
 
lazlohollyfeld said:
As I've said here many times before, polls are skewed based on how questions are phrased. A number can be cherry picked out of a poll while leaving out the number for the follow up questions that would contradict the first result. https://www.ijreview.com/2013/04/47397-90-of-americans-support-universal-background-checks-really

"In every Quinnipiac University poll since the Newtown massacre, nationally and in six states, we find overwhelming support, including among gun owners, for universal background checks,” said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. “American voters agree with the National Rifle Association, however, that these background checks could lead someday to confiscation of legally-owned guns.”“The question is how many of these voters fear confiscation as an abuse of government power and how many are hoping the government uses confiscation to get more guns off the street,” Brown added."

So in the end, what do they truly support? It seems that many within the poll citing 90% think it could be a slippery slope leading to something they do not want; something CA and others have mentioned over and over.
Click to expand...

Okay...here is the exact question:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/.../National-Politics/Polling/question_10030.xml

Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows?
Click to expand...

That sounds pretty straightforward to me.

And as for this...
“American voters agree with the National Rifle Association, however, that these background checks could lead someday to confiscation of legally-owned guns.”“The question is how many of these voters fear confiscation as an abuse of government power and how many are hoping the government uses confiscation to get more guns off the street,” Brown added."
Click to expand...

That is an just paranoia setting in. There was nothing in the background check law that allowed the government to take your legal guns away. Even if the full Brady Bill passed, there was nothing in there that allowed the government to take your legally purchased guns away. During the old Brady Bill (that was allowed to expire under Bush 43), it only limited the sale of newly manufactured guns. Guns that were already manufactured were not affected. I believe that the new Brady Bill would have been the same way.
 
CrimsonChuck said:
Okay...here is the exact question:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/.../National-Politics/Polling/question_10030.xml

That sounds pretty straightforward to me.

And as for this...


That is an just paranoia setting in. There was nothing in the background check law that allowed the government to take your legal guns away. Even if the full Brady Bill passed, there was nothing in there that allowed the government to take your legally purchased guns away. During the old Brady Bill (that was allowed to expire under Bush 43), it only limited the sale of newly manufactured guns. Guns that were already manufactured were not affected. I believe that the new Brady Bill would have been the same way.
Click to expand...

See my reply to Bamaro about how it happened one step at a time in the UK. I wonder how many paranoid Brits wound up being right?

Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows..... is a straightforward question? That implies, to the low information types, that gun shows are gun hugger heavens where guns are freely bought and sold with no background checks whatsoever and that simply is not the case. The gun dealers at gun shows must perform checks through NICS. Private sales between gun show attendees are different. Your "straightforward" poll question is anything but straightforward as it implies there are no background checks at gun shows, period. Do you not see the distinction and the bias in the way that question is phrased, particularly to someone who does not own a gun and/or has never been to a gun show?
 
Bamaro said:
I am and apparently so are 90% of those polled.
Click to expand...

I'm not because I know it's a lost cause. Put in all the guns laws and restrictions you like. They will fail to accomplish what you're trying to accomplish. What it will accomplish is a false sense of security and be harder for the innocent to obtain weapons to protect themselves. That's what will happen. Again, I'm not sure what better example could have happen to prove that when idiots decide to go loco and kill folks they will than this past Monday. AND you've got a guy running through the neighborhoods going house to house. Do you think now's a great time for someone to have a gun with plenty of ammo? I would think so! But put in too many gun restrictions and when things like this happen you've left a lot of people potentially short of ammo or without a gun at all.

But I'm sure the gun control folks will spin it and turn a blind eye and continue down the path of making it harder for innocent citizens to get guns. Maybe you trust the government. That's great. But I don't. They have proven to be able to screw up a sure thing and are too corrupt to be given the responsibility of making gun laws that are fair to me.
 
Last edited:
Tide1986 said:
Remind me...what form of government do we have? Direct democracy? And remind me further...what's the role of the Senate versus the House of Representatives?

And by the way, you may have a poll that shows 90%, but there is at least one other poll that shows the opposite of what you are implying.

AP Poll Shows Ebbing Gun Control Support
Click to expand...


Pollsters can get the numbers they want by the way they word the question.
 
Gr8hope said:
With the events of today I wanted to share a friend's thoughts:
Heck breaks out in Boston
Liberal Solution: GO IN YOUR HOUSE AND LOCK THE DOOR!
Conservative solution: GO IN YOUR HOUSE, LOCK AND LOAD!
Click to expand...

And as funny as this is this is exactly the mindset of a lot of anti-gun folks. Their "solution" is to lock your doors. WOOOOO!!!! THAT'll KEEP THAT BIG BAD DUDE WITH A FREAKIN' AR-15 FROM COMING THROUGH THAT DOOR!!! THAT WILL SHOW HIM!!! I say no thank you. I'll lock my doors, pull out my "toys" and if the the perp feels froggy enough to bust down my door I'll at least be able to fire back.
 
Yes Buzz, that is the only reason I have a gun. I also CC but only as security. I do not hunt and would never pull it out unless I intended to use it.
I have no problem with anyone who feels gun ownership is not for them and cannot understand their need to take my Constitutional right for self defense away. They know making guns illegal for law abiding citizens will not stop criminals. It is about power and control.
 
CrimsonChuck said:
Exactly. I was referring to expanded background checks only.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-on-guns-why-isnt-this-a-political-slam-dunk/

Even 74% of NRA members support universal background checks. How did this bill get derailed then? It is all about the money.

I do support a stronger gun control bill, but I realize that would be unrealistic in today's political climate.
Click to expand...

Why don't you give us the state-by-state breakdown, which is essentially all that matters in our form of government anyway. For example, do 90%, 74% or even 50% of Alabamians support expanded background checks? If not, you might begin to understand the Senate vote.
 
Last edited:
lazlohollyfeld said:
See my reply to Bamaro about how it happened one step at a time in the UK. I wonder how many paranoid Brits wound up being right?

Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows..... is a straightforward question? That implies, to the low information types, that gun shows are gun hugger heavens where guns are freely bought and sold with no background checks whatsoever and that simply is not the case. The gun dealers at gun shows must perform checks through NICS. Private sales between gun show attendees are different. Your "straightforward" poll question is anything but straightforward as it implies there are no background checks at gun shows, period. Do you not see the distinction and the bias in the way that question is phrased, particularly to someone who does not own a gun and/or has never been to a gun show?
Click to expand...

I don't see how that implies that it is trying to be a manipulative question. It is asking about what it should be. Not what it is now.

And we aren't England. We are completely different country. It is like saying that people get thrown in jail for using Youtube in Iran, and so we should be nervous that using Youtube will be illegal in America very soon.
 
CrimsonChuck said:
Okay...here is the exact question:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/.../National-Politics/Polling/question_10030.xml



That sounds pretty straightforward to me.

And as for this...


That is an just paranoia setting in. There was nothing in the background check law that allowed the government to take your legal guns away. Even if the full Brady Bill passed, there was nothing in there that allowed the government to take your legally purchased guns away. During the old Brady Bill (that was allowed to expire under Bush 43), it only limited the sale of newly manufactured guns. Guns that were already manufactured were not affected. I believe that the new Brady Bill would have been the same way.
Click to expand...

Was the purpose of the bill and/or the recently defeated amendment to simply require background checks at gun shows, or was the requirement intended to extend beyond gun shows?
 
Gr8hope said:
With the events of today I wanted to share a friend's thoughts:
Heck breaks out in Boston
Liberal Solution: GO IN YOUR HOUSE AND LOCK THE DOOR!
Conservative solution: GO IN YOUR HOUSE, LOCK AND LOAD!
Click to expand...
Thats as false as most of the gun huggers arguments. Gun owning knows no political orientation although I would guess a higher percentage of conservatives own. I own a few guns myself. I have a very conservative friend who owns none. You never know.
 
Tide1986 said:
Why don't you give us the state-by-state breakdown, which is essentially all that matters in our form of government anyway. For example, do 90%, 74% or even 50% of Alabamians support expanded background checks? If not, you might begin to understand the Senate vote.
Click to expand...

I tried to find that information and I could not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back