Do Americans want tougher gun control laws or not? The real answer might surprise you.
The latest Pew Research poll shows most Americans value gun rights over gun restrictions by a narrow margin.
49 percent say it's more important to protect the right to own a gun. But that hasn't always been the case.
Support for stricter gun laws actually spiked right after the Columbine High School shootings in 1999. Pollsters call it the "Columbine bump."
But over the long haul, that support for stricter gun laws looks like it's dropped. Or has it?
But just like the Affordable Care Act (ACT), it really depends on the question you ask.
When pollsters ask about specific gun restrictions, this is what they get instead:
- 86% of Americans want background checks.
- 63% want a ban on high-capacity clips and magazines.
- 69% want to limit the number of guns you can buy at a time.
- 66% want a national gun registry.
- 88% percent think people on the terror watch list should not be able to buy a gun.
So it turns out that most Americans support common-sense restrictions on guns. However, it's unlikely any of those common-sense measures will be passed anytime soon.
Leave a Comment:
I like the way Chris Rock put it, have bullets cost 10k apiece.
Hi Peace & Love-6429601,
I hear they have amnesty programs if you turn yourself in early.
1 deleted, bpepik comment spamming and calling Mr. Schultz 'fat head'. Don't do that. Mind the User Agreement. You're suspended for a week.
Thanks Tyler, but I'm afraid you will be back.
Ditto.
I have noticed some of the re-regs have improved their behavior.
Brilliant $10,000 bullets - Then only the government will be able to afford them... and you will become a subject instead of a citizen.
California has law that allows law enforcement to track everyone who purchases ammunition in 2009 because too many felons are buying ammunition without getting caught. All this does is send felons back to jail if they try to buy ammo.
Ammunition Accountability laws require manufacturers to stamp each bullet/cartridge with a serial number, and it requires retailers to report the purchaser & serial number to the state. The estimated cost to do this is $0.05 per round. One manufacturers estimate is $0.14 per round. The cost of the government database maintenance is estimated at $0.005 per round. This works out to something like 1% to 3% price increase.
H.R. 308: Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act (Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-NY4) (stalled in committee) (click here)
The only people that would oppose these laws are the ones that are pro-murder.
The polls tell us what we already know, that half the people in this country don't have enough sense to get out of the rain. Guns have only one purpose and that is to kill, be it a animal or a human. Granted that we do not have the killing problem as Mexico or Brazil, but way we are going we could get there. I know we will not get serious gun laws for two reasons, 1 not enough people will be outraged enough get the government do something and a President and Congress with no back bone to do the right thing.
The second amendment was written at a time when you had to pour gunpowder into the gun barrel, ram a paper wad down the barrel, then ram a lead ball down the barrel, install a primer cap, aim, and then fire.
Holmes would have had a dozen people beat his a$$ before he got off a second shot if he had the technology protected by the constitution.
Ah there were no primer caps in those days.
You had to pour some powder in the powder try, then have a piece of flint rock in the hammer, and hopefully it will fire.
And there is a slight delay in the thing firing, it's pull the trigger, click scrap, some fizzle, then bang.
So the constitution guarantees your constitutional right to bear flintlock weapons that can fire a single round.
Joshua Shaw - 1814.
I stand corrected.
Thank you for that.
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms".
Flinlock or a AR-15, or shotgun, and so on.
The founding fathers didn't fondle an AR-15 before signing the second amendment.
Shotgun yes.
Flintlock pistol yes.
AR-15 no.
Strictly speaking.
I hope I read about you in the newspapers after you purchase a howitzer.
Hi, CH. Awwwww, you have been busy with our little re-reg!
Yup.
Funny.
Trolls become the best argument against their own viewpoint when you point out facts.
Urban Dictionary
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll
Re-Reg Troll : ( Not a Liberal Definition )
1a. Noun
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.
1b. Noun
A person who, on a message forum of some type, attacks and flames other members of the forum for any of a number of reasons such as rank, previous disagreements, sex, status, ect.
A troll usually flames threads without staying on topic, unlike a "Flamer" who flames a thread because he/she disagrees with the content of the thread.
1c. Noun
A member of an internet forum who continually harangues and harasses others. Someone with nothing worthwhile to add to a certain conversation, but rather continually threadjacks or changes the subject, as well as thinks every member of the forum is talking about them and only them. Trolls often go by multiple names to circumvent getting banned.
let's take guns and ammo away from the law-abiding citizens. like chicago did. the murder capital of the nation.
What Chicago gun ban?
Oooohhhh ... you're talking about the people that were killed after the ban was ended by the supreme court.
Supreme court trumps city law (link repeated from above).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/28/chicago-gun-ban-axed-afte_n_627773.html
The "Chicago gun ban" of 2012 is a delusional urban legend.
Americans want jobs.
Americans want the government to get out of the way.
40 million want off food stamps.
12 million want jobs.
Hand full of liberals want gun laws.
@ho-lee-wildabeast,
One does not mean you can't do the other, unless someone is obstructing congress.
Ammunition tracking and high-capacity magazine ban does not confiscate any weapons. It just lets police find out who bought the bullet that killed someone and it limits the carnage to half a dozen.
You always vote in favor of the politicians running on the pro-murder platform?
You mean like the 31 bills seating in harry reid's trash can?
Over 1100 days no federal budget.
Spending has gone through the roof.
You mean the 31 bills that Republicans forgot to submit to Congressional Budget Office?
It is actually illegal to bring those to a vote in the Senate without CBO analysis.
Harry Reid can't allow those on the floor without knowing how much each of those bills will increase the budget and unemployment.
Brains have gone out the window.
nice try holy one.........
1st and foremost, legislation does not go to the CBO before the senate can debate it.
That is the wildest thing I have read all day.
The CBO has no say in the passage of laws, or the no passage, that is what the house & senate do.
But reid and the democrats will not debate anything from the house.
Section 202(e) of the Budget Act requires submission by CBO to the House and Senate Committees on the Budget periodic reports about fiscal policy and to provide baseline projections of the federal budget. This is currently done by preparation of an annual Economic and Budget Outlook plus a mid-year update. The agency also each year issues An Analysis of the President's Budgetary Proposals for the upcoming fiscal year per a standing request of the Senate Committee on Appropriations. These three series are designated essential titles distributed to Federal Depository Libraries and are available for purchase from the Government Printing Office. CBO also prepares reports and issues briefs and provides testimony often in response to requests of the various Congressional Committees. It also issues letters responding to queries made to it by members of Congres
Debate in committee is exactly where the 31 "jobs bills" are stuck because CBO analysis is not available.
Do you plan to send the doctor or the woman to jail after the doctor saves someone's life?
Ectopic pregnancy, preclampsia, hemorrhage, infection, blood type incompatibility, and a very long list of other conditions require termination of pregnancy before full term OR require the woman to have birth control medication in order to prevent life threatening complications.
The abortion topic is so complicated that medical literature cannot cover all scenarios, so it is widely recognized that safe abortion laws cannot be written.
Besides.
What kind of increase for welfare are you going to authorize for the unwanted children that physicians are forced to deliver that have birth defects that would otherwise have resulted in abortion that you want to ban?
Exactly my point.
So why have none of the "republican jobs bills" been sent to CBO for analysis?
It would be totally irrational to expect Harry Reid to have people voting on things when nobody has any idea in the world what the economic and unemployment impact would be.
Each of the "house jobs bills" indicates it will eliminate organizations inside EPA, DOL, and DOE, so the only obvious impact is to increase unemployment.
I would certainly want a "jobs bill" that increases unemployment to go through CBO before I voted on it.
I wouild stand and fight for the right to own hunting r8iflrs and shotguns and also sidearms for home protection but I would also fight to rid the country of assault type weapons with extended ammo clips. These weapons are for killing only. Th at's why the military uses them. If a person wants to fire them there are Army recruiting stations in every town in America. They would love to give you the chance
Ditto. Agree.
If I want to shoot a machine gun I can go to a pistol range. Nobody is talking about making that illegal.
Not yet, but this is an incrimental attack. The ultimate goal is to ban all guns.
Romney banned assault weapons (click here).
[begin sarcasm]
Better vote for Obama if you want to keep your guns!!!
[end sarcasm]
Debate in committee is exactly where the 31 "jobs bills" are stuck because CBO analysis is not available.
Please read the rule as to the function of the CBO.
The CBO is not involved in the debating of legislation.
They report on the the economy.
Legislation never heads to the CBO before it is debated what so ever.
I didn't say most abortions were for that purpose.
When you try to bans abortions without making it against the law to save a woman's life, then you end up with an abortion bill about 100,000 pages long.
You have to take the mothers rights into account, and that depends upon how far along the pregnancy is.
If you are talking 3rd trimester ban, then I don't know any doctors that would disagree except when the fetus has a profound birth defect.
The fetus is rarely born alive during a 1st or 2nd trimester pregnancy, so the fetus cannot be considered "living" in the legal sense. That kind of ban is based strictly on religious justification, which is unconstitutional.
Ultimately, this is a decision that cannot be confiscated from the woman OR the doctor.
I have read the rule. And I know what CBO does.
The budget-bill that must be passed by Mid August to avoid government shutdown will require this analysis.
Republicans won't send the "jobs bills" to CBO because they increase unemployment.
The senate is doing what the Republicans asked them to do - manage the budget responsibly - which means Republicans need to send those "jobs bills" to CBO.
How can that be a problem?
So your trying to disagree with me by claiming that Mitt Romney is a democrat?
P&L, you didn't click on the link and read it, did you? I know what you're saying and you're right but the article quoted Romney saying back in 2004
Now, according to Romney's website it says
If he's voted in, which Mitt are you going to believe? But then again, it doesn't mention anything about restrictions or regulations. According to the Federal Firearms Laws
So we agree. Romney is Republican In Name Only.
Hi Caregiver-6019954,
Yup.
Gun Control is out of "control" ! Any American that has half a brain should be in favor of regulations to register any and all firearms, in each and all states! The US is the manufacturers of the most firearms each year in the entire world (not being # 1 is a good thing). We export firearms to many foreign countries have for years and deranged individuals still purchase firearms and munitions . yes we must have a right to "bear arms " whatever that means but there is a need and right to control, purchase, use ,carry, and even kill or to disarm individuals of all firearms in the United States if necessary.
NRA, where is the BEEF!
No wonder Obozo got elected...
It amazes me how in this country we have one side of the political spectrum that says it isn't time to discuss gun violence in america. yes tougher gun laws wont stop criminals from committing crimes, but the proliferation of guns in this country is staggering, there are over 100,000,000 guns in a nation of just over 300,000,000 people. do i think law abiding citizens should have the right to own a gun, yes but do i think there should be some form of tracking those guns hell yes. i mean come on if you own a car, you have to have it registered, if you own a business, you have to have it registered, hell if you are a citizen of this nation you your self are registered(social security number) and the big bad boogeyman(GOVT) isn't coming into your life to strip you of those things. so why all the fuss from the right you ask, its simple its about money..the quickest way to sell a product is to make the people believe that someone somewhere is coming to take it away from them. in some states you have to show more proof of who you are to fly on a plane, apply for a job, get a loan, get a drivers license, hell even to vote then you do to have to purchase a firearm and that to me in a nation as great as this doesn't even begin to makes sense. when will the public see that this is a growing problem because guess what when criminals get guns and commit crimes, i'm sure they didn't get them with a background check, i'm sure the guy that's holds you up in the parking lot didn't go through a 5 day waiting period, and you know why because no one is tracking those guns, no one cares enough to check the person out who's buying the gun, no one ask did he have a history of violence or mental illness, no one asks why one man with no income can walk into a gun store and buy $20,000 worth of AK-47's and what is his intended purpose for such a large amount of firepower. Hiram Maxim (February 5, 1840-November 24, 1916) the inventor of the worlds first machine gun was once told 'Hang your chemistry and electricity! If you want to make a pile of money, invent something that will enable these Europeans to cut each others' throats with greater facility' with a thing so deadly you would think we would have a little more care a little more diligence. we don't let Americans buy and keep nuclear weapons and those are arms, nuclear arms, because we know that weapons of that magnitude need to be controlled for the good of mankind.. well maybe a nation full of killing machines in the hands of every citizen will make it safer...or will it just make everybody capable of becoming a killer- BLUE4 GULF...out
It amazes me how in this country we have one side of the political spectrum that says it isn't time to discuss gun violence in america. yes tougher gun laws wont stop criminals from committing crimes, but the proliferation of guns in this country is staggering, there are over 100,000,000 guns in a nation of just over 300,000,000 people. do i think law abiding citizens should have the right to own a gun, yes but do i think there should be some form of tracking those guns hell yes. i mean come on if you own a car, you have to have it registered, if you own a business, you have to have it registered, hell if you are a citizen of this nation you your self are registered(social security number) and the big bad boogeyman(GOVT) isn't coming into your life to strip you of those things. so why all the fuss from the right you ask, its simple its about money..the quickest way to sell a product is to make the people believe that someone somewhere is coming to take it away from them. in some states you have to show more proof of who you are to fly on a plane, apply for a job, get a loan, get a drivers license, hell even to vote then you do to have to purchase a firearm and that to me in a nation as great as this doesn't even begin to makes sense. when will the public see that this is a growing problem because guess what when criminals get guns and commit crimes, i'm sure they didn't get them with a background check, i'm sure the guy that's holds you up in the parking lot didn't go through a 5 day waiting period, and you know why because no one is tracking those guns, no one cares enough to check the person out who's buying the gun, no one ask did he have a history of violence or mental illness, no one asks why one man with no income can walk into a gun store and buy $20,000 worth of AK-47's and what is his intended purpose for such a large amount of firepower. Hiram Maxim (February 5, 1840-November 24, 1916) the inventor of the worlds first machine gun was once told 'Hang your chemistry and electricity! If you want to make a pile of money, invent something that will enable these Europeans to cut each others' throats with greater facility' with a thing so deadly you would think we would have a little more care a little more diligence. we don't let Americans buy and keep nuclear weapons and those are arms, nuclear arms, because we know that weapons of that magnitude need to be controlled for the good of mankind.. well maybe a nation full of killing machines in the hands of every citizen will make it safer...or will it just make everybody capable of becoming a killer- BLUE4 GULF...out
The right is so against registering their guns because they are convinced the day is going to come when they are going to have to fight the government and they don't want Uncle Sam knowing how many guns they have and what kind. They actually think it's going to be Democrats that take away their guns, but I would bet my life it will be the Republicans that do it. After they've gotten all their Fox zombies to vote them into office. Then as Bushie would say, "Mission Accomplished". But by that time it will be to late and you'll feel just as stupid as you are.
And as usual you are ignoring the fact that if a criminal wants a gun he'll get it. Gun control only hurts the law abiding citizens
What hypocrisy from the far-right conservative extremists. Like clockwork, they routinely come out after every one of these horrific mass shooting events (one a year these days...) and lecture the media and the rest of the country on how people should not "jump to conclusions" and that guns aren't the problem and that these killings are all just the work of demented lunatics who would have found any way to deliver mayhem and death, etc. And in the next breath, these monsters instantly finger the "liberal values" of America as the reason for the "depravity" of the murderers and this would never happen if the USA was a Christian fundamentalist dictatorship, etc. Guns kill people, and assault weapons with 6,000 rounds of ammo bought in bulk off the web kill even more people...
Isn't it lucky that the left has this opportunity to further it's agenda....
Actually you are wrong about that. There are many Progressives who own personal hand guns for personal protection and their private collections who also hunt with rifles. So that ' lefty label ' dog just wont hunt.
It is fully automatic rifles that have NO PLACE in American Society. There is not ONE good reason for our civilian population to have these guns. NOT ONE.
Actually there is one... protection from a tyrannical goverment. But the weapons that were used in CO weren't "automatic" they were semi. That's a seperate issue, you have to have an NFA form to possess "automatic" weapons. Aside from that many progressives may own handguns but there have been calls from the left to ban all guns, stating Gun Control is just the begining.
I repeat. There is not ONE good reason for civilians to own semi automatic or automatic hand guns or rifles. The only reason there would be to engage in the race war you speak of is because Radical Right-Wingers have engaged in telling so many incendiary lies about our government specifically to get the KKK population of America to rise up and start a race war.
So my Springfield XDm 3.8 45acp compact with 9 round magazine would be outlawed under your view of "gun control" since it's a semi-auto pistol. I own and carry it legally for self defense but that's not a good enough reason.
What race war? No one but you has played the race card.
Yes, by all means, lets not talk about the truth. You are the only ones who are talking about needing automatic weapons to go to war with your own country. And trust me, your reason for war it isn't about owning or not owning guns.Nor is it about our government. It is about race, plain and simple.
You really need to clarify your meanings. There is a world of difference between automatic and semi-automatic weapons. But this actually proves my point. The left doesn't seem to see that difference.
As to a war..... I personally am not looking for one. But one very major reason for the 2nd Amendment is to allow the people to protect themselves from a tyrannical goverment. As for race I could care less what color anyone is.. but I'm going to be accused of being a racist because my personal views are predominately conservative. You know that tactic is getting old.... everything isn't about race and playing the race card will not obfuscate every issue.....
Pretend all you want to that the stockpiling of SEMI AUTOMATIC AND AUTOMATIC weapons is not about a race war.
Again no one but you has said anything about a race war.
See you later dust bunny.
????
You would need to include "dust" or "bunny" in your nickname to make that claim true, and this comment wouldn't be an insult if you did that.
Like many workplaces, the building where I use to work in this concealed carry state
has a sign on the entrance informing folks that no weapons are allowed inside.
Some gun advocates think that's part of the problem. Geeee You Think.
After all, folks like the orange-haired suspect in Aurora can read, too.
Colorado actually does have a concealed carry law that allows residents to
exercise their Second Amendment right in a limited manner.
It's so limited the entire town of Aurora - along with other Colorado towns
and cities with "gun-free zones" - doesn't permit anyone to carry a concealed
weapon legally even though it's the law in other parts of the state
That means the answer to one of the most asked questions after the Aurora
shootings became a moot point: "Why didn't someone with a concealed weapon just
take the guy out?
The answer: They would have been breaking the law..
Some will now seek even more gun laws than ever, while others will insist
less is more. But basically, concealed carry gun laws are no guarantee against
crime or violence.
With folks like the orange-haired suspect out there, some laws are destined
to be broken.
“Headquartered in Plano, TX, Cinemark Holdings, Inc. is a leader in the motion picture exhibition industry with 459 theatres and 5,181 screens in the U.S. and Latin America as of March 31, 2012,” their website reports. Cinemark owns the Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, scene of last night’s mass shooting. Cinemark doesn’t allow anyone other than law enforcement officers to carry legal firearms in their theaters. The ban hadn’t escape the attention of some of Cinemark’s law-abiding, gun-toting customers—even before last night’s homicidal frenzy. Make the jump for the story of a Cinemark patron ejected from the cinema for Open Carrying [via defensivecarry.com] . . .
If you don't beleve me, CALL THEM !!! all their looking after is there bottom line.
they should also be held accountable....
Where is my 2nd amendment right to own an RPG? We have gun control, it just doesn't go far enough. Ban assault rifles, extended clips. I know 15 bodies in CO, who would love a little gun control about a week ago.
again when and where does it stop. More gun control isn't the answer.
You all can just give it up.. Guns will never be banned in the U.S. Besides stop leaving in fear over guns. I will never get rid of my guns sorry!! Even if i had to.
It is not even funny the way the NRA has been able to buy policy and opinions on the Hill. Not only do background checks need to be strengthened but also making sure that gun shops or markets on-line can't sell clips with over 10 rounds. We already have certain restrictions that are not being adhered to....