HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Gallup: Public Supports S...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:39 AM

Gallup: Public Supports Stricter Gun Laws, But Opposes Bans

Source: TPM



TOM KLUDT 9:36 AM EST, THURSDAY DECEMBER 27, 2012

Nearly 60 percent of Americans support stricter gun laws but majorities are opposed to bans on specific types of firearms, according to a poll from Gallup released on Thursday.

Fifty-eight percent said that laws "covering the sale of firearms" should be made more strict, while 34 percent said that no changes should be made and a mere 6 percent said that laws should be made less strict.

But while there's robust support for tighter gun control, the poll found that Americans are opposed to bans on certain weapons. Fifty-one percent said they are opposed to a ban on semi-automatic weapons and 74 percent indicated that they oppose a ban on handguns. The poll showed enormous support for a ban on high-capacity magazines: 92 percent said they favor a prohibition on such clips, which have the capacity to contain more than 10 rounds.

-30-

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/gallup-public-supports-stricter-gun-laws-but-opposes

38 replies, 3766 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 38 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gallup: Public Supports Stricter Gun Laws, But Opposes Bans (Original post)
DonViejo Dec 2012 OP
slackmaster Dec 2012 #1
Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #2
FailureToCommunicate Dec 2012 #6
Renew Deal Dec 2012 #9
slackmaster Dec 2012 #13
Renew Deal Dec 2012 #14
slackmaster Dec 2012 #17
John2 Dec 2012 #18
Remmah2 Dec 2012 #25
bongbong Dec 2012 #30
slackmaster Dec 2012 #32
bongbong Dec 2012 #33
slackmaster Dec 2012 #34
bongbong Dec 2012 #36
bowens43 Dec 2012 #26
slackmaster Dec 2012 #29
FrodosPet Dec 2012 #38
ileus Dec 2012 #35
frazzled Dec 2012 #3
still_one Dec 2012 #4
Renew Deal Dec 2012 #8
John2 Dec 2012 #21
askeptic Dec 2012 #5
cosmicone Dec 2012 #10
askeptic Dec 2012 #16
Renew Deal Dec 2012 #7
cosmicone Dec 2012 #11
Renew Deal Dec 2012 #12
cosmicone Dec 2012 #19
NickB79 Dec 2012 #27
samsingh Dec 2012 #15
EnviroBat Dec 2012 #20
plethoro Dec 2012 #22
loyalkydem Dec 2012 #23
Pauldg47 Dec 2012 #24
Comrade_McKenzie Dec 2012 #28
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #31
ybbor Dec 2012 #37

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:49 AM

1. Control criminals and violent mentally incomptent people, and guns won't be an issue at all

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:51 AM

2. Wayne? Seriously?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:13 AM

6. Did you forget the **sarcasm** smilie?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:21 AM

9. Was Nancy Lanza considered either?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:30 AM

13. No, she's a victim.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:33 AM

14. And the owner of the weapons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:42 AM

17. Yes, until they were stolen

 

So she's a victim of multiple crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:21 AM

18. So you actually

 

have information that they were stolen and her son didn't have free access to them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:17 PM

25. To think some of these people would actually sit on a real jury.

 

Be afraid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:38 PM

30. Victim?

 

Too bad she didn't have a gun to defend herself.

Or are you saying she's a victim because she was a Delicate Flower?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:56 PM

32. A divorced woman who was trying to cope with a difficult child on her own, who was murdered.

 

Your hatred is really over the top, bongbong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 04:01 PM

33. She was suicidal

 

> A divorced woman who was trying to cope with a difficult child on her own, who was murdered.

Having multiple guns in the house including the Delicate Flower-lusted-after Bushmaster isn't real smart if that's the case. One of the lessons from her example is that gun-lust makes you stupid. You can't save everybody determined to perform suicidal acts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 04:05 PM

34. That's a nice rationalization

 

But I'm pretty sure you aren't qualified to make such a diagnosis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #34)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 04:47 PM

36. Not a rationalization

 

It's simple common sense.

> But I'm pretty sure you aren't qualified to make such a diagnosis.

And I never claimed to be a clinician. But you keep going with your Strawmen. Entertaining, and ubiquitous, amongst Delicate Flowers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:33 PM

26. Bullshit

Every gun owners is a potential murder

How many more dead kids will it take for the gun fetishist to admire the guns are the problem. We are a country filled with mindless death worshipers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:05 PM

29. An attitude like that will never get you anywhere

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bowens43 (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:15 PM

38. And people want us to become MORE democratic?

Like you said, "We are a country filled with mindless death worshipers". And these people vote, and refuse to listen to common sense.

What are the magic words to smarten people up to the point where they can be trusted to vote properly? I'm running on E with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 04:23 PM

35. Non living devices never are an issue.

It will always be the operators at fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:00 AM

3. Further proof that the American public

is very confused, in general.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:08 AM

4. Gallop has very little credibility in my book, especially after the last election. As dumb as the

public is, I cannot believe that they see a reason for assault rifles

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:20 AM

8. Why do you think they are "confused?"

To me this poll seems in line with recent news. The heavy gun sales since Newtown show that Americans want to be armed to the teeth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:35 AM

21. Corporations

 

can get a Poll to say anything. It also depends on the population you Poll. All they have to do is find a lot of gun enthusists or owners, and then Poll them. I see no reason to own a semi-automatic unless you are planning to kill someone in a War. And to tell you the truth, I don't even trust the Justice System in this country either. Why should African american males trust the Justice System or the rightwing NRA anyway?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:12 AM

5. Bill of Rights not a popularity contest - ask if they want

a Constitutional Convention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to askeptic (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:24 AM

10. Children dying at the hands of a madman

who has easy access to guns is DEFINITELY not a popularity contest.

The government has not tried to take freedoms away (a la Patriot Act) with as much frequency as some gun nut mowing people down with automatic fire.

We are sacrificing reality to satisfy a hypothetical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:35 AM

16. Hyperbole is not reality

The people who want to take away women's right to choose make a lot of the same arguments -- But they are going to have to change the Constitution if they want to outlaw abortion. You may even be able to do all kinds of back-door things, but I don't think you'll be successful going after the gun owners unless you can get the Constitution changed or the 2nd re-defined at some future time by a different Supreme Court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:19 AM

7. Recent gun sales show the same thing

And it seems like a reasonable thing to do. Tighten up sales requirements and larger capacity magazines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:25 AM

11. I say use technology to

embed a serial number in EACH BULLET so it can be traced to its purchaser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:29 AM

12. That sounds like a very expensive idea

Who would keep the list of bullet serial numbers? Who would keep the list of registrants? That stuff takes effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Renew Deal (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:24 AM

19. Then even better ...

each bullet will cost twice as much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cosmicone (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:46 PM

27. Bullets fragment

Especially the small, high-velocity rounds fired rifles like the AR-15.

How are you going to find the serial number when the bullet is in hundreds of pieces inside the victim's body?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:34 AM

15. that makes sense

a ban on all guns would never work and be unfair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:32 AM

20. Apparently people are arming themselves at an ALARMING rate.

Last Saturday, I went shopping for a rifle. A particular rifle made by Ruger called a Mini-14. There were none to be had, ANYWHERE. From the east coast to the west, in every on-line gun store from here to Canada, there are none available. Even the rumor that an "assault weapons" ban may be in the works has caused a run on these weapons like we've never seen before. One dealer told me that his supplier had done 12 millions dollars in orders, (yes that's 12 MILLION) in one day. Jesus fucking Christ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EnviroBat (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:52 AM

22. I got two guns last week in a private sale but what I paid

 

for them almost made me poop in my pants when the quote was given to me via one of those 15 second phone messages they can't trace. I have heard from this dude in SN who has made side money selling guns that he never has one available longer than 15 or 20 minutes and is selling simple pistols for five grand a piece. I wonder if China knows about this market yet? As we move toward macau, I hope we will still be able to occasionally venture outside.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 12:54 PM

23. A pistol should not cost that much money

Why would you buy from a guy like that? Was he licensed to sell his guns? Did he do a background check on you? Sounds shady

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:14 PM

24. This poll is absolute bullshit....

...I believe that a correct poll would ban weapons that are designed to kill people. Gallop is becoming a radical paid-off pollster folks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 02:04 PM

28. I don't really care what the public opposes. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 03:39 PM

31. Maybe we could have a law like property ownership or like car ownership.

Title to weapons would have to be registered (guns) or recorded (real property -- your house, building or vacant lot). The person having title to a weapon would be required by law to insure it for an amount high enough to cover the average amount of damages in a gun incident and somewhat more and would be required to compensate anyone or for anything damaged by the weapon regardless of who was using it.

All gun sales would have be reported as property transfers to the registration or recorder's office. And the person whose name appears on the registry or record as the owner of the gun could be sued for damages caused by the gun.

Liability should not end at the death of the person in whose name the gun or weapon is registered. In the case of the shooter in Connecticut, the estate of the mother killed by the gun would be liable for damages to all the parents who lost children. And the mother would have had insurance to help cover the damages.

There would, of course, be fees for recording or registering a transfer of title in order to pay the cost of maintaining the records.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 07:42 PM

37. 538 says the Gallup poll is irrelevant. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread