E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe public heavily favors universal background checks for gun buyers, and a majority of Americans approve of a federal database to track gun sales as well as a ban on "assault style weapons," a new poll from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press shows.
In the survey, 85 percent of respondents said they favor background checks for private and gun show sales, while only 12 percent say they oppose such checks.
Sixty-seven percent of adults surveyed approve of a federal database to track gun sales, the poll indicated. A majority -- 55 percent -- back a ban on assault weapons, with 40 percent saying they don't approve of the ban, a measure for which President Barack Obama again voiced support during a press conference today. (The partisan breakdown, however, is stark, with seven in ten Democrats backing the ban compared to just 44 percent of Republicans.)
A major gender gap also remains on the gun issue; women favor an assault weapons ban by almost 20 percentage points over men. Women are also far less likely to support the idea of encouraging more gun ownership among teachers and other school officials.
Overall, the NRA-backed idea of encouraging more armed guards and police officers at schools garners wide support, with just 32 percent opposing and 64 percent favoring the proposal.
But when it comes to arming more teachers, those numbers are nearly flipped, with 57 percent giving the idea a thumbs down.
The Pew survey was conducted January 9-13, with a sample size of 1,502 adults. The margin of error for the total sample is +/- 2.9 percentage points.
Leave a Comment:
I bet the "survey" was taken in the blue sections of the country. Still can't get through to the idiot anti "gunners" that assault weapons were banned way back in 1932 or 1934.
It wasn't the Bushmaster that did all the damage at the "Gun Free Zone" theater in Aurora.
I also understand there is some dispute as to Bushmaster doing the damage at the school.
If I were a confederacy person, I would suspect that the anti-"gun" crowd is recruiting unstable people to do these things so they can enforce their agenda. Disarming the "Law abiding Citizen" before they take over the country. Gangs commit around 90% of the gun homicides, but, I do not see any concentrated effort to disarm them.
3000+ killed on 9/11 using a $5 box knife to facilitate takeover of aircraft. Where was the outcry to ban box knives?
Anything can be used to create a weapon as I've pointed out before. The anti-gun posters have failed to acknowledge the reality that people can commit mass murder by using readily available items besides guns because doing so means that they too must give up some freedoms.
Below Average? Tell you what, you try to get on a plane with a box knife and see what happens? Hilarious.
Mass Murders happen with AR-15's because of the APPEARANCE of those weapons not the action. They look deathly and that turns on the pathetic marginal personalities who are motivated to commit these crimes. If your a gun buyer and that "assault like" appearance turns you on too, you need to engage in a little introspection!
James, while I tend to agree, 30 rounds in the magazine definitely has appeal for them, too.
The primary purpose of a box knife is to cut open cardboard boxes efficiently. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill. Try making an analogy between a gun and another instrument whose primary purpose is to kill. You are guilty of specious reasoning.
Airline security went up 1000 fold after 9/11. Where have you been?
Pathetic salsa. Once again the anti-gun people fail to engage in an intellectual conversation by using taunts instead of intelligence. There are thousands of ways to create weapons from household products. Would I create them? No, because I would never take a human life, except in self-defense, and then remorsefully. Anti-guns laws will do nothing to stop violence. How do I know that? Because I am the victim of crime. The felon was arrested and released on bond 4 months previously for having a firearm. Why was he even out of jail? He nearly killed me and my wife using a stolen truck. Again he was released on bond. Four weeks later he actually killed someone using a truck. He didn't need a gun. He used trucks to commit his crimes. If you really want to be part of the solution pull your head out of your a** and breathe some oxygen for a change.
Below Average, you do realize anecdotal evidence can be interesting but not very persuasive? I prefer to focus on countries such as Great Britain that have much lower PER CAPITA gun murders than the US. I wonder why that is? Care to comment?
No.
A firearm's 'purpose' is to send a projectile out of the barrel.
That's the ONLY purpose.
In point of fact, they did ban them; at least they banned them on aircraft. Not only that, but airline crews and passengers are much more attuned to the necessity for taking on any would be hijackers. It is extremely unlikely that a similar group would be able to take over an aircraft with that kind of a weapon in the future. Our response to would-be hijackers has changed substantially. So your statement actually reenforces the notion of a ban.
There is now a red flag alert for anyone seeking to buy the ingredients for a fertilizer bomb. Any large quantities that someone attempts to purchase bring the feds running. When they get there, you better have a damn good reason for buying those ingredients in those quantities. So there is a ban, of sorts, in place.
As you can see, we do change our response to those weapons who have killed large numbers of people. The only exception is guns. It's time they were no longer the exception.
According to thr FBI reports, between 1995 and 2011, 5 times more crimes were committed using items, other than rifles of any type, including bare hands. Now ask yourself...5 times more than rifles...are rifles really the problem? Nope? It's the criminal!
Below Average, your statistics are worthless. The issue is deadly force. Your number will change dramatically when you consider only crimes in which a death or multiple deaths occurred.
Avg Joe--YOU ARE WRONG.
http://www.statisticbrain.com/murder-weapon-statistics/
GUNS FAR OUTRANK ANYTHING ELSE.
Salsa, If you read my earlier posting, you'll see that I am very experienced with the fact that criminals use things other than guns to kill. The FBI report uses facts, not assumptions. Present some facts or go crawl back into your mommy's bed.
@Bart - thank you for posting the link. You will note though that I quoted the FBI report not the DOJ stats. The two do not appear to match each other. That's a problem with stats. They can be skewed one way or the other to prove a point. At least you were more civil than name-calling salsa.
one set of statistics was in reference to all guns, including handguns, which the large majority of gun violence is committed with. the other just gave numbers for killings with just rifles, which is a much lower number.
Below Average, you do realize the issues is not just crimes in general? It is crime where DEADLY FORCE is successfully executed. Keep up.
Bart - AvgJoe specifically said "rifles" of which assault weapons are a subset that is not broken out in the report. Rifles account for about 2.5% of the weapons used in homicides.
Here's your 2011 FBI homicide report.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11
According to the latest statistics, sixty seven percent of all murders in the US are committed by guns.
underemployed - guns? maybe, assault weapons? - not even close (2.5% or less). By going after "assault weapons" they're targeting the wrong thing.
The NRA is showing their true colors of late and more and more Americans see what a radical organization they are. All they care about is pushing guns to help their gun manufacture buddies sell more guns.
Hey gun nuts changes are a coming and there is NOTHING you can do! Go hug your guns tight and everything will be alright. Nobody is coming to take your guns Jethro.
Some people have the facts presented to them repeatedly, and deliberately ignore them.
Do you suppose it's a mental deficiency? Comprehension issues?
Well, one more time....just to prove my point:
You say:
The US Attorney says:
Straight from the Mouth of a U.S. Government Attorney
The U.S. government argues in federal court (U.S. v. Emerson information page) that there is absolutely no right of an individual to own firearms!
I am not sure which case this involved, but you should note the year. This is not an argument that happened yesterday. It happened over 12 years ago, when Bush was president. So who brought this case, to what purpose? Was it specific to an individual or a group or the entire country? Seems to me that there are more questions than answers.
Bush was not the President in 2000. He wasnt elected until November of 2000 and inaugarated in January 2001.
THe NRA and gun nuts have always been against any and all weapons laws and regulations. And it will continue on that way no doubt. But there support is waning and support for sensible gun laws is gaining. Go to Newtown and spew your crazed gun nut talk,make my day! I dare any of you!
oh yeah folks, tony the name caller is here!!! sure he will add some intelligence to these posts...
oh yeah folks, tony the name caller is here!!! sure he will add some intelligence to these posts...
BD, you do realize that some Gun Nuts actually like being called Gun Nuts? Keep it real BD.
lol...i suppose that may actually be true...
No gun ban will make a dent in lowering violent crime or mass killings. The highest violent crime rates are in the more liberal parts of the country that voted in the toughest gun laws. Chicago, NY,NY, LA.. Look at Mexico, only thugs and police have weapons there and the violence is off the chart... Come to think of it the thugs and police in Mexico are not too different.
Ban em if you want but don't be suprised when crime goes up.
So..let's do nothing! Who cares if children are mowed down? As long as we get to keep our guns so we can play Rambo or Wyatt Earp or Elmer Fudd. Is that what you're saying?
Let's just throw out specious statistics and hope people believe.
Perhaps the high violence is because guns aren't banned. Countries with fewer gun regulations have more gun-related deaths. FACT
Many (many!) more children drown.
Ban water!!
Steven, No. Many more children do not drown. Parents can protect their children from drowning. It is much harder to protect them from a madman with a gun.
Doximom, I am rather fond of children, I two grown ones of my own and wish nothing but good for any of them. The point I was shooting for (pun intended) was getting rid of guns will not fix our violent nature. We killed each other when all we had were rocks and we will continue to do so when we are reduced to rocks as the weapon of choice again.
One observation that occurs to me is that "in the day" the lunatics that perpetrated these recent killings would have likely been institutionalized as they were recognized as being insane to protect us from their crazed actions. Those institutions were dumping grounds and were destroyed. Now the insane walk the streets, I am approached by them almost daily as I walk to lunch in the city I work in. The best fix to put a dent in these mass shootings is to come up with a way to deal with folks that you know need help, imho.
Gun nuts also need "big" guns to make up for their small penises.
if you want to play with someone's penis, just ask. i'm sure someone will let you. or are you after the big ones? you like 'em large do you? naughty boy you!!!
Tony -
I am curious as to who you would consider a "gun nut" and what exactly constitutes a "big" gun.
@Tony,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,speaking of nuts. Between that and your concern for penis size I am concerned.
You seem to be posting on the wrong web site.
Don't worry Gomer you will still be able to dress up in camouflage and play Rambo in the woods.
you can let them join the village people with you. you're the guy in the leather outfit, aren't you? huh? huh? come on, you can tell us...
I do not see why anyone outside the military and law enforcement needs an assault weapon.They are useless for hunting. I do not see why anyone outside the military and law enforcement needs a large-capacity magazine.
I refuse to accept that we do nothing simply because the NRA, gun manufacturers, and the gun nuts in this country care more about inanimate objects than they do about living, breathing human beings. Since when does the right to be armed to the teeth trump the right of six-year-olds to life? That is what the NRA would have the gullible believe. And, apparently, based some of the posts herein, the gullible DO believe it.
I find it interesting that Crazy Wayne LaPierre blamed video games for gun violence and yet, the NRA itself has put out an app for smart phones, wherein four-year-olds(!) can shoot guns at coffins! What on earth is the reasoning behind that? How sick and demented can they get?
If Crazy Wayne loves guns and killing so much, why is it that, when he had the chance to serve this country during Viet Nam, he refused to serve? Guess he only likes other people being put in harm's way.
A drunkard ran my Dad down in the street as he legally crossed, he was 84. Why didn't I sue GMC? After all they made the truck and according to "leftist retard logic" that allowed the drunk to kill needlessly.
The state did not offer to jail a car salesman for the awful deed, they went after the driver. I know it seems strange, but they held him accountable for the crime.
Using "leftist retard logic", the American Automobile Association should have been charged and fined in the very least. Those bastards encourage driving, travel in cars and the safe use of cars. They must be punished!!!!!
It stands to reason, correct?
The NRA promotes safe use of firearms, sponsors organized competitive shooting events nationwide, trains firearms safety instructors and advocates on behalf of law enforcement and gun owners.
AND oddly enough, leftist idiots blame them for gun related crime???
Tell us lefty, if GMC cannot be held accountable for their truck killing my Dad. Why can a gun maker be held accountable for a criminals misusing the gun they made?
The gun was sold and licensed by the federal government, the fed did the background check and the fed approved it's purchase. You don't seem to demand an ATFE agent go to prison,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,why?
Give us your best "leftist retard logic" answers,,,,,,,,,,,,,,if you have the nerve.
For those of you who want to know the reason to ban semi-auto assault type rifles I have my answer. It seems to be the weapon of choice for those deciding to take out large groups of people all at once. Newtown is the catalyst because these victims were especially innocent and especially undeserving of that kind of a death. Nor do I believe that banning that particular type of weapon stop all gun deaths, not by a long shot. But it will slow down the gratuitous slaughter of classrooms full of children.
Limiting magazine size has the advantage of forcing a shooter to stop and change magazines. I will concede that this doesn't take much time, but it takes enough time for someone to tackle the guy and stop him from reloading.
Even more important, however, are the background checks for every single gun purchase, especially those on the secondary market. Guns get into the hands of gangbangers from the hands of those that bought them legitimately and resold them to criminals, or had them stolen by criminals. It is time to shut down their supply lines. Do you know how many children get caught in the crossfires of these bangers. In my county, three children under the age of two were killed by crossfire last year. It's not as large a number as Newtown, but you can probably multiply that to take in most large urban areas.
You might note that I said "crossfire". That was two sets of people shooting at each other. It's called a war zone. This is not how our children should have to grow up, or not. It's just wrong.
If you can't see that, if you can't comprehend that children's lives are the price this country pays for your "right" to own a semi-auto, then I think it is safe to assume that your patriotism does not include the defense of children, and your ideology is not interested in saving their lives. How very sad for all of you.
underemployed, a lot of good comments there. but how many people are actually killed with these type of weapons? very few incidents, just makes huge headlines. background checks are great, defintiely should happen, and even with legal sales through secondary channels. out here in AZ, it is a 10 year sentence for privately selling a firearm to a convicted felon, but i'm not sure what channels you would go through to do so, think its just checking with the cops. but most of these gang bangers get the guns illegally, and gang violence is a bigger threat and concern than the overreaction to the horrible school incident. and lastly, the large majority of firearms are the semi-automatic variety, its just means the weapon reloads as part of the recoil cycle. my hunting shotgun is semi-auto, so is my 9mm handgun.
Gun nuts can spew all their gun nut rational,but changes are a coming and there is NOTHING you can do,other then move. Somalia might accept you and they "really" like their guns in Somalia. Your 2nd amendment crap is getting all so tired,is that all you have got?
Damn those Constitutional Rights,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,who needs them anyway?
Holy Messiah (Obama) will take care of us and insure our needs are met. All hail messiah,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The majority rules gun nuts so hug your guns and chill out. Take a pill,shoot your gun for a thrill,whatever works. Your arsenal is safe and if your that scared,sleep with a gun tonight,and you will have something to clutch besides your teddy bear.
If the "majority rules" then you are wrong.
The majority of the people own 1 or more guns...
The majority of the people don't vote in elections...
The majority of the people don't participate in polls...
The MAJORITY of gun owners support sensible,reasonable gun regulations,gun nuts don't. There is a distinct difference between the obsessive,paranoid,scared gun nuts and rational gun owners.. Many gun nuts believe in government conspiracies and have emotional issues. Guns are their life their obsession and their number one priority. Many are very scared and have to have many weapons to sooth their frightened selves.
In gun nut world they think they are the majority and other people listen to their crazed gun nut ramblings. Most of us think you are dangerous with a cap pistol yet alone an arsenal! Keep living in your gun nut fantasy world of non-reality,I know you will.
maybe you ought to try and talk with them like a sensible human being, instead of some immature and idiotic anti-gun child? might get a better dialogue going...
i love the Rambo wannabes who dress up in camouflage and take their guns out to the woods to play Rambo. Unfortunately they use live ammo,that's a scary thought!
ah, come on. they'll let you play too. you can dress up like the indian, your favorite village
idiotpeople.With a ban on assault weapons, what weapons will be issued to the military, national guard and the swat teams...
think the point is only those folks get that kind of weapon
Well they're US citizens...what's the diff...
If you believe in government conspiracies you might just be insane.
And if you don't you might be a moron.
Trained professionals in the military and law enforcement receive special weapons training and are screened for any mental issues,unlike the gun nuts who think they are Rambo. And you wonder why the MAJORITY of Americans think that the professionals should only have these type of weapons. Many gun nuts cannot be trusted with high powered weapons,just read their responses and you can feel the hysteria,the paranoia and their delusional rational. And too think many are armed to the teeth.
I just retired after 25 years of military service. While we all received firearms training for the weapons we would carry, initial and recurring, no one received any preemptive mental health screenings, either when enlisting, or prior to being issued a weapon. police background check prior to MEPS was it.
Yes, the conservative party of accountability, transparency, and qualifications believes that the 2nd Amendment shields gun owners from being accountable, transparent, or qualified to own a weapon INTENDED for deadly force.
you'd have a point, except that the majority of gun owners aren't conservative, if by conservative party you mean republican. wouldn't argue with accountability or qualification personally, but what exactly is gun ownership transparency? a shirt that says "i have a gun?" maybe a sign in front of the house that says "gun owner here?"
Sanity and sensibility when it comes to gun ownership is what the MAJORITY of Americans want,but gun nuts can't accept his. They say "anything" goes as it applies to gun ownership. And they get really pissed when anyone says anything they don't agree with. A few even threaten to do harm. Any mention of a gun regulation sends them into a crazed frenzy. They start yelling 2nd amendment rights blah,blah,blah,and sputter: they are coming for my guns! They are coming for my guns! So paranoid and irrational! You can NEVER reason with these people ever!
Been shooting guns since I was 5 years old...the only people I have killed was sanctioned by the military...and when the military wanted us to take out a lot of people it was m-60s, 50 cals and 500lb bombs...so it's ok for me to "defend" the American people with assault weapons and bombs but it's not ok for me to defend my family and myself with an assault weapon...
the assault weapons you used for military combat aren't the same "assault" weapons you can get for personal protection. and neither are the threats you would realistically face.
You notice every time something happens the NRA is quick to say we don't enforce the laws we have. But they never mention that you can buy a gun at a gun show without a background check. Background checks for all purchases no matter where they are purchased. Licenses for all guns too, no matter what type makes sense too. Lastly, ban assault guns and semi automatics too.
background checks should be required. no license required for a right. but do you actually know what a semi-automatic is?
BD - so you shouldn't need a licence for the right to use a public roadway, in a car.
Is that what you said?
herron -
Driving on a public highway is not a right protected by the constitution. Bearing arms is.
Jan -
Buying guns is like buying politicians...the right amount of money in a backroom can buy you either Obama or an Uzi...with ammo...I don't need a license to buy a politician...
Herron, I'm sorry, but where did I say anything about cars or public roadways? But nice try...
The RIGHT to use the roads!
and this "right" to use the roads is covered where again?
All firearms transfers by licensed dealers require a background check.
And Eric "Fast and Furious" Holder was the one complaining about prosecuting felons that applied to purchase a firearm and were denied.
"We don't have the resources to do that"
So what is it more important putting criminals in jail or harassing law abiding citizens?