.

Quinnipiac University Poll Shows Where the Majority of the People Stand on Guns—Not with the National Rifle Association

National Rifle Association Rebuffed by Poll Results - The People Want Reasonable Measures Enacted

The respected Quinnipiac University poll released some important and stunning findings on Jan. 30, 2013:

95% of those polled support universal background checks for those that wish to purchase firearms;

60%  favor a ban on the sale of assault-style weapons (or whatever term one wishes to use for those firearms designed to slaughter human beings in rapid fire);

59% support a prohibition on the sale of magazines with more than ten rounds;  and

57%  favor stronger gun control laws in general.

It will be interesting to learn whether our elected officials are swayed by the public, including any of the individuals whose lives have been shattered by gun violence, prime case in point being former U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords, a gun owner and Second Amendment enthusiast, who simply, but passionately and emotionally addressed the U. S. Senate Judiciary Committee on 30 January, pleading for action. I believe that the inclination of those in positions of authority will be to conduct business as usual, i.e., to do what the powerful gun  manufacturers’ lobby, the National Rifle Association, its members and admirers tell them to do, which is virtually nothing. 

We shall soon see whether on the matters of background checks and the proliferation of the most lethal weapons and ammunition we enjoy government of, by, and for the people, or whether we live under a system of government of, by, and for minority special interest which is unrepresentative of the citizenry at large. I fear that I know the answer.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Mark Trombetta February 01, 2013 at 11:19 AM
Thankfully, we don't govern by polls. In Pennsylvania, 100% of gun purchases are required to go through a background check. For the most part, the "background check" outrage is a straw man argument. The "Assault style weapons" are not machine guns [which ahve been illegal to own except under very strict permitting from the Federal Government] are characterized as having "military style" features. One such feature is a pistol grip. Pistol grips do not make a gun any more deadly. They make it easier to hold in certain circumstances. This type of legislation is under the profound cloud of ignorance. It sounds good to a politician, but is substantively meaningless.
Mark Trombetta February 01, 2013 at 11:20 AM
There are more than 9000 gun laws on the books. Whatever the term "stronger gun laws" is supposed to mean, There is no scientific evidence that more gun laws yields less crime. Ask Mayor and Supreme Omnipotent Bloomberg, whose city and State have some of the more restrictive gun laws in the World and the MOST restrictive in the United States, if he can honestly answer why his crime rate is so high since his people are "protected" by such stringent gun laws. The truth is, those laws are failures and only serve to disarm the law-abiding citizens of the USA. To disarm the citizenry is to promote tyrrany. Remember Ruby Ridge Idaho and Waco Texas when our then Attorney General, Janet Reno presided over the murder of innocent citizens; many of who were women and children. Real assault weapons were used to kill innocent men, women and children, and it was our Federal Government which did it. Ask Brian Terry's family who was responsible for his death. It was Eric Holder and his failed "Fast and Furious" operation. The Federal Government gave real assualt weapons to drug cartels in that operation. As horrible as the shooting of Gabby Giffords and the others who died in the murder spree , She is not a gun or crime expert. Her testimony was gut-wrenching, but out of place in the determination of law. It was meant to create an emotional distraction from the root causes of these episodes: The breakdown of the family and the devaluation of life in our culture of death.
Roger February 01, 2013 at 07:00 PM
Quoting: "... This type of legislation is under the profound cloud of ignorance. It sounds good to a politician, but is substantively meaningless. ...." Bingo, Mark. The rhetoric played out on the news is rampant with ignorance, selling ideas that are wrong, just plain wrong. In many cases, the same gun, framed in different grips, or slightly different configuration, is shown as one weapon to be outlawed. The clips, number of rounds, rapidity of fire, size and nature of the ammunition is exactly the same. Yet, in one framing, the gun is OK, another framing it is not OK. It is really unfortunate that this issue is so emotionally driven. Sanity is sacrificed for the sake of emotionalism, and ignorance. The one fact we do know for certain, the continued dialogue and national conversation means huge sales of guns. As long as the conversation continues, the more guns will be in the hands of US citizens. Perhaps this is the best outcome that can be expected. Gun laws, as Mark pointed out, will change nothing. If we want to use poll numbers to make a point, how about the movement of our citizens on what they perceive as government's involvement in chipping away at their rights. The most recent poll shows that, for the first time, citizens believe government is going too far imposing themselves into rights (53% vs. 47%). This tells us much about how citizens feel about all the gun control talk.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »