So are Americans actually really anti gun?

I agree.

ar-newbie said:

It is crazy that people don't see it for what it is. Government fails it's duties, and claims even more laws are needed to fix the problem. No, to fix the problem government needs to be held accountable.

Click to expand...

Throughout history there's only been one way that governments have been held accountable. And that always involves lots of dead bodies. That's why the US constitution set up LIMITED government to avoid that. The constitution that's now ridiculed and treated like trash by those who have sworn to uphold it as part of their office.

bnolsen said:

The constitution that's now ridiculed and treated like trash by those who have sworn to uphold it as part of their office.

Click to expand...

This is closing in on what I fear may be a "tipping point."
What happens when oaths have no meaning--atheists can only affirm, and that affirmation is linked to whatever morality they ascribe to. When being a scofflaw is not seen as at all shameful. When we have no leaders following the rules, so why should the plebs. When self-interest subsumes deference to societal "norms."

Short anecdote: It's been a long week of cold, overcast rain here in DFW. Something I noticed more and more trhough the week was that people driving without headlights on was almost commonplace Even worse at nightfall, too. *This despite laws requiring headlights when raining, or after dark, or, for that matter, to not engage in reckless endangerment). Thursday night I stopped counting at 20--that over a 20 minute, 7 mile commute.

Our civilization, our society is predicated upon a Constitution which we all obey; upon laws that are clear and not overwhelming in number. Upon leaders who go to great efforts to be seen to obey our laws; and to show shame at any suggestion of taint, corruption, or personal gain.

Jefferson wondered in his writing if we, the future generations, would become indolent and sated in our luxury and let the great work of forming a nation slip away. Frankly, TJ's words haunt me.

Come to cases, I wil uphold and defend the constitution in the 1/4 mile I can--but I'd rather not if I don't have to.

If faith in the rule of law crumbles we’re Toast, but then that’s the anarchist dream.

Americans will normally answer "Yes" to questions like "Do you want to prevent school murders?" or "Do you prefer criminals to not have weapons". Well, duh!

The the questioner inserts the explanation this means the person answering "Yes" is in favor of whatever screwball gun control measure the questioner desires.

It's similar to asking, is the election procedure complicated and unreliable? An affirmative answer can easily be claimed to mean the respondent is in favor of a monarchy.

Nearly all polling can be made up in such a way to provide the answer sought.

Not sure what percentage of Americans we really represent here, but this is a gun enthusiast forum.
I don't count households that have only one handgun ( most likely inheritance) and never take it to a range or hunting .
I am also ''guilty" of owning some of the weapons that some people would like to ban.
Many of them are also quite normal people in all other aspects ( I work with some of them ), they are not even "leftist".
To them, we are using 2A as an excuse to maintain a hobby of owning and shooting some weapons that are far beyond of '' normal'' hunting or self-defensive needs.
( who is someone to tell me what my self-defensive needs are? Someone feels that a shotgun or a handgun is enough, I like to have an AR, maybe)
They claim that we are now having "arms race" among ourselves - if my neighbor has SKS, I have to get an AK, etc...
Honestly, not sure how to reply to that argument.
What do you say ?

dekibg said:

Honestly, not sure how to reply to that argument

Click to expand...

That's complicated.
If they are fully vested in their Certainty, they will not listen to reason, but will only shout you down with non sequitur talking points until you go away.
If they are truly amenable to reason, actually open to discussion, then a reasoned argument works better. Analogies can help. "If your neighbor gets a pit bull, do you go out and and get a Mastiff?"
If they are truly open to reason, ask them about other hobbies (helps to know the person)--ever see a fisherman with only one pole? A tennis player with just the one racket? Different but similar activities want for different tools.

Are Americans actually anti gun? yes and no. those that have never shot before, those that live a protected collegiate suburban lifestyle think they are entitled to absolute safety. That's what they have learned by having other people fight for their freedom. They think they have a constitutional right to safety provided by government. Guns are not part of their lives and if they feel threatened by guns, then bye-bye guns.

CapnMac said:

That's because those people have jobs and Caller ID, and don't much answer the phone.

There's a "dirty little secret" in the polling industry that they keep lists of "good" callers in the call centers, so that they can meet their minimum caller numbers per shift. Those numbers typically belong to "leisure class" persons (about equal parts retired seniors, college professors, and wastrels).

Further, 50%--half--of the US population lives in just 30 of the 3000 counties in the US. So, a great deal of poling calls fall in those 15-16 metropolitan areas. This creates a skew of its own.

Click to expand...

I can attest to that.

I've noticed in the last few months I've been getting 10 times the number of robo and unsolicited calls I normally do. I don't answer the phone anymore and I have it set to one ring then to voice mail. If someone leaves a message that I want to talk to I'll just call them back. Call block has about 20 numbers on it but that doesn't stop it, they just call with a different number. It's almost like junk mail now.

Somebody must know I'm retired.

The bottom line here is that the liberals want one thing, and that is to abolish the 2nd amendment. Crime and criminals aren't the main concern, it is control. They know, as we do, that once they can take away the legally owned guns from the people, they can then begin to deconstruct the constitution one brick at a time.

The men who authored the constitution predicted this almost 250 years ago. Google any of them on their opinions of the second amendment. They created the 2nd amendment for the sole purpose of the people to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. In reference to the 2nd amendment the founders never mentioned gun sports, hunting or even crime against ones person.

All of these liberal sanctuary cities want to prevent the deportation of illegal aliens, I believe, simply to keep the crime rate up and have more gun related crimes in order to advance their agenda of gun control, up to and including confiscation.

What we need is not stricter gun laws, but for the system as it is structured now to be enforced. Enforce current gun laws as they should have been all along, and correct the problems with the mental health system so that the NICS works as it was meant to. Nothing new is needed just use whats in place as it was intended.

I don't know how many of you heard this story.

In a Outback Restaurant a while back a conservation officer, in uniform, was sitting down to have dinner with his family, when the manager came to him and asked him to take his sidearm and put it in his truck. He explained that he couldn't do that since he was in uniform. She left to make a phone call, returned and informed him he and his family must leave the restaurant.

He posted his experience on face book he was contacted by the parent company with an apology and gift certificate. It turns out some woman who was in the restaurant at the time had complained to a wait person about sitting near the officer and had asked to be moved. When she found they had no table to move her to, she got upset and caused a scene because the sight of an openly carried gun frightened her.

Is this what our country has come to? An officer of the law can't take his family to dinner while he/she is dressed in uniform with a service handgun? Maybe these businesses should create safe rooms for the snowflakes to sit in so they don't have to see the sane people sitting near them. Personally, not only would I feel safer with a LEO sitting near me, but I would thank him/her for their service to the public. If financially possible I would pay for their dinner.

I'm sorry if this is the wrong place for this post, moderators please move it if it is.

Pathetic. That person would undoubtedly die of a panic attack induced stroke walking around Arizona.

what a piece of garbage.
I am manager in a major hospitality industry chain , I would never even try to appease a guest with such idiotic request.
Manager was at fault, not the idiot that ask for ridiculous request to be fulfilled.

Whenever I encounter an anit-gunner like my wife's niece who says she thinks UBCs are a good idea, I try to explain what it actually means (can't give gifts, cannot transfer to family, etc., that criminals don't bother, etc.) the response is usually this, "Really, I didn't know that....but, if it can save ONE life, it's worth it." That's the emotional fall back position and any further discussion is pointless; believe me, I've tried.

Sniper66 said:

if it can save ONE life, it's worth it.

Click to expand...

The default response when someone has nothing to support their argument.

Those stats that they mention are usually highly inaccurate and biased.

As an example, they may take poll of only 1000 US residents in a particular area. So if they polled 1000 New Yorkers, and 900 are anti-gun, then they can prove their point (which is completely manipulated of course).

Don't believe everything you read or see.

On a side note, as a long-time resident of FL where 2 of the mass shootings have happened recently, I believe we are still a pro-gun state as they have led you to believe otherwise.

drunkenpoacher said:

The default response when someone has nothing to support their argument.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

If we can save just one life from drunk driving, we should ban all cars. But yet, cars are still being used daily.