Do more guns = less gun control support?

Do more guns = less gun control support?

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...and-2014-will-there-be-an-electoral-price/?hp

Our president, who sometimes gets a bit careless when it come to spouting off numbers, has often stated that “90 percent of the people support universal background checks.”

“How,” he expounds, “can any senator vote against a proposal that has so high a percentage of public support?”

Well for one thing the stated percentage may be questionable, but it could happen depending on how the questions were framed, and in what areas the poll was taken. Obviously polls can be made to get any preconceived result.

Which brings us to the above-cited article, which looks into the question of how various senators voted vs. the percentage of gun ownership within the state they represent. The results are interesting, and go along way toward showing what exactly influences a legislator’s vote.

The bottom line that I took away is that regardless of what state one resides in, the more people we pull in to the gun ownership community the better, and I find current conditions in the retail sector to be very encouraging. Now we need to capture those folks and make them true believers.

 

It would help if the current buyers were new owners rather than existing owners getting another.

At the core I think you are correct though. For many gun control is a non-issue. What is known about it comes from a heavily biased source so the don't cares are weighted against us. Owning and shooting can change minds much more surely than arguing over a topic someone doesn't care much about.

 

I believe a lot of Americans have voted with their wallets, especially after Obama was elected, then re-elected. The surge in gun and ammo sales have been unbelievable for years now. First time gun buyers, and women gun buyers account for many of these sales. I do NOT believe that 90% number at all, and the Senate knew it was bogus, and while Obama doesn't have to worry about re-election, THEY DO.

At the next opportunity, should he get one, the move will be to pack the Supreme Court with more of his anti (legal) gun, activist judges, and take our rights away that way. Obama is an arrogant, ideologue who does not take losses or rebuttal kindly. This is an emotional, core issue for him.

 

The answer has always been to get non-shooters to the range.

If each of us took just 4 new shooters a year to the range each year.....

Our sport and passion would not be in question.


Just 4....... Not a problem..... Right?

My experience? About 25% of new shooters that I take to the range REALLY get
Into it. Getting a weapon of thier own...... CHL, etc

Usually the other 75% dont have a negative experience, and would support gun ownership if asked



Our problem comes from folks that havent really been around guns.

Calling our Congress is only a small step we can make

 

Possibly. Younger gun owner may be unlikely to support outright bans, but might accept universal background checks and registration. On the bright side, if there's enough of them, large scale confiscation may be impossible for political/practical reasons?

 

I wonder how many antis were feverishly writing letters to their representatives.. Sure they want to cry about it now. But I guarantee they were not that passionate about it due to not really having a stake in it..

 

The 90% stat is a lie plain and simple. Even if the public did support it "90%" that doesn't mean every senator should vote for it when every single bill includes provisions like seizing medical records to let bureaucrats disarm people, magazine limits, bans, registration, taking away concealed carry, infringing on privacy, infringing on states rights, and (despicably I might add) the Democrats obsession with disarming veterans. He knows its a lie. That is what he does. You can tell he is lying when you see his lips move.

 

If every American Gun Owner, all 80 million or so of us, would just go to the polls and vote for pro-gun candidates none of what we would be seeing in congress would be happening, our constitutional rights would not be constantly under attack, and the shelves would be filled with ammo and reloading components.

Too many people who own guns don't vote, and that is pathetic to me to be an American and not vote.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

 

The real gun control issue this year is ``Immigration reform``. Come back in 10 years and the Dems will have majorities just about everywhere, including the Supreme Court. Texas and Arizona will be the first states to fall, just like PRK, Co, and NM already have. with solid majorities and super-majorities in some places, they will pass whatever laws they want with the blessings of the courts.

New gun owners are great, but they can`t beat the demographic change and the driving greed of the Libs. Don`t shoot the mesenger.

 

I'm a first generation American.

Just thought you should know.

 

My experiences have been different. From what I've seen, younger people as a whole may be more for for backgrounds checks and the like, but younger gun owners seems to be more gun rights oriented than older gun owners. I'd wager that there's a smaller percentage of 18-25 yo's owning guns than a similar 8 year age spread population in their 40s, 50s, or 60s. With the smaller percentage comes more dedication, and stronger feelings I's think.

But I am just one person, with a small sample size of observations, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

 

First off, as we all probably "know" clearly 90% statistic is not really accurate. Secondly, I find it interesting and ironic that in the comments section of the link posted in the OP the Senate is being denigrated as not being "democratic" because of it's structure of equal seats from each state and in the same breath various theories (the evil NRA) are bantied about instead of what the article's demographics actually reflects: the Senators were responsive to the concerns of their constituents. Isn't that how the system is supposed to work?
Here in PA both of our Senators voted for the Toomey-Manchin ammendment and for UBC's: this will not and does not sit well with those of us particularly in rural areas. I can remember speaking with a rep from one of the major reloading houses circa 2002 when we moved here and being told that per capita they shipped more 30cal reloading stuff to PA than anywhere else in the country. I suspect that next election cycle will be painful for both Casey and Toomey so long as we can get a viable and nonpolarizing candidate on other issues. At this point, though, I suspect that many of us have become single issue voters and clearly my 2A rights will trump just about any other issue for my wife and myself in the next election cycles.

Bob

 

More guns definitely equals less support for controls. But I think just as important now is that many women, particularly young women, are starting to realize that the best way for them to be safe is to start with themselves.

Most issues lately have been carved to appeal to women voters and the party with the most control is using them as its main voting block right now with quite a bit of success to frame family values and capitism as enemies in the "war on women". However, there must be some resistance to gun control among women right now despite the emotional appeals from Sandy Hook parents. It may be a passive resistance, but it must be present or the controllers would be proceeding at the national level.

 

Excellent Point!

 

More guns =/= less support for gun control; more gun owners = less support for gun control. Specifically, politically active, non-traditional, broad-spectrum VOTING gun owners. Lesbians, Communists, vegans, Hari Krishnas, and Frenchmen, welcome! Vote early, shoot often!