iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Poll: Majority Of Americans, Including Gun Owners, Support Tougher Restrictions


First Posted: 01/18/11 09:07 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:25 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- Despite powerful lobbying against any new gun-control measures by groups like the National Rifle Association, a new bipartisan poll shows that both gun owners and the general public support stronger measures to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and other potentially dangerous individuals.

The poll -- conducted for the coalition Mayors Against Illegal Guns, co-chaired by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino -- suggests that while far-reaching gun-control legislation seems unlikely to pass, some narrower measures may be able to earn bipartisan support.

"Large majorities of Americans agree with the 2008 Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own guns, and Americans strongly oppose efforts to ban handguns," said Bob Carpenter, vice president of American Viewpoint, the Republican polling firm that joined with Democratic firm Momentum Analysis to conduct the survey. "But Americans and gun owners feel with equal fervor that government must act to get every single record in the background-check system that belongs there and to ensure that every gun sale includes a background check. Most Americans view these goals, protecting gun rights for the law-abiding and keeping guns from criminals, as compatible."

Some findings from the poll results, provided exclusively to The Huffington Post:

-- 90 percent of Americans and 90 percent of gun owners support fixing gaps in government databases that are meant to prevent the mentally ill, drug abusers and others from buying guns.

-- 91 percent of Americans and 93 percent of gun owners support requiring federal agencies to share information about suspected dangerous persons or terrorists to prevent them from buying guns.

-- 89 percent of Americans and 89 percent of gun owners support full funding of the law a unanimous Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed after the Virginia Tech shootings to put more records in the background-check database.

-- 86 percent of Americans and 81 percent of gun owners support requiring all gun buyers to pass a background check, no matter where they buy the gun and no matter who they buy it from.

-- 89 percent of Americans and 85 percent of gun owners support a law to require background checks for all guns sold at gun shows.

In terms of protecting Second Amendment rights, 79 percent of Americans and 90 percent of gun owners said they believe an individual has the right to own guns, and the amendment is not limited to protecting the rights of state militias. Eighty percent of Americans and 90 percent of gun owners oppose a law that would ban the sale of all handguns.

The survey also asked whether respondents believe that "the sale of guns should be more strict." Fifty-one percent said they agreed with that statement, 7 percent more than agreed in a November Gallup poll using nearly identical wording and 4 percent more than what CBS found using similar wording last week.

Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged shooter in the tragic Jan. 8 shooting in Arizona, legally obtained the Glock-19 pistol that he eventually used to kill six people and wound 13 others. Despite his documented history of drug abuse, Loughner was able to slip through the cracks and become a gun owner.

In the months following the April 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, lawmakers passed a bill meant to increase the number of records entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. But three years later, hundreds of thousands of records are still missing, allowing many to pass background checks they might otherwise fail. Additionally, since 2007, Congress allocated only $20 million of the $375 million authorized in the law.

"Our coalition of mayors has fought for years to fix our federal background check system and close loopholes that give dangerous people a way to get around the requirement altogether," Bloomberg said in a statement on the poll's findings. "This poll shows that, particularly in the wake of yet another tragic mass shooting, Americans and gun owners agree with our efforts. If the tragedy in Tucson was not enough to ensure that Congress finally takes action, we hope this clear call for reform from the public will add to the groundswell of support."

Closing the so-called "terror gap" has particularly strong support. A 2010 Government Accountability Office report found that during the past six years, individuals on the terror watchlist were able to buy firearms or explosives from licensed U.S. dealers 1,119 times.

The NRA has opposed bipartisan legislation closing the gap on the grounds that the list is flawed -- some individuals are put on the list by mistake, while many who pose legitimate threats are never added.

But this position puts the NRA far to the right of even its members. A survey last year by conservative pollster Frank Luntz found that 82 percent of NRA members supported "prohibiting people on the terrorist watch lists from purchasing guns." Eighty-six percent agreed with the statement that the country can "do more to stop criminals from getting guns while also protecting the rights of citizens to freely own them."

The NRA has taken a low profile since the Tucson shooting, telling The Daily Beast that the organization "strongly believes that now is not the time for political debates or policy discussions. Indeed, anything other than prayers for the victims and their families at this time would be inappropriate."

Currently, there is no Senate-approved head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In 2006, the gun industry convinced Congress to require nominees for the position to meet with Senate approval. The upper chamber has not approved a single director since.

Republican senators even held up President Bush's nominee, arguing he had been "overzealous in enforcing requirements that dealers keep detailed gun-sale records." Obama's nominee, Andrew Traver, is likewise currently on hold.

A handful of lawmakers have signaled their intentions to introduce gun legislation. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) plans to introduce legislation Tuesday to "prohibit the transfer, importation, or possession of high capacity magazines manufactured after the bill is enacted." Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) is readying similar legislation in the Senate.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) has also proposed legislation, backed by Bloomberg, making it illegal to bring a gun within 1,000 feet of a government official. The latest Mayors Against Illegal Guns poll found that 58 percent of the public and 49 percent of gun owners support banning the sale of high-capacity ammunition magazines. Sixty-seven percent of the public supports the King proposal, according to that polling, along with 60 percent of gun owners.

Even McCarthy, however, admits that significant gun-control measures are unlikely to go anywhere in Congress. "Everybody is petrified of the NRA," McCarthy told The Huffington Post.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told NBC's "Meet the Press" recently that Congress will therefore most likely look to fill the obvious gaps in current laws that have broad bipartisan support, such as pushing for better information-sharing and tightening weapon-purchasing restrictions on those diagnosed as mentally ill or drug abusers.

As HuffPost Pollster's Mark Blumenthal has noted, "While public opinion has generally turned against stricter gun-control measures over the last twenty years, majorities continue to support greater restrictions on the sort of semi-automatic weapon used in the Tucson shootings."

It seems, however, that the public's favorable views of gun rights have held despite the Tucson shooting. Forty-six percent of poll respondents said that the Jan. 8 tragedy had not changed their views on gun control at all, while only 41 percent said they now feel more strongly that gun laws should be stricter. In a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll, 69 percent of those surveyed said their views on gun laws hadn't changed.

UPDATE: A HuffPost reader points out that Mayors Against Illegal Guns included both gun owners and people living in gun households as "gun owners" in the summary of its survey results. One of the pollsters who conducted the survey said that they believe "those living with the actual person on a gun license have far more in common with them than with those with no guns in the house at all."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Despite powerful lobbying against any new gun-control measures by groups like the National Rifle Association, a new bipartisan poll shows that both gun owners and the general public supp...
WASHINGTON -- Despite powerful lobbying against any new gun-control measures by groups like the National Rifle Association, a new bipartisan poll shows that both gun owners and the general public supp...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 683
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (23 total)
08:25 AM on 03/12/2011
The problem here is if we impose even more restrictions on firearms ownership we know it won't make a difference in crime. Who we kidding ?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
makdi
08:57 AM on 01/27/2011
Why isn't Washington DC's new Mayor Vincent C Gray a member of this Coalition?
10:54 PM on 01/26/2011
So I clicked on the picture of the boy with the cleft lip to go to the site and it said it does not exist. What is the deal with that, Huff Post?
09:52 PM on 01/26/2011
"90 percent of Americans and 90 percent of gun owners support fixing gaps in government databases that are meant to prevent the mentally ill, drug abusers and others from buying guns."

There's a slippery slope there, and it's bound to get worse.

Would convicted drunk drivers be considered "drug abusers"?

Could states with legal marijuana registration confiscate citizens firearms?

What about Rx drugs for depression and other mentally compromising conditions?

Would "prevention of suicide" be an excuse to search homes for weapons?

Will gun owners need a psych screen every two years, like getting an emissions check?

Better get ready to answer those questions, before you go off half-cocked.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rodger leMonde
I call them as I see them.
01:18 PM on 01/25/2011
The NRA would do well to support the funding of laws that are on the books with the same zeal they vet politicians. They are a minority led by a minority of their members. Of their vote eligible members those who actually vote in NRA elections runs 7-8 %. Only about a third of members are eligible to vote. Sort of interesting that with this internal pattern they dictate to the nation what a democracy should do.
11:00 AM on 01/23/2011
Largely responsible for the shootings in Tucson as all the other such tragedies is the lack of sensible gun control fostered by the NRA to which rightists pander, with liberals too craven to counter.

Reckless and inflammatory language, publicly and repeatedly articulated, may or may not directly encourage the rancorous urges and plotted attacks of the hostile and unstable and may or may not rally those impressionable malcontents teetering on the edge of violence. What is real is the toxic climate such language spawns.

Will someone with power, courageous and strong, come forward and organize an expansive and effective campaign to prod the nation and the Congress to act against easy access to firearms and assault weapons? Until serious steps are taken---apart the undaunted activism of lawmakers like Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) whose legislative efforts, though successful, can only proceed slowly and piecemeal---the incidents will recur.

Elizabeth Gerteiny, author of The President of War
www.bushandcompany.org
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:59 PM on 01/20/2011
" Jared Lee Loughner, the alleged shooter in the tragic Jan. 8 shooting in Arizona, legally obtained the Glock-19 pistol that he eventually used to kill six people and wound 13 others."

Incorrect.

He lied on form 4473 concerning his illegal drug use.
08:31 PM on 01/20/2011
THIS IS NOT MY WORDS... by the way, all the information comes from various sources...

but i do agree 100% with what they say
08:31 PM on 01/20/2011
http://www.constitution.org/mil/rkba1982.htm

here is the rest of the article
08:30 PM on 01/20/2011
alright well i think you get the point now....

the "collective-rights" theory of the second ammendment is nothing but a theory....

there is to much evidence that the right is an individual one.....

if it was a "collective right" that is odd... cause the source of power is the INDIVIDUAL
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Dimensio
I just don't know what went wrong!
09:56 PM on 01/20/2011
"Collective rights" is a nonsensical concept; rights are inherently a property of individuals.
08:27 PM on 01/20/2011
The proposal finally passed the House in its present form: "A well regulated militia, being necessary for the preservation of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." In this form it was submitted into the Senate, which passed it the following day. The Senate in the process indicated its intent that the right be an individual one, for private purposes, by rejecting an amendment which would have limited the keeping and bearing of arms to bearing "For the common defense".
08:27 PM on 01/20/2011
When the first Congress convened for the purpose of drafting a Bill of Rights, it delegated the task to James Madison. Madison did not write upon a blank tablet. Instead, he obtained a pamphlet listing the State proposals for a bill of rights and sought to produce a briefer version incorporating all the vital proposals of these. His purpose was to incorporate, not distinguish by technical changes, proposals such as that of the Pennsylvania minority, Sam Adams, or the New Hampshire delegates. Madison proposed among other rights that "That right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." I n the House, this was initially modified so that the militia clause came before the proposal recognizing the right. The proposals for the Bill of Rights were then trimmed in the interests of brevity. The conscientious objector clause was removed following objections by Elbridge Gerry, who complained that future Congresses might abuse the exemption to excuse everyone from military service.
08:26 PM on 01/20/2011
They argue that the Second Amendment's words "right of the people" mean "a right of the state" — apparently overlooking the impact of those same words when used in the First and Fourth Amendments. The "right of the people" to assemble or to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is not contested as an individual guarantee. Still they ignore consistency and claim that the right to "bear arms" relates only to military uses. This not only violates a consistent constitutional reading of "right of the people" but also ignores that the second amendment protects a right to "keep" arms. These commentators contend instead that the amendment's preamble regarding the necessity of a "well regulated militia . . . to a free state" means that the right to keep and bear arms applies only to a National Guard. Such a reading fails to note that the Framers used the term "militia" to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and that the Congress has established the present National Guard under its own power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so under its power to organize and arm the militia.
08:25 PM on 01/20/2011
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights.)

"The great object is that every man be armed . . . Everyone who is able may have a gun." (Patrick Henry, in the Virginia Convention on the ratification of the Constitution.)

"The advantage of being armed . . . the Americans possess over the people of all other nations . . . Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several Kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in his Federalist Paper No. 46.)

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." (Second Amendment to the Constitution.)
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
10:37 PM on 01/20/2011
Fanned and faved, Seeker500!
08:15 PM on 01/20/2011
"Return of the Adjutant General of the enrolled militia in Pennsylvania, which contained an inventory of the supply of arms (of all types) available for militia use. The editor of the Democratic Press described the Return in these words:"
"Our stock of Public Arms are respectable but it is still more gratifying to observe the number of Private Arms returned. There are no less than twelve thousand six hundred and seventy-eight Rifles reported as private property, and two thousand and thirty-eight public rifles .... Sharp Shooting, Good Marksmanship, is eminently a trait in the American Character ...."
--- DEMOCRATIC PRESS (Phila.), Mar. 8, 1823, at 2. (Source)