iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Margie Omero

GET UPDATES FROM Margie Omero
 

Views Might Be Changing Toward Gun Laws Not Actually Up for Debate. So What?

Posted: 10/26/11 05:16 PM ET

Gallup released tracking today of some of the gun questions it's been asking since the 1990s, and in one case, since 1959. The results got picked up by Politico, with the headline "Don't take away guns." Sure! There is not currently a national effort (or to my knowledge, a serious state effort) to "take away" guns. Problem solved! Right?

Well, not exactly. By tracking opinions toward a handgun ban, and by looking at only a few broad questions, news and polling outlets are missing a clear and important pattern: There is widespread support for a variety of gun laws.

Two of Gallup's standard tracking questions on guns reflect the gun debate of a different time. One is "Do you think there should or should not be a law that would ban possession of handguns, except by the police and other authorized persons?" In 1959, a majority said there should be. Now, after decades have passed without any new movement on a handgun ban, a clear majority say there should not be such a law. Voters' opinions on this likely reflect the political debate, as much as the political debate reflects public opinion.

A second question shows a similar, but less dramatic pattern. It asks "Are you for or against a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell, or possess semiautomatic guns known as assault rifles?" A slight majority (53 percent) are now opposed to such a law, mirroring, perhaps, the lack of a major public debate on the topic.

The third Gallup question is more broad, and so shows the least amount of change in the last few years. The language: "Do you feel the laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are" allows respondents to reflect on the current gun law climate. In my firm's work this year for Mayors Against Illegal Guns (done with a Republican partner American Viewpoint), we've asked this question too, and found similar results to Gallup. About as many say they want "more strict" laws as want laws "kept the same." Hardly any want less strict laws. This presentation we did for MAIG (page 6) compiles data on this question from a variety of polling outlets. Recent results on gun laws are actually quite stable.

Most importantly of all, gun laws actually up for debate are incredibly popular. Our recent polling on concealed weapon reciprocity showed voters do not want Washington to allow people to bring concealed weapons to a state where they did not meet the state's requirements. This five-state bipartisan polling project for MAIG showed voters supporting a series of stricter gun laws, while opposing the less strict gun laws being debated in those states. My analysis of post-Tucson Gallup polling revealed a plurality of respondents volunteered some form of stricter gun laws as a way to "prevent mass shootings." And my post on the our bipartisan national survey for MAIG shows an incredible amount of support for a long list of gun laws, even among Republicans and in gun-owning households.

Despite hyperbolic coverage highlighting political divisions, voters are actually quite united on guns. Large numbers want to see guns out of dangerous hands, better cooperation between law enforcement agencies, concealed gun permits extended only to those meeting a state's requirements.

 

Follow Margie Omero on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MargieOmero

Gallup released tracking today of some of the gun questions it's been asking since the 1990s, and in one case, since 1959. The results got picked up by ...
Gallup released tracking today of some of the gun questions it's been asking since the 1990s, and in one case, since 1959. The results got picked up by ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 392
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
01:52 PM on 11/14/2011
An interesting article in today's NY Times, which flips the old "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" bumper sticker wisdom:
"Felons Finding It Easy to Get Gun Rights Reinstated" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/14/us/felons-finding-it-easy-to-regain-gun-rights.html?_r=1&hp
02:59 PM on 11/09/2011
MAIG conducted a 'sting' operation across state lines in violation of Federal Firearms Law. They then used public money to impose their 'Gun safety' agenda on mom and pop stores that could not afford to fight them in civil court. Three dozen members of MAIG are convicted felons and many others are unaware they are signed up for that organization.
The poll(conducted by Frank Lunz) that suggests NRA members seek stricter laws is HIGHLY suspect. It seems that 30% of the NRA members polled had never even heard of the landmark Heller Decision. The NRA has a members magazine, mailing campaign, and even robo calling campaigns that targets membership constantly. Also, the NRA never gives out membership info to ANYBODY. So, how did our MAIG pollster arrive at his numbers? Lunz himself is on record as saying he can get anybody to contradict their position on any topic by asking the 'Right Questions'.
Momentum Analysis is a similar organization that even boasts of manipulating the very poll that you ask them to conduct.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
montestruc
War is the health of the state--Randolph Bourne
08:53 PM on 11/04/2011
Your analysis is flawed. Opposition to federal reseprocity legislation is only popular in states with strict gun laws such as New Youk, while in the majority of states that have "shall issue" concealed carry permit laws most people favor reciprocity, and do not like states like New York and others violating the rights of traveling Americans.

Regardless this is probably going to be settled in court. Americans have an individual right to bear arms. That is now settled law, the state of New Youk and others are in essence making a the argument that it is inconvenient to the state to accommodate American citizens in excercise of fundamental rights.

That argument will be seen for what it is, and rejected by the courts. It will not fly any better than arguments against school desegradation did in the 60's and 70's.
03:25 PM on 11/02/2011
Any sensible person would be against the killing by gun use of 30,000 Americans yearly. The NRA has polluted our laws.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Carson
07:24 PM on 11/02/2011
ST-you are up against the 2nd Amendment, not the NRA
06:41 PM on 11/03/2011
The 2nd is about securing the free state and a well regulated militia not ensuring hoarding of guns for personal pleasure.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
08:09 PM on 11/02/2011
So? Support H.R. 822 and see how things will change!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:12 PM on 11/02/2011
Which things will those be, besides more guns in more places?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:29 PM on 11/02/2011
Margie, if you think a democrat could run for office on a pro-gun control stance outside of Cali, Chitown, or NY and win, then you aren't much of a pollster. But please encourage as many as you can to do so. By all means try and get Obama to give a big speech encouraging a national debate concerning gun laws. I can't think of anything that would be more helpful to the republican party.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Right Whale
11:36 PM on 11/02/2011
Exactly. if the democrats haven't figured out by now that more gun laws is a losing issue for them then get out of their way and let them shoot themsleves in the foot...The democrat poltitician who thinks democrats don't care about their gun rights is clueless.
03:38 PM on 11/01/2011
Why polls don’t matter…

California is that much closer to Shall Issue Concealed Carry.

The ruling in the Richards v. Prieto case relied heavily on Open Carry which has now been banned.

http://bit.ly/rRY2fX

Without the option of open carry, there’s only concealed carry to implement “Bear”.

Places like Ventura County are being dragged out into the sunshine.

http://bit.ly/sc510K

This county has been violating Equal Protection for the people, tried to hide it, and lost in court. Soon to be Shall Issue.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:58 PM on 11/01/2011
If "polls don't matter", why did you base your last argument entirely upon the results of one?
05:13 PM on 11/01/2011
To watch the reaction. How's that working out for you anyway? Did you at long last provide proof for your assertion? Are guns banned yet? Hey, don't you live in the Ventura area? Do you plan on getting your permit? Have a wonderful week.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dutchman79
Never leave a fallen comrade...
11:54 AM on 11/03/2011
I can only hope so. I'm looking at moving back to CA from VA and I've had a permit to carry for about 3 years now. Prior to that I had a permit in Texas and one in Alabama. all totalled, I suppose I've had permits in various states for about 15 years now. I've never had to draw my weapon, but I know it is there if I need it. I'll feel pretty naked w/o the old pea-shooter by my side once I make the move.
12:15 PM on 11/03/2011
Right now it's county by county. Here's a great place to start. Good Luck!

http://bit.ly/12wIrr
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:36 AM on 11/01/2011
C'mon, all you gun rights guys! Humor me! Better yet, prove me wrong! Tell me you don't believe that certain minorities are racially predisposed to commit crimes. What have you got to lose? None of your buddies will think any less of you if you say you don't believe it, and, well, if you say that you do believe it, it's not like anybody knows where you live or anything, right? Okay, now, form a line, and don't all answer at once.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Carson
03:10 PM on 11/01/2011
fluffyguffy--why should we respond to false claims from an angry snert that has a long history of misinterpreting what we post
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jerry Bourbon
03:21 PM on 11/01/2011
I oppose racist laws like the 1960's era California law banning the open carrying of loaded firearms, passed after the Black Panthers started listening to police scanners, and then showing up, armed, at police stops as a show of force against police brutality against minorities.

Do you oppose such laws?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:32 PM on 11/01/2011
Two lousy deflections? That's it? No denials? No "I agree, but.."? Not even a link? This is evidently more difficult for you guys than I thought. Just relax, take a couple of deep breaths. Remember - the first step in solving any problem is admitting you have one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
You can't take the sky from me.
04:08 PM on 10/31/2011
My birthday is Friday. To celebrate, I'm going to the range. I'm glad the Constitution guarantees that I have the right to do so.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Rooster Coburn
Less Gov't + More Responsibility = A Better World
05:38 PM on 10/31/2011
Happy Birthday, Hagagaga!!!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
07:27 PM on 10/31/2011
X2, "Rooster". Now, if we could only persuade Ted Nugent to jump out of a cake!
03:29 PM on 11/02/2011
The Constitution states "a well regulated militia" and "to secure the free state" not playing with your guns at a range for personal pleasure.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Carson
07:27 PM on 11/02/2011
The Supreme Court says differently
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dutchman79
Never leave a fallen comrade...
12:22 PM on 11/03/2011
Actually it is part and parcel. They go hand in hand. In order to properly exercise your right to bear arms in a safe manner, time at the range is necessary. You obviously don't own firearms or you'd know that owning one brings with a great responsibility to know how to safely use it. You can't just take a firearm out of the box and start using it properly unless you've have a little training. You can't use one proficiently without a lot of practice.
03:48 PM on 10/31/2011
Momentum Analysis: When the statistics absolutely positively must support your position.
04:14 PM on 10/31/2011
That's great!
Wendy420
Live Free
02:27 PM on 10/31/2011
At what point in time has a law stopped a crime? The point of laws is to provide justice/restitution for victims, not to prevent crime. Writing something down on a piece of paper doesn't suddenly make everyone behave the way they ought.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:07 PM on 10/31/2011
Do you believe, then, by that measure, that laws against murder or drunk driving are pointless, and should therefore be overturned? They do not, after all, "stop crime", as you have so astutely contended.
Wendy420
Live Free
03:25 PM on 10/31/2011
Don't murderers have victims?
Wendy420
Live Free
03:25 PM on 10/31/2011
And BTW, that argument is as tired as the Republicans' argument for prohibition.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Adam Davies
01:07 PM on 10/31/2011
Or maybe support for an assault rifle ban is low because there is no evidence that it does anything to lower gun crime? No form of gun control really lowers gun crime. Armed citizens do lower crime though.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:56 PM on 10/31/2011
There already exists a de facto "assault rifle ban". And there is no evidence to support your claim that "armed citizens lower crime". There is, of course, evidence that armed citizens raise crime. 70% of all homicides, for example, are caused by them.
Wendy420
Live Free
02:23 PM on 10/31/2011
Crimes are committed by criminals. Criminals don't follow the law. So how do you figure that ANY law will prevent crime?
02:39 PM on 10/31/2011
Mince words all you like but, people support gun ownership. Lots of people.
03:08 PM on 10/31/2011
It seems like the 10 or so members of the Brady Campaign are the only ones that want any kind of gun ban.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:53 PM on 10/31/2011
The presumption that anyone wants a gun ban is a common one among gun rights activists. It serves alongside fear of minorities and of tyrannical government to aid in the manufacture of anger and indignation.
01:06 AM on 10/31/2011
Gun ownership is up. Support for gun ownership is up. You are powerless to change it.

That must suck.
11:08 AM on 10/28/2011
Yes, those views are changing…

Gallup found the number of Democrats willing to come out and admit to having a sidearm jumped 8 points from 32 percent to 40 percent. Since Mr. Obama’s inauguration, the ranks of gun-toting women swelled by 10 points to 43 percent.

Finally, some change we can believe in!
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:23 PM on 10/28/2011
The election of our first African-American President has certainly caused a spike in gun ownership. That nobody can deny. No sir.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
mackbolan
Libertas inaestimabilis res est
07:51 AM on 10/29/2011
lets see...a gun control guy is elected president and ownership of guns goes up...if a pro-lifer is elected will abortions go up...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:39 AM on 10/29/2011
And there was a spike in gun ownership under Clinton, so your point is what?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jeff Bunting
03:15 PM on 10/27/2011
I never liked gallup polling and feel that the way they word questions on their surveys are suspect. For example they had a poll that just showed public opinion about news stations but will not run a poll that shows how the news stations actually are liberal or conservative, rather they prefer to use peoples interpretations of what the media is alone which in my opinion can be misleading.

Why not conduct a poll that shows how right or left winged the media is by the actual definitions.
11:44 AM on 10/27/2011
Wouldn't it be nice to first have all the facts before you comment.

1) 97% of all gun crime in the lower 48 is committed by people who "CANT OWN GUNS TO BEGIN WITH"
2) The overwhelming majority of guns used in crimes are stolen or purchased by a pseudo buyer.
3) The balance of guns being used are from privatized sales where no paper work is ever done.
A few ideas on how to solve this without taking rights from those who deserve them.

#1 Eliminate the privatized sale of firearms.
#2 Require finger printing on the back of the FFL form at time of purchase. Why? Because according to the Justice department the number of "Identity Theft Purchases" has steadily risen. Fake drivers license and social security card is one thing, finger prints are not so easy to fake.
#3 Prosecute Pseudo Buyers. Pseudo buyers are people that look legitimate but really aren't. They are the baby mammas and best friends that go and buy guns on behalf of the thug that wants the gun.
#4 Last and most important is gun theft, address this and you will see illegal gun possession plummet.
photo
JimInHouston
Arma virumque cano...
02:52 PM on 10/27/2011
#1 and #2 ONLY affect law-abiding citizens and do not affect criminals in the least.

Those are absolutely non-starters.

#3 Absolutely. Go git 'em.

#4 "Address"? What does this mean? Do you have a shred of evidence that illegal possession would plummet?
photo
DeclineToState
Cogito, ergo armatum
03:01 PM on 10/27/2011
-- "#1 Eliminate the privatized sale of firearms."

How? The way drug laws eliminate the private sale of illegal drugs? The way Prohibition eliminated the private sale of alcohol?

There are approx. 73 million gun owners in the US who own approx. 200 million guns. How are you going to monitor every one of those millions of gun owners and guns 24/7 to make sure someone isn't selling a gun privately? More importantly, since only a tiny fraction of those guns will be used for criminal purposes, why would you want to?