Polls: 54% of Voters view NRA favorably, 56% oppose stronger anti-gun laws.

[TPaine7]

...

The National Rifle Association, on the other hand, is likely to endorse whomever Republicans choose as their presidential nominee in 2012. Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters view the gun rights group favorably, including 29% with a Very Favorable opinion. The NRA is regarded unfavorably by 41%, with 25% who have a Very Unfavorable view.
 
Yet while 80% of Republicans and 53% of unaffiliated voters share a favorable opinion of the NRA, 63% of Democrats view the group unfavorably.
Seventy-five percent (75%) of the Political Class don’t care for the NRA, but 61% of Mainstream voters regard the group favorably.

...

Thirty-six percent (36%) of Americans say the United States needs stricter gun control laws, but 56% don’t share that belief and oppose stronger anti-gun laws. 

--http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/july_2011/42_give_the_nea_positive_marks_54_like_the_nra

It may be fun to pretend that gun rights are a fringe issue that only the 4 million members of the NRA care about--that the majority of Americans share utopian, gun free fantasies. But that perspective, despite its emotional appeal for some, is fiction.

Strategic battle plans based in fiction only work... in fiction. Fortunately our president isn't living in a novel. He may hate gun rights, but he's said and even done many of the right things.

It's time for many of his supporters to catch up.

Taking LEADERSHIP on gun rights AND gun responsibility--like fighting straw purchasing--could make it much easier to win elections.

[ileus]

1. 100% should oppose anti-gun laws...

[HockeyMom]

2. Rasmussen Poll?

You have got to be kidding. As a Democrat, I hope, would you trust a Rasmussen poll on Obama, or any other DEMOCRATIC Presidential candidate?

Or do you just pick and choose a pollster based on whatever issues you favor?

[TPaine7]

4. When I was tracking Obama in the polls--before I voted for him twice--

Rassmussen was not an outlier among the polls, IIRC. And their wording of the poll question doesn't sound biased.

[TheCowsCameHome]

8. Ding! Ding!

We have a winner.

The last sentence clinched it.

[Hoyt]

26. Yes they do -- in a pinch, they'll poll folks shooting at silhouette targets with assault weapons.

[eqfan592]

36. And in a pinch you'll dismiss out of hand anything that disagrees with your clouded world view. nt

[SteveW]

53. And leave me and my .357 magnum out? Unfair! nt

[jpak]

3. Rasmussen - more GOP gun luv

yup

[ileus]

5. what's not to love about firearms, and freedom?

[jpak]

6. Guns are freedom and life taking devices

yup

[ileus]

7. Guns are freedom insurance and life saving devices.

[RSillsbee]

38. Does that include YOUR guns? NT

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

47. Are some more...

...equal..ah, I mean dangerous than others?

[spin]

14. Any poll or news story that disagrees with your position on gun control is NRA/GOP propaganda ...

yup

[DanTex]

9. 36% favoring stricter gun control is much lower than other polls I've seen.

As others have pointed out, Rasmussen generally polls a few points to the right (e.g. Nate Silver noticed this). However, the 36% is way out of line with every other poll I've seen, more than the normal GOP lean from Rasmussen would account for. Probably something about the wording.

For example, a recent Time poll:

"Overall, do you think that gun control laws in this country should be more strict than they are now, less strict, or are gun control laws about right now?"

More strict: 51%
Less strict: 7%
About right: 39%

And other polls on the more/less/same strict gun control question come out about this way, for example:
CBS/NYT: 46/13/38
NBC/WSJ: 52/10/37

These numbers from
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm


The reality is that, far from being an unwinnable battle, the public is basically split on "generic" gun control. Moreover, when polls ask about specific policies under consideration, the numbers generally are even higher in support. For example, background checks on private gun sales polls at about 80%, ban on high-capacity magazines comes out around 60-65%.

[X_Digger]

10. Here's the gallup relatively recent poll..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/144887/Continuing-Record-Low-Support-Stricter-Gun-Control.aspx

November 22, 2010

In U.S., Continuing Record-Low Support for Stricter Gun Control

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the second year in a row, a record-low 44% of Americans say laws governing the sale of firearms should be made more strict, while 42% say gun laws should be kept as they are now. Twelve percent say gun laws should be made less strict.

eta: And another one from CNN (2009):

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-08/politics/gun.control.poll_1_gun-laws-gun-owner-rights-people?_s=PM:POLITICS

Now, a recent poll reveals a sudden drop -- only 39 percent of Americans now favor stricter gun laws, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.

[DanTex]

12. Congrats! You seem to have found the two most pro-gun poll results since the start of 2009

They are both listed in that pollingreport link I gave. Your Gallup poll is from Nov 2010, which means you chose to ignore all seven polls from 2011 (including another by Gallup), every single one of which shows higher support for stricter gun laws than the one you selected.

LOL. Are you trying to give a clinic in how to cherry pick poll data?

What's also funny is that you had to go back all the way back to 2009 to find a second poll even close to the 36% from the OP.

In my last post, I just listed the most recent poll results. But I can play the cherry-picking game too! How about the 2008 Quinnipiac poll found that registered voters support stronger gun control by a margin of 54-40... now that's a pretty big margin!

[X_Digger]

20. I went to the 'guns' topic on gallup..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/1645/Guns.aspx

It's the second graph down. There were no newer graphs on the question.

If you search 'gallup gun poll', that's the place where you land.


I like to use gallup because they have a historical trend. They ask the same question, in the same way, every time. One off polls are nice, but they don't give you perspective.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

31. I read the poll you linked to.

I think this is positively bizarre:

Just your best guess, do you think Barack Obama will attempt to ban the sale of guns in the United States while he is president, or not? (2009 Oct 1-4)

Yes, will - 41%
No, will not - 52%
No opinion - 7%

I just don't see it happening.

[TheWraith]

44. Or maybe there was a brief spasm of support in reaction to someone attempting an assassination.

Remeber Gabby Gifford? Public traumas can and do influence how people perceive issues, before those perceptions return to what they were before. That's why Bush had 45% approval on September 10th and 91% approval on September 12th. But as people shake off the traumatic event and come back to grounding their views in reality, their opinions will reset.

[benEzra]

11. I'll bet a lot of those polls on magazine bans

don't clarify that they're talking about outlawing standard factory magazines for the most popular firearms. You'd get a lot of pushback on that, just like in 1994 (and that one didn't even ban much of anything, unlike current proposals).

A limit of 20 rounds for pistols and 30 rounds for rifles, however pointless, wouldn't affect all that many people, but a 10-round limit sure as hell does; that would ban guns and magazines going back to the 1860s. Which is, I'm sure, precisely the point.

[spin]

13. I support many current gun laws. I feel Florida's gun laws are fair and reasonable ...

For a good summary visit: http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_fl.htm

If asked if I favor the gun control laws in this country, I would be confused on how to reply. While I think the gun laws in Florida are reasonable and fair, I feel the gun laws in places like Illinois, California and New York City are far too strict.

We have individual gun state laws and some are lenient and some are draconian.

You could ask a person in Florida a series of questions and if he felt Florida laws were too lenient he might answer that he felt the nation's gun laws should be more strict. If the same individual moved to Illinois and experienced their gun laws he might answer the same questions differently and could say that the nation's gun laws were too strict.

The question, "Overall, do you think that gun control laws in this country should be more strict than they are now, less strict, or are gun control laws about right now?"is too vague and too dependent on the respondent's locale to be useful.

[gejohnston]

16. did the pollsters explain what current laws are?

You would be amazed how many people at Think Progress etc think you can buy a machine gun at Wal Mart or a gun show.

[Hoopla Phil]

18. With no questions asked either.

[DanTex]

21. Despite your clear disdain for liberal groups like Think Progress...

...I don't know anyone who thinks you can buy a machine gun at Wal Mart. Do you?

Also, when the polls get more specific, the results become more rather than less pro-control. The "generic" poll questions are the ones that come out mixed. When you ask about high-capacity magazines or background checks for private sales, you get significant majorities.

What this seems to indicate is that people are not aware, for example, that a convicted felon can go to a gun show in many states and walk out with a truckload of guns, no IBC, no hassle. Probably if more people know about this, the polls would turn much further in the pro-control direction.

[gejohnston]

33. I just don't like hacks passing themselves off as journalists period.

liberal has nothing to do with it. Dishonesty and hypocrisy have everything to do with it. They do the same sloppy half assed journalism as Fox just on different subjects. They did the same with guns in bars in Ohio. Think Progress and Crooks and Liars both took the Al Qaida BS at face value about buying fully automatic weapons with no questions asked at gun shows. Al Qaida's words. They did no fact checking, and reading through the comments led people to really believe you can buy machine guns legally with little hassle.

For example. Read the comments, lifted right from the pages of Free Republic.
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/watch-nra-heads-explode-al-qaeda-spo


Problem with generic polls, in order to be accurate, you have to explain current federal laws. I run into a lot of "pro control" people who define reasonable laws. They are surprised to learn that not only do I agree, but that has been the law since the 1930s.
Gun shows have nothing to do with no IBC. The problem is with private sales. Private sellers are prohibited by law from using NICS. You know that as well as I do. The commerce clause would prevent the feds from requiring it. Some states do require private sellers to go through an FFL as a broker.

Perfect example:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/07/white-house-taking-seriously-al-qaeda-gun-show_n_872413.html


Here is his half assed correction:

Multiple readers have noted that Gadahn's statement -- that you can buy a fully automatic weapon at a gun show -- is not true. You can, in fact, get (nearly) everything but a full-automatic. That being said, one gun control advocate notes that purchasers can buy "conversion kits" to turn semi-automatics into full-automatics, and there have been documented cases of individuals doing so.

This is my email calling him out

You can not buy conversion kits either. Under the National Firearms Act of 1934, conversion kits and guns that can be converted are still legally a machine gun and are regulated as such. In fact modern semi autos such as the AR-15 and Kalashnikov variants that are legal in the US and Canada have different bolt carriers and other internal parts that make such conversions impossible. A phone call to BATFE or any firearms expert would have told you that. Also, while the gun show loophole makes a nice talking point, all federal and state laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else. In other words, another canard. Same as a gun show in Canada, or any other country. Every gun show I have been to, cops are everywhere. There are at least one or two at the door.
While on the subject of machine guns, while Europe and UK do have fewer gun crimes, but the ones they do have machine guns are used more often than in the US or Canada.
While everyone is for gun control (the only disagreement is to what extent) groups like the Brady Campaign and VPC (who are mostly Republican) are not exactly bastions of intellectual honesty anymore than the NRA is. Actually, they are worse in many respects. Like being against Bush's watch list that does not have any real terrorists on it before you were for it, it creates huge credibility problems with our side in the eyes of rural moderates or social conservatives that agree with us on economic issues.

[RSillsbee]

40. I don't know anyone who thinks you can buy a machine gun at Wal Mart. Do you?

Hockey mom

[TheWraith]

46. You seem to have missed WHY they have disdain for Think Progress.

Specifically, that TP blindly repeated the total lies of a known terrorist, in order to advance the belief that you could walk in and buy a machine gun anywhere in America with no questions asked.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/06/06/238156/al-qaeda-gun-show-loophole-2/

[lawodevolution]

15. No matter what the anti gun people say about the gun issue it is a fact that

gun control has weak support, people are not willing to put their money on gun control. The NRA is 100 times more significant by revenue and membership than the most famous anti gun group.

[DanTex]

17. Yeah... thank god money rules in politics!

We wouldn't want the "will of the people" to start to encroach on well-funded right-wing special interests...

[lawodevolution]

22. Brady campaign has 50,000 members and ex members, NRA has 5 million current members

5,000,000 / 50,000 = 100

The anti gun side is 1% the size as the pro gun side.

any questions?

[TheCowsCameHome]

23. And yet the pro crowd is so scared of Brady.

I though they were irrelvant, with those piddling numbers.

[beevul]

24. You confuse fear with disgust. N/T

[SteveW]

55. It's not Brady's popgun. It's MSM's studious support of gun-control...

THAT is the remaining "power base" of the gun-control "movement," not Brady.

[SteveW]

54. Gallup reports 75% of Americans believe the 2nd respects an individual RKBA...

I'll take that "will" anytime.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

19. if Dem candidates would take this seriously, I think we could easily get a lot

more of them elected and turn more red states blue.

[Hoyt]

34. I think you are right.

I also think if people saw what those really into guns do, they'd push for restrictions immediately -- things like carrying two in public; filling up rooms with more and more tactical guns in preparation for something; like the ideology of non-Dem gun owners (TBaggers) who have armed themselves to "take their country back;" and more.

Guns have gotten out of hand.

[eqfan592]

41. Only those with distorted views of reality like yourself would buy into it.

Thankfully you represent a small minority.

[gejohnston]

45. I'm still looking for these gun nut tea baggers who

because I have yet to see any. But then, being Florida they are all transplants from New York and Cleveland.

[Marengo]

61. What is a "tactical gun"? N/T

[Hoyt]

64. It's what all the hot gunners covet nowadays.

[Marengo]

62. Do you advocate an ideology test for gun ownership?

Should non-Dems not be permitted to own firearms?

[Hoyt]

65. Problem is to make a few Dems happy, we have to let people who have vowed to shoot liberals and take

their country back carry and attempt to intimidate folks. Not sure it's worth it.

[friendly_iconoclast]

66. So people that have vowed to commit crimes won't commit them if...

...owning the means to commit said crimes becomes a crime in itself?


How's that supposed to work, again?

[Hoyt]

25. Since this is DU -- "63% of Democrats view the group unfavorably" is most important "finding."

Most people don't know how vile the NRA is. That's something we need to work on quickly.

[Upton]

27. Actually only a 63% unfavorable for the NRA from Democrats is pretty good..

considering much of the Democratic party leadership is in bed with gun control groups. It also demonstrates that over 1/3 of Democrats are able to separate the NRA's support of the 2nd Amendment from their political advocacy..

The NRA is here to stay. I suggest the Democratic party get with the program and support the entire Bill of Rights...as you and the rest of the antis are losing ground fast, not only in the country, but even in your own party.

[HockeyMom]

29. That really depends where you are from

Take a poll in NYC, as opposed to say Dallas, and you will get completely different answers.

There was a recent shooting in a pharmacy on LI where the store owner and several customers were killed. It happened not far from where my daughter lives. In all the interviews, I did not hear one single person say that the gun laws should have been less strict so the owner could have had a gun (which he probably could have anyway but didn't) or the customers could have been carrying. Nobody. Do you think any of these people want less gun control so THEY can have guns? I doubt it. Generally, the legislators listen to the people in their areas.

[Upton]

30. Here's the thing

For the most part, national Democratic party leadership, talking heads, and platforms have all embraced gun control. This has reflected poorly upon Democrats running in swing districts and states, costing us who knows how many votes and seats in Congress. Rural folks, in particular, don't want to hear urban gun control BS from a Schumer, a Lautenberg, or a McCarthy..

It's time we as a party dumped these nonsensical self defeating gun control proposals, and supported the 2nd Amendment the same way we would support the 4th or any other part of the Bill of Rights.....

[Hoyt]

37. -1

[eqfan592]

43. Major +1 here. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

48. +1

so simple.

the laws are in place already. criminals break the laws already in place and will continue to break any new laws written.

all the new laws only further increase restrictions on people who are already abiding by current laws.

[SteveW]

58. Oh, why not. +1

[gejohnston]

35. You would get the same results from Republicans

in those two areas. It is not as much as a right left issue as many people think.

[SteveW]

57. See Upton's comment. The "gun issue" has been nationalized. nt

[Hoyt]

32. A lot of Dems aren't into guns and probably have no idea what the NRA and what they represent.

If they did, they'd be considered just like any other corrupt lobbying group or corporation.

[gejohnston]

39. Same is true with Republicans

It works like this, the Dems and big city Republicans jumped in bed with the anti gun groups. There is also a pronounced anti rural/working class bigotry found in urban and suburban areas that is kind of bipartisan. The problem is that a lot of folks in the hinterland confuse "urban" with "liberal". They assume urban=liberal. Republicans figured that out, started gun control groups along with the think tank machines and you have trust fund babies like Mitt passing themselves off as "one of the people".

Brady/VPC are just as corrupt and and even more astroturf.

[Spoonman]

52. You are obviously completely ignorant of all the NRA does.

Without their low cost instructor programs, thousands of rural police forces would not exist.

They are THE leaders in firearms training in the world, having trained over 50,000 law enforcement firearm instructors.

All those Dems that aren't into guns probably have no idea that the NRA trained the officers they depend on for protection!

Oh those corrupt lobbying NRA police officers!

We need a cure for tunnel vision around here!

[SteveW]

56. "Quickly?" You've been flogging that dead horse for some time...

...and try as one might, one cannot smear progressive DUers who favor a strong Second Amendment with the odor of the NRA. BTW, are you trying to make out DUers as "vile," or are you doing it to the NRA? You seem to tilt toward the former.

[Abq_Sarah]

60. Yeah well

A lot of people on the right believe the ACLU is "vile" as well.

Just goes to show there are a lot of people on all sides who don't give a shit about the Constitution if it stands in the way of their ability to control the actions of everyone around them.

[Doctor_J]

28. No one has ever claimed that billion-dollar propaganda isn't effective

if it wasn't they wouldn't flood the nation with it.

[gejohnston]

42. I think you are underestimating America's critical thinking skills and

over estimating yours.

[Doctor_J]

49. Looking at the Congress that was elected in 2010, I don't think it's

possible to underestimate America's critical thinking skills. And the election of the most reactionary Congress in history and the results of this poll fit very nicely together. And the same propaganda accounts for both.

[lawodevolution]

50. Propaganda or not you will have to cope with the new change in this country on the gun issue

Amongst my very liberal friends only a few refused to go to the range due their political views. Guns are fun to shoot and are simply cool.

If you cannot pass gun control today it will be a near impossibility in the future as more people join the pro gun movement every day while people abandon the anti gun movement. The democratic party will have to adapt to the new pro gun democrats they need votes from.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pullo]

59. File under "Backlash" n/t

[ileus]

63. They educate the public, advocate for the second, they teach safety...

why would the public not view the NRA favorably unless they respondent has and anti-gun agenda?


I don't join the NRA because they waste dues trying to bum more money from their members.