« Republican senators visit Israel, Afghanistan | Main | Fix the Debt group launches in six additional states »

January 14, 2013

Mixed news on gun control from Gallup survey

A new Gallup poll released Monday has mixed news on gun control.

Thirty-eight percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the nation's gun laws and want them strengthened--a big jump from the 25 percent reading of a year ago, and the highest in a dozen years.

But....43 percent are either satisfied with current gun laws or think they should be loosened.

"Other recent Gallup polling shows Americans are not prepared to relinquish their Second Amendment rights, as majorities reject banning the possession of handguns by civilians, or even outlawing the manufacture or possession of certain semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles," Gallup said.

But it added, "They are clearly more open to further restricting the sale of guns, including with more background checks and bans on high-capacity magazines. Thus, Biden's task force enjoys a window of opportunity, albeit with apparent limits, to address Americans' concerns about gun violence."

The poll was conducted Jan. 7-10.

To read more:http://www.gallup.com/poll/159824/americans-dissatisfaction-gun-laws-spikes.aspx

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c64169e2017d3fed38a0970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Mixed news on gun control from Gallup survey:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Michael G. Kamau

As a self-empowerment writer, the gun-control debate is very puzzling to me. It seems to me that one law would solve the many problems that exist: A gun tracking law.
Stated simply, just permit law enforcement, at all levels, the ability to match any weapon used in a crime to the last registered owner. That means that if a manufacturer, dealer or private citizen sells a weapon to someone who chooses to commit a crime, they too (former owner) would be charged in the crime as an accessory and be liable in facing full legal prosecution (which would include prison time and fines). Responsible weapons owners would have no fear of such a law. Such a law would quickly weed out those who are dealing secretly with the criminal and terrorist elements of society. Then, any talk of a weapons ban or mandatory background checks becomes a moot point. The tracking law would become the policing influence.

J Bailhe

Are any of you aware of the numerous court decisions that hold there is no Constitutional prohibition to restricting firearms that are, in the words of Justice Scalia, “dangerous” or “uncommon” (District of Columbia v Heller (2008)?

See:

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)
“… the Second Amendment right…extends only to certain types of weapons.”

Lewis v. United States (1980); Footnote 8
“(The Second Amendment guarantees no right to keep and bear a firearm that does not have “some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia”); United States v. Three Winchester 30-30 Caliber Lever Action Carbines, 504 F.2d 1288, 1290, n. 5 (CA7 1974); United States v. Johnson, 497 F.2d 548 (CA4 1974); Cody v. United States, 460 F.2d 34 (CA8), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1010 (1972) (the latter three cases holding, respectively, that 1202 (a) (1), 922 (g), and 922 (a) (6) do not violate the Second Amendment).”

Adams v. Williams (1972); (dissenting opinion of Douglas, joined by Marshall)
“The leading case is United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, upholding a federal law making criminal the shipment in interstate commerce of a sawed-off shotgun. The law was upheld, there being no evidence that a sawed-off shotgun had “some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.” Id., at 178. The Second Amendment, it was held, “must be interpreted and applied” with the view of maintaining a “militia….Critics say that proposals like this water down the Second Amendment. Our decisions belie that argument, for the Second Amendment, as noted, was designed to keep alive the militia.”

Southern Gun Forum

You can poll whoever you want, but it doesn't mean a damn thing. It's unconstitutional.

Thomas

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.

We the people in the United States that abide by the laws that understand right from wrong, and in many cases cannot wait for the law to be on our side have the right to carry a firearm of our choice to protect our families. We live in a country that finds it okay that when a person breaks into our home in the get hurt, they can sue us! We live in a country that when someone calls us and tells us they're going to come and kill us there is nothing the police will do until the person is at our front door! We live in a country that thinks a restraining order is really going to stop the person that's been beating his wife and the police won't respond until he's either in the act of beating her or she's already dead! We live in a country where our own government sits on their high horses live in the good life while many of us are having to work two in three jobs just to put food on the table! The reason we have the right to bear arms is to keep our own government at bay and the problem that we have right now is that our government doesn't stand for the people anymore they stand for themselves. We live in a country that when things go bad. We point the finger at media, TV, video games and the government steps in and tells us how we can raise her children, and when our children are great and do great things. The parents get all of the praise but when our kids go out and kill and harm one another. Well, it's kind of hard to blame the parents. Now, isn't it because the governments told us that we can't do anything they tell us to say things like, that's not right, don't do that anymore or go stand in timeout! I guess I'm just a dumb hillbilly and I don't know about you guys but it seems like this big government. We have can't take care of itself. How in the hell is it going to take care of me!

Sincerely, an American that gives a damn

ErnestPayne

Time to run a government based on responsibility and not popularity polls. The justifications for not tightening the gun laws are ludicrous and laughable. It took 20 years to kill 56,000 americans in Vietnam. Between murders and suicides the US Vietnams itself every 23 MONTHS with nary a whimper from the majority.

The comments to this entry are closed.

ABOUT THIS BLOG

"Planet Washington" covers politics and government. It is written by journalists in McClatchy's Washington Bureau.

Send a story suggestion or news tip.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

THIS MONTH

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3 4 5
    6 7 8 9 10 11 12
    13 14 15 16 17 18 19
    20 21 22 23 24 25 26
    27 28 29 30 31    

BLOGROLL