Outposts

Outdoors, action, adventure

« Previous Post | Outposts Home | Next Post »

U.S. is a pro-gun nation, especially from a Republican viewpoint, survey finds

Hunters on dawn patrol in search of doves.

The October issue of Outdoor Life arrived in the mail today, and inside are recent poll results that might be of interest to hunters and fishermen.

The polls, conducted by Rasmussen Reports, asked whether the Constitution guarantees the right to own a gun and what was behind the recent increase in gun sales.

Among Americans polled, 75% said the Constitution guaranteed the right to own a gun. The percentage of "yes" answers was higher among Republicans (92%) and lower among Democrats (64%). Among others, 71% answered yes.

As for the second question, 57% of those polled cited fear of increased government restrictions as the reason for a spike in gun sales; 23% said it was because of a fear of crime, while 20% were unsure.

What Outdoor Life left out was that Americans appear to be evenly divided regarding the much hotter issue of gun control: 44% of respondents said stricter laws are needed, while 44% said they're not. The other 12% were unsure.

Republicans and Democrats were evenly divided as well: 63% of Republicans polled said they opposed stricter gun laws while 62% of Democrats said stricter laws are needed.

A Rasmussen poll conducted last October found that 63% of U.S. voters believed Barack Obama would be more inclined to restrict gun rights than John McCain, his rival in the presidential election (84% of Republicans answered yes to this question).

To be sure, it was no coincidence that the run on guns and ammo began when it became clear who would win that election.

-- Pete Thomas

Photo: Hunters on dawn patrol in search of doves. Credit: George Wilhelm / Los Angeles Times

 
Post a comment
If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate.
Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In





Comments (27)

Guns are essential to self-defense, national defense, and Liberty. The founders of the United States understood this and guaranteed the individual right against government limitations. Gun control, with its roots in racism, is still a tool to destroy individual human rights. The roots of anti-social violence should be addressed, not the means.

The people who feel we need stricter laws, do not know what the laws are. If they did some research on thier own I am quite sure they would realize it is not the law, but enforement of the law that is the problem.

This nation was founded by those that took up arms against a tyrannical government. The right of the citizen to keep & bear arms is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, just like freedom of speech & religion. The problem is that Congress has repealed the right to free speech as they have effectively silenced the NRA during elections. They are attempting to silence talk radio and they have established a precedence to do it. Only right to bear arms will defend the right to free speech.

Don't rely on the Constitution to preserve your liberties and rights. Many member of congress claim they support the Constitution while in secret, they're using it as toilet paper. Americans need to get off their butts and start flooding congress with emails to let them know just how serious we are about preserving ALL of our Constitutional rights.

Here's a link to an EXCELLENT organization that keeps us informed of anti-gun legislation that congress is trying to cram down our throats. They will alert you of such issues, pre-compose a letter either for or against proposed legislation and all YOU have to do, is enter your zip code and sign and send the email to your representatives in congress. So easy a caveman can do it!

Here's the link. Sign up for Email Alerts (It's free) and start doing your part!

http://gunowners.org/current-alerts/

Thanks and God Bless America, Again!

Quench Rise

Wrong again. The National Guard is a voluteer force not like the mandatory Swiss conscription for all able bodied men. The Swiss government does not rquire the registration to machine guns issued to the militia since the guns belong to the Swiss government. When the Swiss citizen is not completes their service they are permitted to purchase the weapon from the state but is not required to register the gun. But there are people like you in Switzerland that want all personal guns registered.

US Code section #311 the definition of militia includes those that are the "Unorganized Militia who not in the National Guard or Naval Guard." This means all able bodied mean who is capable of serving in the US military is a member of the militia. If it weren't for that definition of the Unorganized militia according to a SCOTUS decision,in 1918, on the Selective Service Act congress could not draft citizens to raise an army.

Since the Swiss conscripts and National Guard are already good in safe gun handling without registration why are you requiring registration for a Guard to take home a state issued weapon? The only reason you want registration like in California is to be able to lawfully confiscate a gun from a gun owner with the threat of prison time for refusing to turn in their lawfully owned guns. Without registration California citizens can't be forced to turn in a legally owned firearm by the threat of prison time.

Gun crimes are already solved without registration based on the fact the BATF has data on who purchased each gun in the US.

Quench Rise is just a moron. TXCptCSA is right on. I prefer to think I cannot wait for a cop to arrive. My right to protect myself & my loved ones preemtps any other directive. I've been there and done that. I know without a doubt what necessary force is.
Thank You.

Gun control laws don't work for one simple reason, by definition criminals don't obey laws!

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy!

"Among Americans polled, 75% said the Constitution guaranteed the right to own a gun. "
I find this statement to be EXTREMELY disturbing. It means that 25% of the respondents are uneducated, mentally defective boobs, incapable of comprehending the content of a single sentence!

What other meaning could possibly be attributed to the 2nd amendment, than to guarantee the right to own a gun?

You really had to issue a poll in order to find out if America is Pro-Gun?

The Second Amendment is at the very core of what is American. I think a more interesting poll would be to ask how many Democrats are members of the DSA...Democratic Socialist Association of America. These people are nothing short of Anti-American! Show me a Socialist or Communist country that has fared well without access to firearms? I'm sure that list will be some what limited. But I can name a half dozen countries either Socialist or Communist where the people has suffered at the hands of their own government and was denied access to firearms. So why the push from Socialist Democrats to eliminate firearms? It's about control over the people. Capitalism maybe flawed but it grants the people freedom.

http://www.semiautorifles.com/

There will always be a segment of society (murderers, rapists, etc.) that should not be allowed access to firearms. In addition, there are some weapons that need restrictions (Tactical nukes, 155mm Howitzers, 16 inch cannons, etc.). The trouble starts when one individual feels threatened at the prospect of another having a weapon and no actual reason exists to prevent the lawful ownership of that weapon by that person. Basically, human beings are tool users and like a knife, fork spoon, hammer, drill, baseball bat, screwdriver, etc. a gun is nothing more than a tool designed by a human being to compensate for physical shortcomings to accomplish an objective. In the case of a weapon (gun) the ability of a 110 pound woman to resist being raped and murdered by someone 50 to 100 pounds heavier than her is equalized by the ability of that woman to own and use a gun to inflict serious physical damage to the assailant that she would not otherwise be able to do while waiting for the police to arrive. Some people still hunt out of necessity to place food on their plates and keep their families fed. Denying these people the right to own a gun for hunting denies them the basic right of survival. So when someone attempts to rationalize that there is no need for people to own guns, each argument can be opposed with a counter argument. Nevertheless, until the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights are abolished, the people of the United States are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms.

Quench Rise,
One of the problems with your data is that most of those countries play games with their crime statistics. For instance, Japan doesn't even include "loss of face" whole family murders/suicide in their crime data. In Britain, you can't even get the cops to take a crime report. They are desperate to keep the crime numbers down, and this is how they "fix" their problem. Violent crimes have skyrocketed since they disarmed the public. It's an ISLAND, and they can't keep the bad guys from bringing in lots of guns!

I would adopt all Swiss gun laws in a second as a more measured and reasonable approach.

Our equivalent to the Swiss, the National Guard, has a pretty good record on gun safety as well. I would have no problem with every member of the National Guard having a registered machine gun in their home if they were held just as accountable as their Swiss counterparts. I would also have no problem with keeping guns off the streets like the Swiss do as well.

But I don't know why the English genocide going on doesn't get more press though.

Here in California north of Sacramento, most of the county sheriffs believe qualified citizens have a right to own and carry handguns to protect themselves and their loved ones. My business, BullsEye Tactical Firearms Training, has experienced an explosion of concealed carry license applicants who desire training.

Students tell me two reasons why they want to obtain the training; they are worried about what restrictions Obama may impose in the future, and/or they are concerned about a rise in crime during the current economic depression that is far from over. I am seeing many more students from the San Francisco Bay Area, Sacramento, and the Los Angles area who could be considered "liberal" minded, who have never owned guns before.

The issue of more gun control is rapidly losing advocates as more and more Californians realize the motto of my BullsEye training T-Shirts; "When seconds count, the police are minutes away!"

Which cities in the United States have the highest murder rates? How about Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Detroit, Baltimore, Washington, Atlanta, et al. What is the political party is in charge in each of these cities, and have been in power for years? The Democrats! Do you think that maybe the liberal leanings of the people in power in these cities may have something to do with the crime rate? The figures are there!

The problem with gun control as a solution is that it ultimately equates to civilian disarmament, whether by confiscation (or registration followed by confiscation). Historically this has always been followed by a savage slaughter in the tens of millions. Governments, armies, and police can be bought and sold to the highest bidder. I'd rather take my chances getting hurt by an individual thug than an elitist government gone psychotic that unleashes an army of thugs. When you take away the right of the people to be armed, the bayonettes will be pointing at YOU. No thanks.

bama and plossie will try to take guns away or make ammo so high only a rich man can aford it anny body with a lick of sense knows all law abiding people carrying guns makes a safer plase 2 live because crooks don,t know who has or has not . just look at dc, and see the crime rate against towns that alow you 2 carry them . even a dumb person can see that . coarse a person can be just so dumb and blumberg and a few more has hit the bottom !!!

Society is safer when criminals don't know who's armed... It's that simple.... and if you don't agree with me - You're
worse than Hitler !!

Quench Rise

The Swiss, whose citizens have machine guns in their homes, according to Nationmaster have a lower murder rate then United Kingdom or Autralia.

As for guns in peoples hand a defense against gov. tyranny. The two longest continues republics in the western nations the US and Switzerland give their citizens the right to keep and bear arms.

If less strict laws on guns increase crime the 2008 FBI Uniform Crime Report would show California's murder rate at 5.8 to be lower then less gun restriction state but is not true. Oregon has a rate of 2.2. Even gun happy Texas (5.6) has a lower murder rate then California.

If guns were the only cause for the rise in crime why does the FBI Uniform Crime Report show a decrease in homicide from 1991(9.8) to 2008 at 5.4 when there is an rise in gun ownership by civilians now, especially those menacing so called assualt weapons?

You may actually want to read your reference:

"DEFINITION: Note: Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence . Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population. "

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita%29#definition

To Quench Rise:

While that statistic might be true, what about overall crime? Using your "source" (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_percap-crime-total-crimes-per-capita) let's see how it plays out.

Funny how the UK beats the US in total crimes per capita. The point isn't about who has more crime, it's about the trends after strict gun control legislation goes into effect. As seen, regardless of what nation, crime increases because only criminals have guns. Make sense?

A question for "Quench Rise".
Can you show me where in the Bill of Rights it says that geography determines where and when civil rights can be violated?

Only the first sentence of Quench Rise | September 22, 2009 at 10:09 AM is correct. Everything after that is unsupported conjecture or just flat wrong.

First, remove the murders and populations of the handfull of cities with the most restrictive gun laws in the U.S. and the murder rate for the nation plummets. Further, in those places in the U.S. that have been RELAXING gun laws the violent crime rate is decreasing at a faster rate than those places that have not.

Second, Kates and Mauser showed conclusively (especially in Europe) that the murder rate is unrelated gun ownship rates but is more a matter of culture.

Find (google) the study published in the Harvard Law site:
WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE
MURDER AND SUICIDE?
A REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL AND
SOME DOMESTIC EVIDENCE
DON B. KATES* AND GARY MAUSER**

and you will see just how wrong Quench is.

You are THREE (3) times as likely to be murdered in the USA than in the United Kingdom or Australia (and just about every other First world nation).

http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita&b_map=1

Gun ownership does afford some protection of a population from its government, but please don't be so delusional as to think you are safer by having a proliferation of arms amongst the population.

Having the right to bear arms comes at a huge cost.

The bad guys buy guns just as easily as anyone else in this country. Gun control laws are for urban areas where there are too many bad guys with guns doing bad things. Please use common sense and realize what works in the woods in Virginia isn't going to work in New York City.

Yes the U.S. is a pro-gun nation,and it should be. This nation was founded by those that took up arms against a tyrannical government. The right of the citizen to keep & bear arms is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights,just like freedom of speech & religion. History shows that Gun Laws have no effect on crime.The Fabled North Hollywood Shootout http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout
was perpetrated by convicted felons who couldn't lawfully own or posess firearms. They robbed a bank,shot at and wounded police officers,the weapons used were full auto with high capacity magazines,all of which are illegal on either a state or federal level. In this case the most restrictive gun laws in the nation, and it's A+ rating from the Brady Campaign did nothing to slow these criminals. Laws only effect those who are inclined to obey the law.It is beyond absurd for law abiding citizens to be punished for the actions of the criminal element. And while protection of our LEO's and general public safety is incredibly important. Further laws will be just as inneffective as the current ones. I strongly advocate the Enforcement of current laws. Make the penalties for commiting a crime with a firearm severe & swift. No more slaps on the wrist & no more,It's because of (insert excuse here). People must be held responsible for their actions. We will see a change in the crime rate when the risk of and punishment for ,far exceed the benefits of criminal activity..

The United States has always been a country that believes firearms are a tradition and a right. This will continue, as it should.

Gun control is not about guns, it's about control!

We will not be disarmed, because a few politicans don't like firearms.

 

Connect

Recommended on Facebook


Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...


About the Bloggers
Outposts' primary contributor is Kelly Burgess.



Categories


Archives