Hot on the heels of a national Rasmussen poll that showed declining support for stricter gun control measures, and a public response to a proposed ban on firearms on city parks property by out-going Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels comes a new poll released by Gallup that also shows the lowest support ever among Americans for banning handgun possession.
This cannot make the gun prohibitionist lobby very happy, and it just might cool the jets of people like Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, though that might be wishful thinking.
I wrote about the Rasmussen poll here, and about the overwhelmingly negative reaction to the Nickels gun ban here. Mayor Nickels is out of a job at the end of this year, but there is some indication that his proposal might be favored by his successor, whether that person is Joe Mallahan or Mike McGinn. Both have said they support the idea, which Attorney General Rob McKenna has already said is blatantly illegal, so now they are both on record supporting a gun ban agenda that has no foundation in law.
The poll also shows a new low in the percentage of Americans favoring a ban on handgun possession except by the police and other authorized persons, a question that dates back to 1959. Only 28% now favor such a ban.
But to the Gallup poll, which was conducted earlier this month. According to Gallup, only 44 percent of those who responded think gun laws need to be stricter. Back in 1990 when the question was first asked as part of Gallup’s annual Crime Poll, 78 percent felt that gun laws needed strengthening.
As for a total ban on handguns except for the police, only 28 percent of Americans now subscribe to that philosophy.
But there is more revealing information. As did the Rasmussen poll results show, Gallup’s results also reveal that a majority of Democrats (66%) still support stricter gun laws, and 67% of self-described liberals want tighter gun restrictions. Not surprisingly, 59 percent of Easterners want more gun laws; they have been living with gun restrictions so long, they think the entire nation should follow that whim.
Rather, Americans as a whole may just be more accepting of gun rights now than in the past. Compared with views in 2000, each major demographic or attitudinal subgroup has shown a shift toward a more pro-gun stance on the question about whether gun laws should be more strict or less strict.
Of course, gun owners want fewer restrictions, as do self-described conservatives and Republicans.
Not surprising, then, that the Los Angeles Times, a traditionally anti-gun newspaper with a decidedly anti-gun editorial slant, seems to have suddenly discovered that the Bill of Rights should be protected from erosion, and that limits on the federal government to restrict those rights also should apply to the states. The Times surprised a lot of people last week when it published an editorial supporting incorporation of the Second Amendment as a limitation on state and local governments.
Even with the change, there are some subgroups among whom a majority continues to favor stricter gun laws, including liberals (67%), Democrats (66%), Easterners (59%), gun non-owners (57%), postgraduates (55%), women (55%), and nonwhites (51%).The groups least in favor of stricter gun laws are gun owners (20%), Republicans (28%), conservatives (30%), and men (33%).
The newspaper, however reluctantly, acknowledged, “If you support measures to reduce gun violence, as this page does, it’s tempting to hope that the court will rule that states aren’t bound by the 2nd Amendment. The problem is that allowing states (and cities) to ignore this part of the Bill of Rights could undermine the requirement that they abide by others.”
This is no time for the court to start picking and choosing when it comes to the Bill of Rights. - Los Angeles Times
The Times was alluding to a case now before the U.S. Supreme Court: McDonald v. City of Chicago. Filed jointly by the Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association with four local plaintiffs, this case could lead to incorporation of the Second Amendment to the states through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment.
Isn’t it about time?
Visit with other Gun Rights Examiners:
And Don’t forget to visit:
For more info: Second Amendment Foundation. Chicago Gun Case
Comments
amen
love live the 2nd amendment & to hell with anti-gunners aka
anti-freedom zealots
The fact that MILLIONS of DOLLARS has to be spent to protect a right which is plainly defined in our Bill of Rights, and other laws, SHOWS HOW MUCH THE CRIMINALS OF THE NATION ARE AFRAID OF HONEST CITIZENS BEING ABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND THEIR NATION!
Corrupt dictator wannabes are now using Michael Bloomberg to poop out their lies and manure. And he joined as quickly as he could getx on his knees and kiss their arses!
None Are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.----Johann W. Goethe--- Restore the Honor to our country and Reveal the Truth about the corrupt politicians who are robbing us of the freedoms we hold so dear. People separated from their history are easily persuaded.---Karl Marx---
I agree with Charles--it's dumbfounding how restricted our right to bear arms has become. Gun control does not stop criminals from attaining weapons--it only hurts the law-abiding citizen trying to defend themselves.
Make no mistake, your life is in YOUR hands. It's not the duty of the police to protect individual citizens. The police will rarely be there when you need them. It's your responsibility to protect yourself and your family.
Time and time again, we've seen countries ban handguns, only to see handgun crime rise because criminals knew their victims couldn't put up an equal force resistance. The same happened in Chicago and D.C., and it's about time Americans stood up for their right to bear arms and defend themselves.
I can only hope we continue to see Concealed Carry Permits on the rise and more people exercise their right to Open Carry as well.
Guns are not the enemy! Those who wish you harm are the enemy, and will do so by any means. A gun is merely a defensive
Continued from last post...
"A gun is merely a defensive tool!"
McGinn aligns with Nickels.
mcginnformayor.com/2009/10/clear-choice-emerging-on-firearm-safety-and-gun-control/
It was Halloween night and one of my favorite costumes happens to be a 16th Century Tudor of King George (my wife has the matching outfit). I have a number of costume prop swords that go with it.
We saw that a local pub down the way from us was having a costume contest and we wanted to go have some fun. As I researched 'the laws' (like a good law-abiding citizen with internet can do) I read that ominous clause about 'if anyone shows concern about me carrying a knife, sword, gun, or anything that could be termed a weapon'....then I could lose my Concealed Carry Permit. Wah?!? So, I decided to leave my broad sword PROP at home and head on over to the bar...guess what, there was a guy there was a Colt National Match 45 in a shoulder holster playing Agent Smith from The Matrix, in a bar getting hammered. I tried hard to see if there was a mag in it, and I don't think there was, but everyone in the bar gave him 500 double-takes...most people showed up with plastic guns & swords.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!