or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Positions on Guns in America
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Positions on Guns in America

Poll Results: How do you feel about guns in the US? (click all that apply)

Poll expired: May 12, 2007 This is a multiple choice poll
  • 19% (38)
    It is too easy to buy a gun in the US.
  • 3% (6)
    The proper systems are in place to control guns.
  • 6% (12)
    Gun control laws already go too far.
  • 7% (15)
    Guns save lives.
  • 14% (28)
    Guns are dangerous and should be strictly controlled.
  • 10% (21)
    Guns are a menace and should be banned.
  • 4% (9)
    The 2nd Amendment is sacrosanct (assuming it allows possession).
  • 13% (26)
    The 2nd Amendment is out of touch with modern America (assuming the same)
  • 3% (7)
    College student should have the right to protect themselves with guns
  • 17% (34)
    College campuses are no place for weapons
196 Total Votes  
post #1 of 367
Thread Starter 
There is already a debate raging in another thread, so I thought it would be good to augment the debate with some data.

With polls limited to only 10 questions, it is difficult to cover all the options, so I have done what I could to make a broad-reaching poll. Hopefully this will show us a few things.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #2 of 367
Thread Starter 
... ... Sorry...

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #3 of 367
Thread Starter 
Sorry... the 2nd question on the 2nd Amendment should not have the phrase " (assuming the same)"... can a mod cut that?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #4 of 367
IMHO, you need to "flatline" your "poll."

It has a clear bias, e. g. no other options like;

1) Fully enforce existing laws on the books.
2) Strengthen existing laws with stiffer penalties (longer jail terms, severity of penalties).
3) Increase existing police forces.
4) Increased (more thorough) background checks/procedures.
5) Make tougher and consistent state/federal laws for mentally deficient individuals.
6) Increased restrictions/training are needed to legally obtain firearms.
7) and 8) see Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors that Explain the Decline and Six that Do Not pages 17 thru 22.

and I'm sure there are others but the point is I had to choose the last one (Which I would have chosen anyway!), but others may feel that your selections are skewed or too limited.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #5 of 367
Thread Starter 
Good input. I am exhausted tonight and it was the best I could come up with in a limited 10 questions. I debated having a thread to come up with good questions and then make the poll, but went ahead and posted. We'll see what people do with it.

Maybe also I was trying more to get an overall feeling of attitudes towards guns and they tend to be pretty well defined.

For example, I would assume that if someone wanted tougher restrictions on purchasing, penalties for possession, etc., that they would choose Guns are too easy to buy in the US.

There are many, many options that could be included, but there is a limit to the number of poll questions. So, unless we created several polls, it would be impossible to completely cover the topic.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #6 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Good input. I am exhausted tonight and it was the best I could come up with in a limited 10 questions. I debated having a thread to come up with good questions and then make the poll, but went ahead and posted. We'll see what people do with it.

No problem! I doubt that if I attempted this that mine would have been any better (probably worse)!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #7 of 367
This poll might have some meaning in a Democracy. We don't live in one. This is a Republic (if we can keep it) and the RKBA is in our founding document. I can go ahead and give you results if you'd like... on this board, I'd say 80% for ever more gun control, 10% undecided, and the balance that actually understand the reality, not the utopian ideal.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #8 of 367
Thread Starter 
Everyone knows how you voted, Jub. Don't worry.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #9 of 367
I think I'm going to head over to the 700 Club site and have a poll on Abortion. Be right back.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #10 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

This poll might have some meaning in a Democracy. We don't live in one. This is a Republic

Perhaps you could explain how a Republic and a Democracy are contradictory.

Oh, that's right: they're unrelated concepts.
post #11 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker View Post

Perhaps you could explain how a Republic and a Democracy are contradictory.

Oh, that's right: they're unrelated concepts.

Rule of Law versus Mob Rule.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #12 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Rule of Law versus Mob Rule.



What do either have to do with democracy or republic? You can argue that the US is becoming less democratic, but that doesn't make it any more or less republican.
post #13 of 367
Thread Starter 
Interesting that the government should have a homepage explaining American Democracy...

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/...ac/preface.htm

And to quote the article:

"A democracy may take the form of a republic or of a limited monarchy, and the ways in which the people's voices are heard and their will carried out are numerous."

Guess the gubberment wants us to think we live in a democracy, albeit a democratic republic.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #14 of 367
Thread Starter 
There are those who feel the Constitution and its amendments are unchangeable. The Constitution iteself says this is not the case.


Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #15 of 367
2nd Amendment: "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."

Any laws restricting my right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional, period. In my opinion, all guns laws should be abolished. The 2nd amendment serves to protect us from our own government, should the need arise, and the minute this right is lessened to any degree, we are no longer truly free.

[edit - typo]
post #16 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ra View Post

2nd Amendment: "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."

Any laws restricting my right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional, period. In my opinion, all guns lays should be abolished. The 2nd amendment serves to protect us from our own government, should the need arise, and the minute this right is lessened to any degree, we are no longer truly free.

You mean like this;



less this;



is OK with you?

Brilliant, simply Brilliant!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #17 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ra View Post

2nd Amendment: "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."

Any laws restricting my right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional, period. In my opinion, all guns lays should be abolished. The 2nd amendment serves to protect us from our own government, should the need arise, and the minute this right is lessened to any degree, we are no longer truly free.

Are you done playing in the sandbox, boy? Dinner is ready.
post #18 of 367
... I want that post on a t-shirt...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #19 of 367
They can never take away our right to arm bears!!!

Oh, wait...

You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #20 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker View Post

Are you done playing in the sandbox, boy? Dinner is ready.

How intelligent. Cute.
post #21 of 367
I just noticed, that as I write this, the vote total displayed indicates 22 total votes, yet the actual number = 76 (summing up the individual vote categories). The bar chart does look proportionately correct, and the percentages are relatively correct, but add up to 100* (76/22)?

Not that it's a biggie to me, but could one of the mods fix this?

EDIT - OK, I now see that we could have chosen more than one category (thus the difference in 76 != 22). But I still think that the percentages should sum up to 100 percent?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #22 of 367
Thread Starter 
Frank, this is a persitent "problem" with the polls here (and a request that has been made before...it would be very nice!); the poll making machine doesn't do it.

Also, for this poll, the questions are in categories, which would require totals of 100 by category, of which there are three or four. It would be great to be able to sub-divide the poll into sections.

Most importantly, it would be helpful to have more than 10 possible questions to allow a thorough coverage of a topic.

Mods: can we get a better polling system?

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #23 of 367
Thread Starter 
Frank: your link to to the factors about crime reduced doesn't work...

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #24 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

Frank: your link to to the factors about crime reduced doesn't work...

Sorry about that, it's been fixed, should work now. The URL I had originally used had an extra space, it's been removed, and I just tested it, and it worked for me.

Give it another try, it should work for you now.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #25 of 367
Thread Starter 
Got it and had a quick look; will give it a good read later today.

I aslo liked the long list of sources at the end, many of which are actually links.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #26 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

This poll might have some meaning in a Democracy. We don't live in one. This is a Republic (if we can keep it) and the RKBA is in our founding document. I can go ahead and give you results if you'd like... on this board, I'd say 80% for ever more gun control, 10% undecided, and the balance that actually understand the reality, not the utopian ideal.

Well if you follow the standard conservative line, you believe in "strict constructionist" judges who will try to interpret the constitution as narrowly as possible, which means that citizens' rights will be as limited as possible, and that includes the 2nd amendment. For instance, a good strict constructionist would argue that only individuals in organized militias have a right to guns, as the 2nd amendment clearly says.
post #27 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

Well if you follow the standard conservative line, you believe in "strict constructionist" judges who will try to interpret the constitution as narrowly as possible, which means that citizens' rights will be as limited as possible, and that includes the 2nd amendment. For instance, a good strict constructionist would argue that only individuals in organized militias have a right to guns, as the 2nd amendment clearly says.

Or... NOT so clearly, as the courts have recently found...

By your particular appraisal of "the conservative line" I'd say that they can all go pound sand. I believe that the Constitution says what it means and means what it says. Almost no one thinks that way anymore. Well, maybe Ron Paul, which is why he's a hero of mine. I think these guys meant what they said:

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms;…"
Honorable Samuel Adams. August 20, 1789

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right to be armed;..."
Thomas Jefferson. June 5, 1824.

"The whole of the Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals … It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of."
Albert Gallatin. October 7, 1789

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
Thomas Jefferson

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
Tench Coxe June 18, 1789

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms;…"
Samuel Adams. February 6, 1788

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." Zachariah Johnson, June 25, 1788

"to preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them …"
Richard Henry Lee, January 25, 1788

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them …"
Thomas Paine, 1775

"Arms in the hands of citizens [may] be used at individual discretion… in private self-defense" John Adams, 1788

"I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." George Mason. June 16, 1788.


-------------
I'm ready for the "those were different times" rebuttals now...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #28 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

[. . .] would argue that only individuals in organized militias have a right to guns, as the 2nd amendment clearly says.

Actually, the 2nd amendment says the people have the right to guns:

"[. . .] the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
post #29 of 367
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
MA700LL/A arrived.
---
Latitude D600, PowerEdge 1600SC, OptiPlex GX520
Reply
post #30 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ra View Post

Actually, the 2nd amendment says the people have the right to guns:

"[. . .] the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

You removed the context.
post #31 of 367
"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."

I think if they meant "the militia has a right to keep and bear arms" they would have written it that way. They are amazingly concise and clear on so many issues. There's a comma there, BTW...

The "national guard" argument is getting tired. It's not been interpreted to say that ever, in court or in custom, in over 200 years. We are getting close to finally having a court recognize it as an individual right... like in DC.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #32 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by 100mph View Post

Guns:
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm


Oh goody! A bloodbath we can capitalize on so we can take guns from people that didn't do it! Weeeee!
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #33 of 367
Political Outsider: Soon to Be Voted a Gun Free Zone.




A board full of liberals want to ban guns? Now we have proof? Brilliant!
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #34 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

You removed the context.

I'm not so sure it's context though... it seems more to me that it's explanation.
post #35 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Or... NOT so clearly, as the courts have recently found...

By your particular appraisal of "the conservative line" I'd say that they can all go pound sand. I believe that the Constitution says what it means and means what it says. Almost no one thinks that way anymore. Well, maybe Ron Paul, which is why he's a hero of mine. I think these guys meant what they said:

[I]"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms;"
Honorable Samuel Adams. August 20, 1789

Ha, it has become a conditioned response for you guys. Bring up guns, and you can't help yourself from copying and pasting streams of quotes from gun websites.

If you can't say you care about the actual words of the 2nd Amendment, and at the same time disregard the 50% of it that refers to a "well-regulated militia." I'm not a strict constructionist, and I think the Constitution can be interpreted broadly. But a true strict constructionist would

BTW, you refer to what the courts have said on this. Did you know that the Supreme Court has never, not even once, used the Second Amendment to strike down a gun control law? The only time it has addressed it (US v. Miller), the Supreme Court upheld a gun control law because the Second Amendment only applied to weapons necessary for a well-regulated militia.
post #36 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I think I'm going to head over to the 700 Club site and have a poll on Abortion. Be right back.

You know Jub it doesn't say here " Liberal Computer Website " in the title.

Back in 2001 this forum was full of conservative viewpoint. Eating up the results of Bush's rhetoric and 911. Well times have changed ( even people who used to lean in that direction have ). I know you weren't here then ( if your profile is honest that is ) but that's what happened. The rightwing rhetoric just ran out of steam.

The real rightwingnut hardliners mostly left ( few in number ).

So I think this is more or less representative of the populace as a whole.

If you don't believe me look at some of the recent polls out there.

Times are changing.

The fact of the matter is I don't liike government telling people how to live either. However with this gun thing humans on this planet just don't seem to have matured as much as we'd like to think they have. They act like children. And you don't give a child a loaded weapon.

So for their own safety ( and ours ) and because they've proven time and again they can't act in a responsible manner they must lose the privilege of owning a firearm. I really wish it was different. A lot of people would still be alive.

I always think it's funny that people are so prolife on abortion and yet not so much on gun law.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #37 of 367
I think the second amendment is clearly worded and states that the people should be armed because the state will always have its own militia (as it's necessary to the security of a free state).

That being said, I think the second amendment should be repealed.

You gun nuts always bring up that if nobody were armed then only the criminals would have arms. Well, what if everybody were armed?

Do you think that might change the way criminals consider using their arms?

I would say so. If I were a criminal and sure that my quarry were armed, I'd have to find some way to bring the advantage back to my favor.

That would mean gaining the element of surprise, and using overwhelming firepower to my advantage. Overwhelming firepower could be through numerical superiority, or the use of superior weapon systems, assualt style weapons with large magazine capacities would be more than enough, and cheap too!
post #38 of 367
[CENTER][/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #39 of 367
Whoa, that makes me dizzy!
post #40 of 367
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsLan^ View Post

Whoa, that makes me dizzy!

I couldn't resist!

Following the firearm and abortion threads (BTW, I've got 3 STATIC images over there) does make one rather dizzy!

Artman has his MP animation, now I have an AI/PO animation too!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Positions on Guns in America