This polling information was collected last October, which Gallup does mention in its third paragraph. Yet it certainly begs the question: Why publish a statement based on data that is almost six months old, in the wake of a string of mass shootings committed over the past month?
The pressures of getting into the news cycle are powerful, but the important question is what Americans believe about gun violence prevention policy today.
What's even more disturbing is for Gallup to ask Americans whether or not they support a total ban on handguns when that policy has not been pursued nationwide in years and totally ignores the current debate on gun violence prevention.
It seems the Gallup Poll, that inviolate bastion of truth all Americans respect, is just another mouthpiece for the gun lobby. What else could explain the terrible discrepancies Paul pointed out?
The Bradys, meanwhile, conducted their own survey. Not surprising, very different results were achieved.
For example, the Brady Campaign commissioned a survey of 1,083 people who voted on Election Day last year to find out their attitudes on a handful of gun law proposals. The results showed:
83% of voters support requiring background checks for all gun sales in this country;
68% support registration of gun sales and licensing of gun owners; and
65% support banning military-style assault weapons;
These wide majorities include McCain voters and gun owners who support these policies, as well. (Not surprisingly, some of these results compare favorably to a CNN poll taken in June of last year.)
What's your opinion? Is it possible that the folks who run the Gallup Poll can be influenced by external forces? Is it conceivable that some of them, the ones making Gallup decisions, are biased towards the pro-gun side?
Those three ideas presented by the Bradys as having wide support among the American people, do you think they're practical? Who are the people opposing background checks for all gun transactions? What do they find objectionable in that?
Is registering and licensing guns and gun owners something we could do? Wouldn't that help?
And what about those famous "assault weapons?" Have we agreed on a definition we can all live with? Is such a thing possible, to define them?
What's your opinion? Why do some gun owners resist the Brady approach so vehemently? Why are they so threatened by all this?
Please leave a comment.