Wednesday, April 1, 2015

Strong Opposition to Constitutional Carry

Huffington Post

A vast majority of likely 2016 voters oppose legislation that would allow gun owners to carry their concealed weapons without a permit, according to a new national poll released Wednesday. 

The poll, shared first with The Huffington Post and conducted on behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety, a coalition of gun control groups, was done to assess public attitudes toward carrying concealed weapons. The issue is a timely one, as three state legislatures -- in West Virginia, Kansas and Montana -- are considering rolling back some of their permit requirements. 

Everytown found that 88 percent of likely 2016 voters oppose concealed carry without a permit, and 57 percent of voters said they would be less likely to support a candidate who voted to allow concealed carry without a permit. 

Even 80 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of gun owners opposed concealed carry without a permit. 

21 comments:

  1. The poll, shared first with The Huffington Post and conducted on behalf of Everytown for Gun Safety . . .

    Well, there can be no doubt that this poll was designed to be objective, without a hint of agenda-driven advocacy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Well, there can be no doubt that this poll was designed to be objective, without a hint of agenda-driven advocacy"

      Kurt, I'm SHOCKED by your cynical attitude that suggests that the poll results might somehow be in any way biased. Or maybe its because they are quite honest in where their loyalties lie,

      "Because we have expertise in so many areas we can truly prioritize our clients’ resources, and be intellectually honest about what it will take to win. That may include PR or government relations or social media, but maybe not. Our work is driven by our clients’ objectives, not our own."

      "We know the decision makers who matter, and we set up the environment to advance your agenda on the local, regional, state or national level."

      http://www.strategies360.com/about

      Delete
    2. "We know the decision makers who matter, and we set up the environment to advance your agenda on the local, regional, state or national level."

      Yep--saw that. Was holding it in reserve in case Mikeb challenged my assertion that they design polls with the explicit intent of achieving the desired results ;-).

      Delete
    3. ...and we set up the environment to advance your agenda...

      There's the money quote right there. Nice find, Sarge.

      Perfect example is that the question about permit-less carry is phrased in such a way to imply it would make it legal for people with criminal records to carry.

      Delete
    4. So, let's cut the numbers way down. The point remains.

      Delete
  2. Don't count on the American people's beliefs becoming law.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It appears that the voters will have a chance to make their opinions heard in 2016 if the vast majority claim is true. I wonder if they can do a recall similar to the ones that resulted in three congresscritters losing their jobs in Colorado.

    "Gov. Sam Brownback is preparing to sign a bill allowing Kansas residents to carry concealed firearms without a permit.
    The Republican governor's office set the Statehouse signing ceremony for Thursday. Legislators approved the measure last week, and the new law would take effect July 1."

    http://www.kmbc.com/news/kansas-to-allow-carrying-of-concealed-guns-without-permit/32148438?absolute=true

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wonder if they can do a recall similar to the ones that resulted in three congresscritters losing their jobs in Colorado.

      Kansas does seem to have a provision for holding recall elections to oust statewide elected officials.

      So, yep--those who are claiming that the "vast majority" of voters are opposed to Constitutional carry will have a chance to prove it in Kansas. If they don't, that would be quite instructive, too, wouldn't it?

      Delete
    2. One State does not make national consensus, nor does 3, 4, 5, or 6. Put it up for national vote, then you can say it's what the majority of the whole country wants. My point above was, the people are not consulted when politicians write laws. Politicians push what they want and they don't need the people to approve, only a few other politicians willing to vote for a bill.

      Delete
    3. "One State does not make national consensus, nor does 3, 4, 5, or 6. Put it up for national vote, then you can say it's what the majority of the whole country wants."

      Notwithstanding that we do the representative democracy thing in this country, considering that over 80% of the states have either shall issue permit systems or Constitutional carry, you might want to think hard before calling for such a vote. In fact, with only nine states opting for a May issue permit system, it could be argued that there is no consensus for such a system.

      "My point above was, the people are not consulted when politicians write laws. Politicians push what they want and they don't need the people to approve, only a few other politicians willing to vote for a bill."

      I disagree with your assertion that politicians don't need the people to approve of the bills they introduce and support. First they need to be elected by the people, who base their voting decision based of the politician's position on issues.
      Once elected, while they are free to introduce legislation and get it passed dependent on support of their fellow representatives, if they don't keep their promises that got them elected, or aren't responsive to feedback from the voters, they can quickly find themselves out of office after the next election, or possibly sooner if they allow recall elections, which resulted in three Colorado Democrats losing their jobs.

      Delete
    4. You guys should stop bringing this one up.

      " I wonder if they can do a recall similar to the ones that resulted in three congresscritters losing their jobs in Colorado. "

      That was 3 out of 35. In other words the irate gun-rights voters in CO left 33 congresspeople in office who voted on that abomination, as Kurt calls it.

      Delete
    5. In other words the irate gun-rights voters in CO left 33 congresspeople in office . . .

      What the hell does Congress have to do with this? These were (emphasis were, and no longer are) state senators.

      Delete
    6. "That was 3 out of 35. In other words the irate gun-rights voters in CO left 33 congresspeople in office who voted on that abomination, as Kurt calls it."

      Actually Mike, your math is a bit off. The Senate passed it by a single vote, 18 to 17. And three of those who voted in favor ended up out of office. A pretty clear message. In fact, the Senate majority has now changed parties and has resulted in this bit of news,

      "Taking advantage of the first Republican majority in a decade, GOP lawmakers in the Colorado Senate on Monday gave approval to a bill to end the state’s 2013 limit on magazines holding 15 or more rounds.
      The measure passed on a voice vote but is expected to pass a formal roll call next week in the chamber, which is narrowly controlled by the GOP."

      http://www.guns.com/2015/03/17/senate-votes-to-repeal-colorado-magazine-limit-law/

      Delete
    7. "Taking advantage of the first Republican majority in a decade, GOP lawmakers in the Colorado Senate on Monday gave approval to a bill to end the state’s 2013 limit on magazines holding 15 or more rounds.
      The measure passed on a voice vote but is expected to pass a formal roll call next week in the chamber, which is narrowly controlled by the GOP."


      Oh, that would be sweet, but not nearly as sweet as the anguished bleating from the gun ban zealots.

      Delete
    8. 'you might want to think hard before calling for such a vote"
      You are obviously mistaking me for someone against such a law.
      The people must have wanted the Patriot Act and all the freedoms it took away, the people reelected that ideology. I disagree with your simplistic description of how politics work. The fact that crooked politicians (some convicted criminals) are reelected regularly shows the people could care less and don't even know what Congress is up to.

      Delete
    9. "The fact that crooked politicians (some convicted criminals) are reelected regularly shows the people could care less and don't even know what Congress is up to."

      You make a very good point Jack. In fact we, not so long ago discussed such a politician,

      "Democratic Virginia state delegate Joseph Morrissey, who reached a plea agreement for charges relating to a sexual relationship he had with his 17-year-old office assistant, is yet to decide whether he will resign or commute to work from jail."

      http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/12/republican-response-to-torture-report.html

      At the federal level, there are no limitations in regards to convicted criminals being elected and holding office. And the rules vary from state to state.
      However, legality aside, I still suggest that the voters still get to decide. If they decide to elect someone with a record to represent them, then that is their choice. And if they, at least at the state level, to close this "loophole" that allows felons access to wielding governmental power, then that can be addressed at that level.
      I am curious, can you give an example of some convicted criminals who have been regularly reelected? It would be interesting to see what kind of crimes the voters consider to be acceptable for an elected official to have broken.

      Delete
    10. Good point, ss. It's really 3 out of 18 who voted for the new law. My point remains though. Why have the other 15 been allowed to continue if the law is such an abomination and the gun rights folks in CO are all that powerful.

      Delete
    11. Why have the other 15 been allowed to continue if the law is such an abomination and the gun rights folks in CO are all that powerful.

      Because recalling a senator is a monumental task. That's why it had never happened in Colorado until those two gun ban zealots were recalled (if memory serves, technically, the third wasn't recalled, but resigned when she saw the writing on the wall, so that Gov. Chickencooper could appoint a Democrat to replace her).

      Delete
    12. "Why have the other 15 been allowed to continue if the law is such an abomination and the gun rights folks in CO are all that powerful."

      The same could be said of the claimed support of "common sense" gun laws being supported by astronomical percentages. If there is such large support for these laws, why weren't any elected officials who voted against passage of the laws recalled? If fact, it wasn't until the recall elections that the Republicans gained a majority in the midterm elections.
      It speaks also to the claim that the NRA is some leviathan that holds all politicians under their power. There is extreme rhetoric on both sides, but the real world situation is somewhere in between.

      Delete
  4. By now you've learned that conservative "values" have crashed whole states, and conservative in Ks, Wis, ok and La are running scared. You open carry initiatives are Doa. And in 2016 your programs will receive an unprecedented rebuke.

    ReplyDelete