# Gun Law Poll



## blacktailslayer (Feb 21, 2007)

Here is a current gun law poll. 76% of the people so far are in favor of stricter gun laws. Let’s see if we can change that by getting our vote in. 

Obama must man up on guns -- take the political heat and fight for sane limits to firearm sales
By Judith Miller 
Friday, January 14th 2011, 4:00 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions...tical_heat_and_get_tough_on_sane_limits_.html


----------



## PArcheryhunter (Feb 1, 2010)

We don't need more gun laws but enforcement of the laws. It only hurts the law abiding citizens if their are more.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

lots of sheep want more controls but most of the comments are anti gun control

Judith Miller is a leftwing psychobabbler BTW


----------



## dale gribble (Jan 18, 2011)

My wife & I just saw an episode of "judge alex" where he (alex) went off on a FIREFIGHTER for owning a gun! Alex said he "didn't feel safe now that everyone has carry-conceal"! It was disgusting to hear a JUDGE spit on the 2nd amend.


----------



## 410gage (Dec 14, 2008)

Blackie. Do you really think a gun rights poll taken of only New York Times readers is representative of this great country? They would always have a seriously skewed result, just as if we take the same poll of readers of almost any big city urban newspaper. But the NYT might have the most left leaning readership this side of Paris, France. 
We do need to stay alert, but with the new makeup of the House, gun restrictions will only be on the agenda of a few lefties. That said, Peter King (R) of New York, did surprise with his opinions last week.


----------



## Curve1 (Nov 25, 2009)

I dont believe that poll for at all. They dont tell you how they ask the questions on these polls. If a poll is taken in LA or NY City, you might get 76%.
Besides, if 76% did favor more gun laws, it shouldn't matter because the 2nd Amendment already addresses this issue.
Problem is ,the Socialst in DC dont recognize the Constitution....that's the problem. I take what I hear from the main-stream media with a grain of salt....85% of them are leftist.


----------



## supermonkey (Feb 19, 2008)

The results of this New York should not be surprising. I say we take the same poll in KENTUCKY and send the results to the New York Times and see if they do a story about it.


----------



## dale gribble (Jan 18, 2011)

Curve1 said:


> I dont believe that poll for at all. They dont tell you how they ask the questions on these polls. If a poll is taken in LA or NY City, you might get 76%.
> Besides, if 76% did favor more gun laws, it shouldn't matter because the 2nd Amendment already addresses this issue.
> Problem is ,the Socialst in DC dont recognize the Constitution....that's the problem. I take what I hear from the main-stream media with a grain of salt....85% of them are leftist.


You are so right, only the % is probably even higher........much higher!


----------



## cookiemonster (Dec 4, 2006)

The problem most people believe that laws will stop murder and violent crimes. The only thing that will is tougher punishment longer sentences. If you look at what happen in one country that outlawed handguns murder and home invasions increased by 80%. So tougher gun laws will not make it better.


----------



## Curve1 (Nov 25, 2009)

cookiemonster said:


> The problem most people believe that laws will stop murder and violent crimes. The only thing that will is tougher punishment longer sentences. If you look at what happen in one country that outlawed handguns murder and home invasions increased by 80%. So tougher gun laws will not make it better.



I believe the leftist politicians know this, but, they are concerned with gaining control. Only a handfull of anti-gun supporters really believe that gun control works.


----------



## Seneca Archer (Feb 25, 2010)

Throwing around labels like "the socialist in DC", "leftist politicians", "left wing psychobabbler" etc does nothing to bolster your arguments, IMO it simply helps alienates those in "the middle" who are undecided about the issue or have an opinion but are willing to listen to "valid" arguments based on facts not political rhetoric or "name-calling". 

Jim


----------



## Curve1 (Nov 25, 2009)

Seneca Archer said:


> Throwing around labels like "the socialist in DC", "leftist politicians", "left wing psychobabbler" etc does nothing to bolster your arguments, IMO it simply helps alienates those in "the middle" who are undecided about the issue or have an opinion but are willing to listen to "valid" arguments based on facts not political rhetoric or "name-calling".
> 
> Jim



The post above are based on facts. It is really simple, the leftist politicians [ Democrat or Republican] are Socilaist....that is an accurate description. They are Socialist because they support Socialist rheteric. As for myself, I'm not a Republican nor Democrat.
Both parties have done their fair share of trampling Constitutional rights. Constitutional rights as penned in the Constitution......not what some activist judge decides is Constitutional.


----------



## viperzulu (Mar 14, 2010)

It is my opinion that we don't need more "laws" we need to execute the criminals commit hideous crimes against innocent people and enforce the laws that are already in place before our country turns into a police state and we lose many other rights and privileges. I feel that if the nation started clearing out death row, and start putting harsher punishment to use, we might not have some of the problems we have now.


----------



## Curve1 (Nov 25, 2009)

viperzulu said:


> _It is my opinion that we don't need more "laws" we need to execute the criminals commit hideous crimes against innocent people and enforce the laws that are already in place before our country turns into a police state and we lose many other rights and privileges. I feel that if the nation started clearing out death row, and start putting harsher punishment to use, we might not have some of the problems we have now_.




Only one problem with that........it makes too much sense. Sense is something our justice system lacks.


----------



## jim-bo (Feb 10, 2010)

I am a Canadian, and I live with gun laws, as well I live in a supposedly "socialist" country although Canada is incredibly far from being socialist, closer than the U.S. but distant none the less.

Our form of gun control consists of non-restriced (long guns, hunting rifles, shotguns, etc...), restricted (hand guns, AR lowers, concealable weapons, etc...), and prohibited weapons (full auto, anything that is outside of the definition of un and non restricted). If one would like a firearm, the must complete a firearms safety course for non restricted firearms, if they would like handguns or restricted weapons they must take a secondary course involving these weapons. Prohibited weapons are just that, prohibited. Once the courses are completed, a person applies to the federal government for a Possession and Acquisition Licence (PAL), background check is completed amongst other checks (they even go as far as the check and inform former relations that you are acquiring a firearms licence). Once you have been approved and receive the licence, you can purchase firearms according to the class that you have recieved (non restricted and restricted). These firearms are then transferred and registered to you, this registry accounts for all legal "firearms" in the country to their owners.
The Canadian Gun Registry in a nutshell.

It has been this way since I was a kid, and I have grown up with this system in place, and to be honest I really don't mind it at the moment, however if they tried to further restrict my rights I would be pretty infuriated, as the notion of any gun control must be to some certain demographics of Americans.

Gun control did curb gun violence in Canada, however it curbed the statistics of violence with long guns as they became harder to obtain, although I shouldn't say harder, it was one course and a 4 week waiting period. However the statistics of gun violence did increase with illegal/unregistered guns (particularly hand guns). It just changed the weapon used.

Unfortunately this was a suitable concession for the the majority of Canadians, there is a general fear of guns amongst the majority of people, this fear stems from a mis understanding and mis representation of guns. Guns and gun control seem to be a polarizing subject, there are those anti-gun, and anti control groups that are reluctant to lose ground and change agendas. The anti-control hate/fear the anti-gun and vis versa. 

A greater understanding of guns is needed, it is one thing for someone who has no knowledge of guns to fear them, why shouldn't they? They never grew up with them in their homes, they likely never hunted or engaged in shooting sports, they see a mis representation by hollywood and media. They fear them because they know nothing about the sporting uses for them. 

enforcement of current laws should be first and foremost, further the illegal trade of guns would need to be rectified, as in the Canadian situation the amount of gun crime is the result of illegal guns as opposed to legal firearms. Gun control does work to an extent, but it is far from a comprehensive answer or plan. 

Gun control is not a magic answer, only a means without enough enforcement to curb illegal firearm traffic... those that have instituted it in Canada have yet to learn this lesson.

Funny thing, bit of a social experiment, if you were to ask firearm owners in Canada under the age of lets say 25 (those that have grown up with the registry) and owners over the age of 35 (registry implementation) you would get to very different answers. My father is deathly opposed to the registry, I on the other hand know nothing different of it, and have learned how to function within it. I quite imagine that if the registry is still in place for another decade, my children and future children may have a different experience than I.

Well I hope you enjoyed my little socialist rant...

Ha, "socialist," bloody Americans :wink:


----------



## ohiobullseye (Feb 6, 2011)

I would hope the amercan government will not follow the path of Canada on there gun laws. We are a free country with with the constitution that gives us our rights once we start down the road like Canada banning hand guns all together it will not stop there.


----------



## Curve1 (Nov 25, 2009)

ohiobullseye said:


> I would hope the amercan government will not follow the path of Canada on there gun laws. We are a free country with with the constitution that gives us our rights once we start down the road like Canada banning hand guns all together *it will not stop there*.



That is exactly what our founders wanted to prevent from happening. If only our politicians [in the last 60 years] took the Constitution seriously!


----------



## jim-bo (Feb 10, 2010)

ohiobullseye said:


> I would hope the amercan government will not follow the path of Canada on there gun laws. We are a free country with with the constitution that gives us our rights once we start down the road like Canada banning hand guns all together it will not stop there.


Perhaps my post was not clear, Hand guns are not banned, they are restricted... you can still get them. 

The second sentence is rather confusing to me, are you suggesting that Canada is not a "free" country?


----------

