More Americans support stricter gun laws today than they did only a few years ago, Pew Research Center reports.
The nonpartisan think tank conducted a survey in September finding that the number of respondents who support banning “high capacity magazines” has increased from 65 percent in 2017 to 71 percent in 2019.
On the subject of banning “assault-style weapons,” there was a more modest uptick from 68 percent in 2017 to 69 percent in 2019.
In general, on the question of whether gun laws should be made more strict, less strict or stay the same, 60 percent of Americans said more strict, 11 percent said less strict and 28 percent said they were about right compared to two years ago when those percentages were 52, 30 and 18 respectively.
What shall we make of all this?
Probably not much as it’s a small sample size. Pew does have graphs and charts that examine these questions over a much longer time span. And what you tend to see is that these percentages ebb and flow over the years.
A good example is on the question of whether it is more important to “control gun ownership” or “protect the right of Americans to own guns.” On this, Pew has charted the trend lines going back roughly two decades in their latest press release, as you’ll see below:
At the same time, while this latest polling data shouldn’t put one’s panties in a bunch, it does behoove 2A supporters to monitor public sentiment on gun control. It reminds us that our work, our efforts to win hearts and minds, is never done.
ANOTHER BULLSHIT POLE THAT DONT MATTER TO ANYONE
If 12 million Illegals and the liberal Politicians running those cities that hide them don’t have to obey the laws then neither do gun owners have to obey any anti gun rights laws . 🤷♂️
I hold a doctorate, worked as an executive level attorney in various positions at a mid-level state appellate court for 16 years, and I only saw less than a dozen crimes committed with any type of rifle. So why all the rush to ban semi-automatic rifles using Eugene Stoner’s design?The people who wanted to ban handguns lost and needed a new “evil” firearm to ban. First, they invented the term “assault weapon.” Second, they harped on all the scary, yet nearly all cosmetic, parts like bayonet lugs, even though I haven’t heard of a bayoneting spree, collapsible stocks, even though I can testify as a Vet that fixed stocks work just as well or better, left “semi” out how the rifle’s action works to confuse the idiotic people who had never seen a civilian model into thinking that we could easily buy select fire rifles. Those of us who know the law could tell them that an actual M-16 sells for over $26K, they would have to fill out paperwork, send it and $200 to the ATF which is too busy illegally smuggling guns into Mexico to review the paperwork and conduct a background check that borders on one to receive a security clearance, and the rifle must be shipped to a special licensee, who may charge a large fee, only if the applicant’s state allows the possession of NFA controlled firearms. Last, I’m not trying to be Captain Obvious with this partial list of lies disseminated by the media, which are the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, instead I’m trying to delineate the uphill battle we lawful gun owners face as the above lies have morphed into a more devious plan using monikers like military arms firing high power rounds when the .223 Remington is just a varmint round that was altered into the 5.56 NATO round, which has been despised by soldiers, Marines, SF operators, etc. since the Vietnam War. (Finally, the Puzzle Palace has come to its senses, hopefully, and are looking for a more powerful round based on a 6.8mm bullet.) These idiots don’t know or care that the 6.5 Grendel or the 6.8 SPC Spec II can be loaded into magazines holding around 25 rounds and will easily kill a large deer at over 200 meters. Those are high powered rounds.Thanks to anyone that read my rant against idiotic people who know nothing whatsoever about the rifles that they are trying to unconstitutionally ban. If they served in the Military, which is doubtful, they drove Range NCOIC’s like me crazy because they couldn’t shoot, even though they “qualified” in Basic, no matter how hard you tried to help them. I shot expert every time except during a blizzard in Wildflecken when I missed it by one disputed shot using those lousy 25 meter paper targets that simulate human targets at various “distances”, so it really frustrated me that they couldn’t even zero their M-16A1’s within a few shots.
Putting any firearm in front of one of the “useful idiots” of the unknowing Far-Left repeatedly saying “shoot them” as they fidgit while nothing happens tho believe banning an inert object will stop evil in the hearts of criminals- is humorous to observe.
Any vehicle is far more dangerous if the intent is to kill indiscriminately with it and easy to obtain being everywhere…
The bigger the more dangerous- imagine an 18 wheeler loaded gas tanker at high speed (100+mph) into a building or auditorium full of people= vehicles are not about to be banned.
This anti gun foolishness goes on while up to 3,000,000 times per year firearms prevent crimes 90+% by mere display of it as almost no criminal hopes to catch a round = tho those that do should by armed Americans esp in so called “Gun Free” zones…
I hold a doctorate, worked as an executive level attorney in various positions at a mid-level state appellate court for 16 years, and I only saw less than a dozen crimes committed with any type of rifle. So why all the rush to ban semi-automatic rifles using Eugene Stoner’s design?
The people who wanted to ban handguns lost and needed a new “evil” firearm to ban. First, they invented the term “assault weapon.” Second, they harped on all the scary, yet nearly all cosmetic, parts like bayonet lugs, even though I haven’t heard of a bayoneting spree, collapsible stocks, even though I can testify as a Vet that fixed stocks work just as well or better, left “semi” out how the rifle’s action works to confuse the idiotic people who had never seen a civilian model into thinking that we could easily buy select fire rifles. Those of us who know the law could tell them that an actual M-16 sells for over $26K, they would have to fill out paperwork, send it and $200 to the ATF which is too busy illegally smuggling guns into Mexico to review the paperwork and conduct a background check that borders on one to receive a security clearance, and the rifle must be shipped to a special licensee, who may charge a large fee, only if the applicant’s state allows the possession of NFA controlled firearms. Last, I’m not trying to be Captain Obvious with this partial list of lies disseminated by the media, which are the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, instead I’m trying to delineate the uphill battle we lawful gun owners face as the above lies have morphed into a more devious plan using monikers like military arms firing high power rounds when the .223 Remington is just a varmint round that was altered into the 5.56 NATO round, which has been despised by soldiers, Marines, SF operators, etc. since the Vietnam War. (Finally, the Puzzle Palace has come to its senses, hopefully, and are looking for a more powerful round based on a 6.8mm bullet.) These idiots don’t know or care that the 6.5 Grendel or the 6.8 SPC Spec II can be loaded into magazines holding around 25 rounds and will easily kill a large deer at over 200 meters. Those are high powered rounds.
Thanks to anyone that read my rant against idiotic people who know nothing whatsoever about the rifles that they are trying to unconstitutionally ban. If they served in the Military, which is doubtful, they drove Range NCOIC’s like me crazy because they couldn’t shoot, even though they “qualified” in Basic, no matter how hard you tried to help them. I shot expert every time except during a blizzard in Wildflecken when I missed it by one disputed shot using those lousy 25 meter paper targets that simulate human targets at various “distances”, so it really frustrated me that they couldn’t even zero their M-16A1’s within a few shots.
Don’t like guns? Don’t buy one.
dont like women dont own one
No where in the article did I see any explanation to those taking the poll as to exactly what constitutes, even for the poll, an ‘assault-style’ weapon. And of course they also continue to label standard capacity magazines incorrectly as “high capacity”. Instead of the false divide between communists [oops my bad] democrats and republicans, how about a poll divided by Hoplophobic Idiots vs Sane People? All right, all right Non-Gun Owners vs Gun Owners? Mob Rule vs Constitution?
One thing I don’t get here. All this posturing to ban “assault weapons”, and magazines over 10 round capacity. If over 10 round mags are banned, as they are now in quite a few states, then why ban the guns?
As I see it the main argument is magazine capacity, not the gun that uses them. This would be like banning alchohol again, and the bottles they package it in. I don’t get it.
The plan is to be bled to death by incremental cuts.
Survey questions are written to get the desired polling result and usually poll more on the left. That should be obvious to anyone who watched the 2016 elections and paid attention to how poorly (almost) EVERY poll did when predicting the 2016 presidential winner – right up to the night of the election!
I’ve never been overly bight but, doesn’t 3 10 round mags. hold all most as many “bullets” as a 30 round “clip”?
how about strictor dumbdemoncrat laws….lol
Yes, we obviously need thorough criminal background checks and mental fitness exams for all political candidates, BEFORE they can even run for any public office.
Equally obvious why they will never allow this is because most of them would not pass both, being the mentally ill criminals that most of them are.
Only it’s not criminal to be a closet socialistic Marxist Ana a halfway liar…
My constitutional rights are not up for vote.
The leftist judges ONLY care about the constitution when they are getting in the way of the president doing his job’ otherwise, they treat it as something they’d like to ignore or get rid of.
I dont give a dam about surveys made by groups or individuals biased against the Second Amendment. The respondents responses are typically emotionally driven, and biased by fake news propaganda.
Only the Second Amendment matters, and it has been illegally nullified by congress, and state governments. The gun community historically has lacked a sufficiently aggressive effort to keep the Second Amendment intact and to stop states preemptive acts against Federal Law, as in State efforts acting against the Second Amendment.
Most of these so called surveys are meaningless for many flaws they have.
One is that there is no such thing as a nonpartisan “think tank”, that they claim to be.
The results from their own survey shows how partisan this entire issue is.
Dumocrats are clearly vastly more in favor of gun control than Republicans.
That is not a coincidence, and it says more than anything else that this survey says.