NYT - Gun Owners Unfiltered

rep308

NES Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2008
Messages
10,412
Likes
12,388
Location
inside the 495 Belt
Feedback: 68 / 0 / 0
Take you blood pressure meds before reading.


Gun Owners, Unfiltered - New York Times


The National Rifle Association has long fulminated in the gun control debate in Washington like the Great Oz in the Emerald City. Now along comes Frank Luntz, a conservative Republican pollster who, Toto-like, has snatched back Oz’s curtain to reveal that gun owners favor much more reasonable gun controls than the gun lobby would ever allow the public to imagine.

Mr. Luntz queried 832 gun owners, including 401 card-carrying N.R.A. members, in a survey commissioned by Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the alliance of hundreds of executives seeking stronger gun laws. In flat rebuttal of N.R.A. propaganda, the findings showed that 69 percent of N.R.A. members supported closing the notorious gun-show loophole that invites laissez-faire arms dealing outside registration requirements.

Even more members, 82 percent, favored banning gun purchases to suspects on terrorist watch lists who are now free to arm. And 69 percent disagreed with Congressionally imposed rules against sharing federal gun-trace information with state and local police agencies.

These findings strike at some of the N.R.A.’s most sacred shibboleths. The survey questionnaire, devoid of boilerplate alarums about threatened gun rights, found some plain reason at work. It is clear that most members still oppose policies like a national gun registry. But 86 percent of gun owners also agreed that more could be done to “stop criminals from getting guns while also protecting the rights of citizens to freely own them.” And 78 percent of N.R.A. members said they should be required to report stolen guns to the police — to combat another source of underground arms dealing.

Imagine, the dreaded M-word — moderates — surfacing in a political constituency that the N.R.A. portrays as fully locked and loaded for marching orders. If only poll-addicted members of Congress dared to heed gun owners unfiltered by the gun lobby.
 
But 86 percent of gun owners also agreed that more could be done to “stop criminals from getting guns while also protecting the rights of citizens to freely own them.”

Well, count me among that 86% as I agree that more can be done, although I doubt my ideas coincide with what the author had in mind.
 
But 86 percent of gun owners also agreed that more could be done to “stop criminals from getting guns while also protecting the rights of citizens to freely own them.”

Um, yeah, we do... How about dealing with criminals a little more harshly (didn't we just see an article about a guy that got 1 year and probation for stealing a gun and a car and driving across state lines with his underage girlfriend?) instead of treating gun owners like the criminals?
 
The answer is ordained by the question.

Were these supposedly random-sampled respondents asked:

Do you favor terminating the private sale of lawfully-owned property?

or

Do you favor closing the gun show loophole that allows felons and the mentally unstable to acquire weapons without a Federal background check?

The latter asserts as fact the existence of an imaginary crisis, thus creating the answer sought.
 
3 possibilities
1. They only interviewed Fudds and/or threw out data that didn't confirm their "hypothesis"
2. They completely fabricated the whole thing
3. The questions were phrased in such a way as to induce a high percentage of desired answers
 
3 possibilities
1. They only interviewed Fudds and/or threw out data that didn't confirm their "hypothesis"
2. They completely fabricated the whole thing
3. The questions were phrased in such a way as to induce a high percentage of desired answers

That was my initial thought(s) also. Espcially the first part of your 1st point.
 
832 people is much too small of a statistical sample to represent the MILLIONS of gun owners in the US and it does sound like they must have asked only fudds who own muskets what they thought.
 
They never poll me for theses things. Too bad.
Some of this stuff is actually true. I quit membership in a rod and gun club because the treasurer was willing to give in to the neighbors and shut down the rifle range as long as the trap range wasn't affected. He didn't care; he only did trap and indoor pistol. See what happens? Some people just care about themselves. As long as their own discipline isn't affected, to hell with others. As a rifle shooter, I decided to quit after they shut down the rifle range to appease neighbors.
One time I was in a gun shop and I heard an old fool ranting and raving about how nobody needs a semi-auto or military-type rifle and that he had no problem with military firearms and ammo being banned. Then, he asked the store's owner for two boxes of .308 ammo! I tried to keep a straight face when I told him that he just purchased two boxes of the same ammo that he wants to see banned. He told me that he has a .308 single-shot and that the .308 is not a military caliber. Realizing that I was dealing with a complete idiot, I shook my head as I watched him leave with the ammo. Some people don't get it and never will.
 
832 people is much too small of a statistical sample to represent the MILLIONS of gun owners in the US and it does sound like they must have asked only fudds who own muskets what they thought.

The issue isn't the sample size, its the sample itself. It appears to be a biased sample selection.
 
The answer is ordained by the question.

Were these supposedly random-sampled respondents asked:

Do you favor terminating the private sale of lawfully-owned property?

or

Do you favor closing the gun show loophole that allows felons and the mentally unstable to acquire weapons without a Federal background check?

The latter asserts as fact the existence of an imaginary crisis, thus creating the answer sought.

Dead-on.
 
Back
Top Bottom