POLL: Majority of Gun Owners View Gun Control as a Slippery Slope to Civilian Disarmament

Reptile

Reptile

NES Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
28,019
Likes
20,295
Feedback: 124 / 0 / 0
According to a poll conducted by NPR/Ipsos, the majority of gun owners believe the passage of additional gun control legislation is a slippery slope to gun confiscation.


NPR posted the findings, which demonstrated that 53% of gun owners believe “passing new gun control laws is a slippery slope toward taking away all guns.”

Furthermore, the poll shows that the majority of firearms owners believe “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.”


There are stark differences between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to their views on gun confiscation. Only 16% of Democrats believe gun control is the first step towards gun confiscation. Only 19% of Democrats believe a good guy with a gun is capable of stopping an armed assailant.

Continues...
bigleaguepolitics.com

POLL: Majority of Gun Owners View Gun Control as a Slippery Slope to Civilian Disarmament - Big League Politics

According to a poll conducted by NPR/Ipsos, the majority of gun owners believe the passage of additional gun control legislation
bigleaguepolitics.com bigleaguepolitics.com
 
The poll https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default...pline NPR Gun Owners Poll_6.24.22_FINAL_0.pdf

An oldie but a goodie from Volokh on the Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope


Though the metaphor of the slippery slope suggests that there's one fundamental mechanism through which the slippage happens, there are actually many different ways that decision A can make deci- sion B more likely. Many of these ways have little to do with the mechanisms that people often think of when they hear the phrase "slippery slope": development by analogy, by changes in people's moral or empirical attitudes, or by "desensitization" of people to earlier decisions.
To illustrate this briefly, consider the claim that gun registration (A) might lead to gun confiscation (B). Setting aside whether we think this slippery slope is likely - and whether it might actually be desir- able - it turns out that the slope might happen through many differ- ent mechanisms, or combinations of mechanisms:

a. Registration may change people's attitudes about the propriety of confiscation, by making them view gun possession not as a right but as a privilege that the government grants and therefore may deny.

b. Registration may be seen as a small enough change that people will reasonably ignore it ("I'm too busy to worry about little things like this"), but when aggregated with a sequence of other small changes, registration might ultimately lead to con- fiscation or something close to it.

c. The enactment of registration requirements may create politi- cal momentum in favor of gun control supporters, thus making it easier for them to persuade legislators to enact confiscation.

d. People who don't own guns are more likely than gun owners to support confiscation.' If registration is onerous enough, over time it may discourage some people from buying guns, thus de- creasing the fraction of the public that owns guns, decreasing the political power of the gun-owning voting bloc, and there- fore increasing the likelihood that confiscation will become po- litically feasible.

e. Registration may lower the cost of confiscation - since the government would know which people's houses to search if the residents don't turn in their guns voluntarily - and thus make confiscation more appealing to some voters.

f. Registration may trigger the operation of another legal rule that makes confiscation easier and thus more cost-effective: if guns weren't registered, confiscation would be largely unenforce- able, since house-to-house searches to find guns would violate the Fourth Amendment; but if guns are registered some years before confiscation is enacted, the registration database might provide probable cause to search the houses of all registered gun owners.

In the registration-to-confiscation scenario, only the latter two mechanisms seem fairly plausible to me; in other scenarios, others may be more plausible. And there are of course mechanisms that may work in the opposite direction, so that decision A may under some po- litical conditions make decision B less likely. (For instance, gun regis- tration might energize gun-rights groups, and lead them to be even more effective in fighting broader gun controls; or if gun registration seems ineffective or unduly intrusive, some formerly pro-gun-control voters might become more skeptical of gun controls generally.) But the important point is that being aware of all these phenomena, including the several kinds of slippery slope mechanisms, can help us (as citizens and policymakers) think through all the possible implications of some decision A - and can help us (as advocates) make more concrete and effective arguments for why A would or would not lead to B. Even if you are skeptical of one kind of slippery slope claim, you may find that others are worth considering.

And less theory and more example from Kopel on how the English lost their guns ALL THE WAY DOWN THE SLIPPERY SLOPE
 
This statistic should give us all pause…. 93% of Democrats want to raise the age to purchase an AR15 to 21 years of age and 84% want to ban AR15s altogether - that’s the top and bottom of the slope in one table.

A8FDAF5A-D064-4D59-B7D2-BED172D6E25E.jpeg
 
Last edited:
MaverickNH said:
This statistic should give us all pause…. 93% of Democrats want to raise the age to purchase an AR15 to 21 years of age and 84% want to ban AR15s altogether - that’s the top and bottom of the slope in one table.

View attachment 635969
Click to expand...
80% of republicans favor universal background checks? I call BS
 
xjma99 said:
80% of republicans favor universal background checks? I call BS
Click to expand...
It’s all about how the question is worded.

”Do you support requiring Background Checks for sale or gifting of firearms to friends, family and all others?” would have gotten 60-70%, or closer to 50/50 if those polled included only those registered who voted in the last election.

If people had to fill out paper polls and drop them in any one of dozens of conveniently located polling boxes throughout their city (like liberals back for voting), polls would border on being valid measures - but not quite…
 
Eitherway, it seems that it is inevitable for more laws/bans to happen with more people being brainwashed about firearms. Even from the conservative and independent sides of the political spectrum. The pro 2a crowd has been winning some battles but it just seems like we will eventually lose this war... That is why we need to support what ever we can.
 
Blackbeard83 said:
Eitherway, it seems that it is inevitable for more laws/bans to happen with more people being brainwashed about firearms. Even from the conservative and independent sides of the political spectrum. The pro 2a crowd has been winning some battles but it just seems like we will eventually lose this war... That is why we need to support what ever we can.
Click to expand...
OR, we remember that 1. we live in a constitutionalized republic, not a democracy where majority opinion doesn't grant rights and 2. " the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" doesn't take a legal scholar to comprehend. Our rights aren't granted by the government or popularity.
 
Last edited:
Blackbeard83 said:
Eitherway, it seems that it is inevitable for more laws/bans to happen with more people being brainwashed about firearms. Even from the conservative and independent sides of the political spectrum. The pro 2a crowd has been winning some battles but it just seems like we will eventually lose this war... That is why we need to support what ever we can.
Click to expand...
20 years ago, 1 Constitutional Carry state. Now - 25 with more on the way.
 
Tartakovsky said:
OR, we remember that 1. we live in a constitutionalized republic, not a democracy where majority opinion doesn't grant rights and 2. " the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" doesn't take a legal scholar to comprehend. Our rights aren't granted by the government or popularity.
Click to expand...
Yet certain states are able to pass bans and mag restrictions with needing to have a license to carry on a "may issue" basis. Making it a "privilege" and not a "right".

These MF'ers are infringing on our rights and these laws and bans still some how get passed....
 
Blackbeard83 said:
Yet certain states are able to pass bans and mag restrictions with needing to have a license to carry on a "may issue" basis. Making it a "privilege" and not a "right".

These MF'ers are infringing on our rights and these laws and bans still some how get passed....
Click to expand...
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time by the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson

Don't blame me for tyrants that regularly infringe on our constitutional rights and a complacent people that allow it to happen. SCOTUS sometimes needs to step in and address these unconstitutional laws (like they have over time).
 
Tartakovsky said:
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time by the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson

Don't blame me for tyrants that regularly infringe on our constitutional rights and a complacent people that allow it to happen. SCOTUS sometimes needs to step in and address these unconstitutional laws (like they have over time).
Click to expand...
I am definitely not blaming you or anyone on this site. It's the anti-2a crowd and the gun owners who give in too easily to the "demands" they try to impose.
 
Blackbeard83 said:
I am definitely not blaming you or anyone on this site. It's the anti-2a crowd and the gun owners who give in too easily to the "demands" they try to impose.
Click to expand...
I can't blame people who don't want to risk their lives, or their livelihood by fighting tyranny and oppression. Things need to get really bad to see that happen and I don't know what that breaking point is but we clearly aren't there (yet).
 
Tartakovsky said:
I can't blame people who don't want to risk their lives, or their livelihood by fighting tyranny and oppression. Things need to get really bad to see that happen and I don't know what that breaking point is but we clearly aren't there (yet).
Click to expand...
I definitely don't blame them for making that choice. I don't need other people taking away my choice to defend myself with a firearm.
 
MaverickNH said:
This statistic should give us all pause…. 93% of Democrats want to raise the age to purchase an AR15 to 21 years of age and 84% want to ban AR15s altogether - that’s the top and bottom of the slope in one table.

View attachment 635969
Click to expand...

There's still a lot of these guys walking the earth:
elmer1.jpeg
 
You know, I don't think it would be a bad idea to tell Joe stories about how having a gun deterred a violent crime--stopping a carjacking, robbery, home invasion, rape, etc.
How a gun saved a life.
I don't care if you exaggerate, hyperbolize, or even lie.
Just to get them in there for poor old Joe's staff to see. He certainly won't......
 
Only 19 percent of democrats view gun control as a first step toward confriscation. The other 81 percent said they would prefer it to be the second or third step.
 

Similar threads

Paul Craig: Gun control debate a fractured discourse
Replies
2
Views
121
jkelly1229
J
Gun Control Debate Live Stream
Replies
18
Views
555
Bigfudge16
Bigfudge16
Hanover High teacher accused of threatening to bring gun to school
2
Replies
32
Views
625
Devils Paintbrush
Devils Paintbrush
NEW- Gun Grab Bill Six-member conference committee to decide Legislature's gun control proposal
Replies
24
Views
1K
StevieP
StevieP
Gun rights enthusiasts as Extremists
Replies
2
Views
338
StevieP
StevieP
Back
Top Bottom