Poll-itics: Americans back Pres. Obama's gun safety proposals; Seven of nine have bipartisan support.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

newtown children smaller gun

gallup guns 1gallup guns 2

91% want background checks. 91%. 67% want a ban on armor-piercing bullets. 60% are for an assault weapons ban. And 54% want to limit ammo magazine capacities to 10 rounds or less. Clear? Clear.

Gallup:

The question does not tell respondents that all nine proposals come from Obama's recently released plan to reduce gun violence; however, the wordings used to describe them intentionally follow the White House's "Now Is the Time" plan descriptions. [...]

Although Democrats show more support than Republicans for each proposal, majorities of both partisan groups favor seven of the nine proposals.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
  • Fred Beloit

    Gotta, you can keep your emotional arguments and sensitive feelings, and espouse infringing all you want, but you have to change the Constitution to do it legally. That's what my first comment is about.

    BTW, I have a granddaughter in Newtown's other elementary school and feel worse about what happened in Sandy Hook than you do. I also feel badly about drownings and auto deaths. You,  I and others have to get around and we like to swim . Should swimming and driving be curtailed more than they are now? I must add that driving and swimming are not specifically defended by the constitution.

    Exactly who do you think you are to infringe my right to defend myself and others with the best means available?

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

     Again, nice try. That doesn't violate the Constitution. Nobody's repealing the Second Amendment nor are they taking away guns. They are regulating firearms, just as we regulate any product that is intended to end or inadvertently ends human life. If that's hard for you to understand, then you're on your own.

    Your apparently have your own logic and unique ideas of what can and cannot be done legally. When the Assault Weapons Ban was in effect, there was not one legal challenge during the ten years it was in place. Not one.

    We're done.  Or should you insist on having the last word, please do. I'm not wasting another second on trying to reason with someone who has no idea of the law or finds it impossible to go beyond the Fox script.

  • Fred Beloit

    Here, Gotta, is Sen. Feinstein again violating the Constitution she swore to uphold and defend by infringing on gun rights:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/01/23/feinstein-assault-weapons-ban/1856613/

    You don't deny it. How could you?

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    Did you ever hear of killing 20 children with an assault weapon? Did you ever hear of infringing on THEIR rights, their lives with a weapon intended only to mass kill?

    You can still keep your precious guns, the kinds that don't do that. But not military weapons. Unless you're into killing lots of humans, you'd understand that instead of spouting talking points. And most of America agrees with that.. including Republicans.

    Nice try. No cigar.

  • Fred Beloit

    Gotta, did you ever hear of the word 'infringing'? No?  Telling citizens exactly what kind of arms can be kept and borne is infringing, now isn't that right?

  • http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/ GottaLaff

    Where has anyone suggested "deleting" the Second Amendment?

    "There you go, Democrats": Did you bother to look at the poll? Both Dems and GOP support his proposals, which again, do not include "deleting" anything.

    Nobody is "taking away" guns. Show me where that's occurring.

    Enjoy your Fox viewing, because you have their talking points down pat.

  • Fred Beloit

    So there you go, Democrats. All you have to do is change the Constitution to delete the 2nd Amendment and you can take guns away from your lawful fellow citizens. But don't think you can do it without that change. That would be lawless.