Advertisements

Reality Check: Support For An ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Hits An All-Time Low

bang-bang

: A new ABC News/Washington Post poll found that support for an assault weapons ban is dropping. Fifty-three percent of Americans who were surveyed say they oppose such a ban, the highest amount of opposition to the ban ever recorded. Only 45 percent thought banning assault weapons was a good idea—a significant drop from the 56 percent who supported it in 2013 and 80 percent who supported it in 1994.

“Only 45 percent thought banning assault weapons was a good idea—a significant drop from the 56 percent who supported it in 2013 and 80 percent who supported it in 1994.”

The poll also found that most Americans—77 percent of those surveyed—don’t think the government can successfully thwart lone-wolf terrorist attacks. In fact, only 22 percent said they were confident that the government could stop a lone-wolf attack, while 43 percent thought the government could stop a larger-scale attack.

“The poll also found that most Americans—77 percent of those surveyed—don’t think the government can successfully thwart lone-wolf terrorist attacks.”

Of those surveyed, 42 percent thought stricter gun control was the best response to terrorism, while 47 percent disagreed. As Joe Perticone of IJReview pointed out, it seems that as confidence in the government’s ability to stop terrorism wanes…(read more)

Source: Federalist.com

Advertisements

Michael Barone: The Negative Impact of New York Times Front-Page Editorials

Barone-3Michael Barone writes: What influence does a front-page editorial in The New York Times have on public opinion? A strong negative influence, judging from the only two examples from the last 95 years. The Times famously ran a front-page editorial Dec. 4 calling for drastic gun control measures, including confiscation of weapons. The response: No. The latest CBS/New York Times poll reports that 50 percent oppose “a nationwide ban on assault weapons,” while only 44 percent support it.

[Read the full story here, at the Washington Examiner]

That’s a sharp reversal of trend: In January 2011, 63 percent supported the ban on “assault weapons” — a vague term that invites agreement, even though any gun, even a toy pistol, can be used to assault someone (consult your law dictionary) and the 1990s legislation banning “assault weapons” distinguished them from other guns by purely cosmetic criteria.

The report contends that so called assault rifles are rarely used in mass shootings in the US.

So-called ‘assault rifles’ are rarely used in mass shootings in the US.

The Times’ second-most recent front-page editorial, published in June 1920, had a similar effect. It criticized the Republican National Conventions‘ nomination of Warren G. Harding as that of “a candidate whose nomination will be received with astonishment and dismay by the party whose suffrages he invites.” Voters took a different view that fall….(read more)

Source: Washington Examiner


CHANGE: Majority Of Americans Oppose ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban For First Time In 20 years Of New York Times Polling

nyt

AWR Hawkins reports: According to NYU political scientist Patrick Egan, the opposition to such a ban is up 16 percentage points from the numbers seen in 2011. Moreover, support for an “assault weapons” ban is down 19 percent. On January 15-19, 2011 Americans polled at 63 percent in favor of a ban and 34 against. On December 4-8, 2015, American polled only 44 percent in favor of such a ban, with 50 percent polling in opposition.

obama-tense

The real swing in numbers can be seen by contrasting the latest figures with the first poll NYT took on the topic during January 2-3, 1995. At that time support for a ban was at 67 percent, while opposition to a ban was at 27 percent.

Buying-guns-Getty-640x480

These numbers square with a post-San Bernardino Breitbart News report showing that AR-15 sales have been skyrocketing since the December 2 San Bernardino attack….(read more)

Source: Breitbart


‘California Has the Strictest Gun Control in the Nation, so Obama’s Politicization of San Bernardino Rings Sickeningly Hollow’

obama-frown-white-background

No, Mr. President, the NRA is not to blame

Chris Cox writes: Just when we think that politics can’t sink any lower, President Obama once again proves us wrong by politicizing the tragedy in San Bernardino before the facts were even known. What we do know is that the American people are heartbroken by these horrific crimes — and despite what the president would have us believe — America’s law-abiding gun owners are heartbroken by these horrific crimes as well. At the same time, we are sick and tired of this president suggesting the men and women of the National Rifle Association are somehow to blame.

gun-pistol-knot-wsj

The National Rifle Association is not to blame. Neither is our Second Amendmentfreedom. An act of evil unfolded in California. President Obama used it not as a moment to inform or calm the American people; rather, he exploited it to push his gun control agenda.

[Read the full text here, at USA Today]

Policy discussions should be intellectually honest and based on facts, not politics. And the fact remains that California has already adopted President Obama’s gun control wish list: “universal” background checks, registration, waiting periods, gun bans, magazine bans and an expansion of Hands off my gun - Dana Loeschprohibited gun categories. But those laws did nothing to prevent this horrific crime from taking place. Nothing.

[Order Dana Loesch’s booHands Off My Gun: Defeating the Plot to Disarm America” from Amazon.com]

Here’s another fact: the president’s failed foreign policy has made us less safe. And his domestic gun control agenda would jeopardize our safety even further. In California, President Obama had what he wanted — the strictest gun control in the country — and it did not prevent this evil act. Read the rest of this entry »


Candidate Martin O’Malley Rushes to Comfort Victims Score Political Points, Assign Blame

 


[VIDEO] Former Charlie Hebdo Writer Blasts Self-Censoring Media As MSNBC Censors Mohammed Drawing on Charlie Hebdo Cover

Former Charlie Hebdo Writer Blasts Self Censoring Media As MSNBC Blurs Mohammed Drawing


Charles C. W. Cooke: Happy New Year, Happy New Gun-Control Nonsense

Screen Shot 2015-01-01 at 4.14.25 PM

Charles C. W. Cookecooke writes:

…In the space of just 144 words, Gopnik has managed to: 1) conflate the supposed problem of “assault weapons” with the actions of the man who murdered Richard Martinez’s son (when, in fact, that killer did not use a rifle, but instead used a trio of bog-standard handguns that were legal even in California); 2) propose that those handguns “should never have been in the hands of a lunatic” (when, in fact, that “lunatic” passed the federal and state background checks that Gopnik’s ilk routinely sell as a panacea for our problems); and 3) pretend that there is any evidence whatsoever that to “reinstate assault-weapons bans” would likely “stop the next massacre” — which, as even the Obama administration’s DOJ concedesthere is not….(read more)

National Review Online


SAFE Act Fail: New Yorkers Gather, Burn Nearly a Thousand Gun Registration Forms

registration-burningAwr Hawkins reports:  On March 16, SAFE Act protesters gathered in Saratoga, New York and burned “nearly a thousand gun registration forms.”

Postar.com reports the forms “are used for people to register with New York State Police firearms that meet the state’s definition of military-style assault weapons.”

The Saratogian reports that “hundreds of gun rights advocates” turned out for the rally, which turned out to be “equal parts a rally against Gov. Andrew Cuomo and a teach-in on how to not comply with [the] SAFE Act assault weapons registration law.”

The latter consisted of showing gun owners how to make lawful cosmetic changes to their AR-15s in order to keep them legal….Read more…

Breitbart.com

 


Punked Again: Manufacturers Change Look of AR-15; Rifle Is Now Legal in New York State

Speaking of guns…

Charles C. W. Cooke writes:  Pass a stupid law, get a stupid result. This, Clash Daily reports, is a remodeled AR-15, and it is legal in New York despite the state’s “assault weapons” ban:

Gun-ban-AR

When the opponents of “assault weapon” bans argue that it is preposterous for the state to ban firearms based on the way they look, they really mean it. It is. The rifle in the photograph above is no more or less powerful than the one that has been banned; it just looks different. And, because the SAFE Act was, typically, interested only in cosmetic questions, a simple change to its aesthetic rendered the rifle legal once more. As Clash Daily’s Jonathan S. explains:

Prototypes for the newly designed AR-15 are hitting gun shops across New York, as gun shops and machinists have designed a rifle that complies with the anti-gun law. At least one gun shop has received a letter from state police saying that the new AR-15 style rifles should be legal in the state as long as they don’t have some of the features that the law prohibits.

Read the rest of this entry »


New research on mass shootings shows the same thing all the other new research shows: assault weapon use rare, no epidemic

800px-sig_pro_by_augustas_didzgalvis

 writes:  A recently completed study at Northeastern University finds that many of the ‘facts’ circulated by gun control groups about mass shootings in the US are far from it. In fact, the study contends that mass murders rarely use ‘assault weapons,’  cannot be prevented with background checks and gun bans, and that the rates of these shootings as well as their toll is not increasing.

The 22-page study, entitled  Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown was compiled by criminology professor James Alan Fox and Monica J. DeLateur. In the study, the two smash a number of gun myths through hard statistical work. Without taking funds from either side in the argument, the work is impartial.

Read the rest of this entry »


Concealed Carry Means Fewer Murders, Says New Study

Flashbang bra for Christmas? ArmedinHeels

Flashbang bra for Christmas? ArmedinHeels

Ronald Bailey reports: Quinnipiac University economist Mark Gius has published a new study, “An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates,” in the journal Applied Economics Letters. From the abstract:

The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates. Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level. These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level. The results of this study are consistent with some prior research in this area, most notably Lott and Mustard (1997).

Intriguing.

For more background: The most recent Reason-Rupe poll reports that 63 percent of Americans don’t believe that stricter gun laws would keep weapons out of the hands of criminals.

Hit & Run : Reason.com