I would argue that no poll is totally honest. It is way too easy to skew the answers by presenting the questions in a manner calculated to do so, this one being a case in point: I am not even in favor of the laws that exist, but that is the only vote I get to cast because the others are even more onerous, and the pollsters can then say "In a random poll conducted on the internet (or some such language) it was found tha gun owners support current laws."Abraham wrote:AndyC and baldeagle,
Obviously, I'm not articulate enough to get my point across.
I'm not throwing in the towel.
I'm simply stating that polls that are NEVER going to be honest, hosted by leftys - are a waste of time to participate in.
Independently posting conservative/pro gun posts are an entirely different matter.
Or going head to head with a lefty in an open forum.
Or participating in any number of different approaches that aren't fixed make good sense to me to participate in.
Lefty sponsored pre-determined polls: I say: Why bother?
So, it isn't really a poll - it's a hoax.
You're fooling yourself if you think your pro-gun effort is taken into good faith consideration by antis.
Your pro-gun vote goes into the dumper.
Rant off.
Even supposedly blind polls can easily be skewed by presenting question in a certain order in order to guide the pollee to the answer desired.
OTOH, I think it's worth the effort because, for now at least, those results are sitting out there where anyone can see them, so if someone says that a random survey conducted on the internet showed an overwhelming number in favor of checks and bans, there will be a lot of people who will know they are lying.
And it's not that much effort anyway.