TexasCHLforum.com

CNN of all places!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/16/guns.poll/index.html

Majority in U.S. poll support gun ownership rights

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Nearly two-thirds of Americans say they believe the Constitution guarantees each person the right to own a gun, according to a poll released Sunday.

In all, 65 percent said they thought the Constitution ensures that right, and 31 percent said it did not. The question had a sampling error of plus-or-minus 3 points.

This sounds about right to me.

In the last 5-10 years, people have been waking up and realizing the truth about guns.

In another 5 years or so, it should filter up to the political parties, I hope.

I'm mildly, pleasantly surprised by the results. I'm shocked that CNN reported the story.

The 31% is depressing.

There is hope yet.
Lets see if the politicians and political judges take note.

Dan

If these numbers are correct, and I believe they are, then why do we have such insane gun laws in some states? The reason - Because 80% of the 31% anti's will vote and 75% of the gun owners will sit at home on election day.

I have no data to back up the above statement. I just wanted to point out that the only percentage that matters is the percentage that votes. Our elected officials only pay attention to the groups that vote.

Houston1944 wrote:If these numbers are correct, and I believe they are, then why do we have such insane gun laws in some states? The reason - Because 80% of the 31% anti's will vote and 75% of the gun owners will sit at home on election day.

I have no data to back up the above statement. I just wanted to point out that the only percentage that matters is the percentage that votes. Our elected officials only pay attention to the groups that vote.

nuparadigm wrote:The 31% is depressing.

Yeah, but it's a CNN poll so there is going to be an overt weight to the poll in that direction. meaning that 31% probably does not represent all of the US.

I know that things change but what happened to the earlier CNN poll that was discussed on this forum where 99% of the responders interpreted the 2nd to give rights to "individuals"? I don't remember the exact wording but I wonder if a second (more scientific - interpreted as "re-worded") poll was conducted by CNN and produced similar results without such radical lopsidedness.

Houston1944 wrote:If these numbers are correct, and I believe they are, then why do we have such insane gun laws in some states? The reason - Because 80% of the 31% anti's will vote and 75% of the gun owners will sit at home on election day.

I have no data to back up the above statement. I just wanted to point out that the only percentage that matters is the percentage that votes. Our elected officials only pay attention to the groups that vote.

Possibly, but then again, maybe that’s not the only reason…

I know some folks that believe the 2nd amendment is an individual right, but they feel it’s a right to own a firearm, and not a right to carry one around in public. They feel CHL and similar laws actually put them more at risk. The less firearms being carried in society, the safer society is…they have no problem with ownership, and hence would have answered such a poll in the affirmative.

They also believe in the following:

Capacity limits…why would you need more than 10 rounds?

Waiting periods…why do you need it immediately? Why not a cooling off period?

Extensive background checks…if you’ve got nothing to hide, why should you care?

Licensing for handguns…you have to license a car don’t you?

AWB…after all, there really isn’t any sporting/hunting uses for them

Purchase limits…rational people don’t need to buy more than 1 or 2 weapons in a year

Limits on the amount of ammo you can have…why would anyone need more than a box at a time?

Limits on the type of ammo…take a look at the evil hollow point…obviously it’s designed to kill people.

And these very same people believe the 2A guarantees your right to own a firearm.

These same people vote in elections.

bpet wrote:I know that things change but what happened to the earlier CNN poll that was discussed on this forum where 99% of the responders interpreted the 2nd to give rights to "individuals"? I don't remember the exact wording but I wonder if a second (more scientific - interpreted as "re-worded") poll was conducted by CNN and produced similar results without such radical lopsidedness.

, or maybe they just fixed the first as well as they could.

"The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation telephone poll of 1,002 U.S. adults was carried out December 6 - 9."

They think a sampling of 1000 people give them an accurate idea of what millions think?

Texas Armadillo wrote:"The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation telephone poll of 1,002 U.S. adults was carried out December 6 - 9."

They think a sampling of 1000 people give them an accurate idea of what millions think?

I don't recall the specific numbers, but statistical theory gives a minimum sample size for a poll to have some "credibility". A responsible report would have included at statement to the effect that "This poll has a statistical error of plus or minus 3%" (or whatever number corresponds to the actual sample size.

LarryH wrote:

Texas Armadillo wrote:"The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation telephone poll of 1,002 U.S. adults was carried out December 6 - 9."

They think a sampling of 1000 people give them an accurate idea of what millions think?

I don't recall the specific numbers, but statistical theory gives a minimum sample size for a poll to have some "credibility". A responsible report would have included at statement to the effect that "This poll has a statistical error of plus or minus 3%" (or whatever number corresponds to the actual sample size.

As long as the sample is truly random and the questions are correctly worded (the biggest way to fudge the numbers is the wording), then yes that is most certainly a statistically valid sample. As long as you do it right, you can get a pretty good sample with as few as 50 people, but most polls go for the roughly 1000 person size. That seems to be the point of diminishing returns for national polls.

bpet wrote:I know that things change but what happened to the earlier CNN poll that was discussed on this forum where 99% of the responders interpreted the 2nd to give rights to "individuals"?

Big difference between a voluntarily web poll, versus a scientific poll of a random sample.