- Joined
- Oct 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,130
- Reaction score
- 10,901
- Location
- Where faults collide
- Website
- doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
I looked at the articles linked and the pew research center site, but didn't see any the graphs or a clear representation of the exact wording of the question asked. Wording will influence outcome. I'm not pro gun at all, but I wouldn't support a law that took away all rights to gun ownership. I'm more interested in laws that make it easier to track the owners of guns, prevent spur of the moment gun purchases, and that normalize safe gun ownership (like trigger locks, stronger liability if one's gun is involved in a fatal accident or a crime), and that restrict access to assault weapons.
It's been my understanding that Americans have always tended to favor gun rights over restrictions, though there will be a temporary shift in the polls after a major mass shooting with high mortality. But relatively few Americans back unrestricted access to all guns in all situations. The area of play has always been in the middle--over which restrictions are appropriate when, where, and for whom. You can paint almost anyone as being pro or anti gun ownership rights, based on where you draw that line in the middle of the continuously varying distribution of attitudes.
I do wonder whether the increasing frequency of lone shooter incidents is making Americans less likely to react with the kind of shock that leads to a long-term change in their attitudes about laws restricting automatic and semiautomatic weapons, however. When something happens over and over, it tends to become part of people's background normal, and people stop talking about ways to prevent the same from happening again and instead focus on things they think will make them safer on a personal level ("I don't trust the government to fix this, but if I carry my own gun with me everywhere, I'll be able to take down the next mass shooter who comes into a restaurant and opens fire, just like those national guards people did in that IHOP!")
Sad, but true.
It's been my understanding that Americans have always tended to favor gun rights over restrictions, though there will be a temporary shift in the polls after a major mass shooting with high mortality. But relatively few Americans back unrestricted access to all guns in all situations. The area of play has always been in the middle--over which restrictions are appropriate when, where, and for whom. You can paint almost anyone as being pro or anti gun ownership rights, based on where you draw that line in the middle of the continuously varying distribution of attitudes.
I do wonder whether the increasing frequency of lone shooter incidents is making Americans less likely to react with the kind of shock that leads to a long-term change in their attitudes about laws restricting automatic and semiautomatic weapons, however. When something happens over and over, it tends to become part of people's background normal, and people stop talking about ways to prevent the same from happening again and instead focus on things they think will make them safer on a personal level ("I don't trust the government to fix this, but if I carry my own gun with me everywhere, I'll be able to take down the next mass shooter who comes into a restaurant and opens fire, just like those national guards people did in that IHOP!")
Sad, but true.
Last edited:
