A new poll by the University of Chicago finds that Millennials have a strong preference for gun control, even supporting a proposed ban on semi-automatic weapons.
The survey—which was conducted by GenForward, part of the University of Chicago’s Black Youth Project, in conjunction with the NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, a nonpartisan social science research organization—polled 1,940 young Americans ages 18 to 30 and revealed that that 57 percent of Millennials approve of banning people from purchasing semi-automatic weapons.
This is the part that is really scary to me:
…over half of those surveyed said they believe that Second Amendment rights can be compromised in order to support greater gun control.
Perhaps the the Nineteenth Amendment should be compromised to support greater voter control. Compromising the Second Amendment is no less repugnant.
It’s estimated that nearly 70% of the guns in circulation (and even a higher percentage of those sold) are semi-automatic. 57 percent of Millennials support banning 70% of the currently owned guns and the vast majority of those currently legally sold?
But most importantly, don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.
So what are the odds of a prosecution and destruction of those illegally-kept records, you think? I’m putting it at less than 1%. It Trump wants a few million more votes, promise to prosecute and destroy. (Preferably prosecute the records and destroy the ATF, but I’d settle for t’other way ’round).
In January 2015, the families of 10 victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook shootings filed suit against the Remington Outdoor Co., which manufactured the Bushmaster rifle used by Adam Lanza to kill his mother and students and teachers at the school. They filed a suit against Camfour Holding LLC, the gun’s distributor and Riverview Sales, the store where Lanza’s mother bought the gun.
They claimed the gunmaker and sellers knew civilians are unfit to operate the assault rifle and yet continue selling it to civilians, disregarding the threat the gun poses.
July 29, 2016 Gun control spotlight shines in Bridgeport court
[This is what they think of you. You are “unfit to operate ‘the assault rifle’”. If this claim is successfully litigated in court then expect manufacturers of modern sporting rifles to stop selling to private citizens.
Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you that no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
More women should have guns. And since it’s abundantly clear that they’ll commit less violence than men and be vulnerable to violence committed by men, let’s take all the guns away from men and give them to women. In fact, let’s only give guns to women.
You have to take that sort of moderate, “We just wanna have commmon sense legislation so our children are safe!”
You say shit like that, and then people will buy into it.
Mary Bayer @marybayer3 DNC delegate July 25, 2016 [See also a shorter version at Say Uncle. I chose this one because it shows her stealing the sign of the people who made the video (the police recovered it from her and returned it to the owners). This demonstrates private property means nothing to her, the First Amendment means nothing to her, and, obviously, the Second Amendment is nothing more than a minor obstacle.
Oh, the irony. “A professor at the Southern State Community College (SSCC) in Ohio is currently under investigation for threatening to shoot up the NRA headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia and Washington lobbyists in order to increase support for anti-gun legislation.”
His FB post read, in part :
“Look, there’s only one solution. A bunch of us anti-gun types are going to have to arm ourselves, storm the NRA headquarters in Fairfax, VA, and make sure there are no survivors.
This action might also require coordinated hits at remote sites, like Washington lobbyists.
Then and only then will we see some legislative action on assault weapons.”
Not sure how someone with this tenuous a grasp of reality manages to become an adjunct prof, but there you have it. And while I’m sure that if he did do that, he might see some action on weapons, but I’m not so sure it would be legislative.
Don’t ever let them tell you nobody wants to take your guns.
Our Congress and the NRA contribute to the dangers of policing through their refusal to restrict assault-type weaponry to those that should have it — the police and our military. There is no legitimate purpose for every Tom, Dick and Harry to possess this type of armament. Most rednecks can kill Bambi with one shot!
Yes, I believe strongly in the Second Amendment, but in my opinion, it is entirely constitutional, and rational to restrict these weapons which are designed to only kill other human beings.
“Designed to only kill other human beings”? That would be news to 100s of thousands of deer, rodents, coyotes, and other varmints. And besides I’ve fired thousands of rounds through many different ARs without killing anything. Does that mean those guns were all defective?
This guy may be a mental midget but he still wants to ban guns and is politically active in pursuing that goal. Don’t ever let anyone get away with telling you no one wants to take you guns.—Joe]
In the states that have such bans what the gun controllers did when 85%+ of citizens ignored them was declare victory and ignore them back. I suspect this will only last for a while. Eventually the laws will have to be repealed or things will get more and more tense.
Our job is to continue changing the culture by taking non-gun owners to the range and being open about gun ownership in hopes of decreasing the tension.
Elizabeth May Leader of Canada’s Green Party referring to AR-15s, the most popular rifle in the United States. June 16, 2016 Canadian gun enthusiasts and their truly bad timing [Don’t ever let any get away with telling you no one wants to take your guns.—Joe]
But let’s be clear about precisely what kind of decision is letting events like this recur.
Congress’s decision not to pass background checks is not what’s keeping the US from European gun violence levels. The expiration of the assault weapons ban is not behind the gap. What’s behind the gap, plenty of research indicates, is that Americans have more guns. The statistics are mind-blowing: America has 4.4 percent of the world’s population but almost half of its civilian-owned guns.
Realistically, a gun control plan that has any hope of getting us down to European levels of violence is going to mean taking a huge number of guns away from a huge number of gun owners.
I don’t want to ignore the shooter’s motivation. But I want to deny him–and every civilian–the means to kill 49 innocent people on a whim.
I suppose we could get along fairly well without pressure cookers but no gasoline or matches would be a huge step backward. Let alone the hundreds of other things that could be used. The only place where that would even be plausible would be a prison.