Charles C. W. Cooke:
Late last year, Gallup reported that the “percentage of Americans who believe having a gun in the house makes it a safer place to be (63%) has nearly doubled since 2000, when about one in three agreed with this.” Today, Rasmussen finds that the vast majority of Americans also want to live around other armed people:
American Voters overwhelming prefer living in a neighborhood where they have the option of owning a gun than to live where nobody is allowed to be armed.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 22% of Likely U.S. Voters would feel safer living in a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun over one where they could have a gun for their own protection. Sixty-eight percent (68%) would feel safer in a neighborhood where guns are allowed, while 10% are not sure.
The question Rasmussen asked was, ”Would you feel safer moving to a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun or a neighborhood where you could have a gun for your own protection?” From this, outfit drew the conclusion that ”Americans prefer living in neighborhoods with guns.
That poor New Jersey lady who was murdered while waiting for her permit process to end so she could get a gun to protect her from a nasty ex is only going to cause these numbers to rise.
I actually think I may have been one of the people called by Gallop on this one.
Ironically, I answered about both CA and Utah where there are plenty of gun owners in both places, but in CA most are criminals while in Utah most are law-abiding.
I had been pinned inside a condo complex in CA by drug dealers waiting for a major delivery on the block.
I had also been pinned in a home by police in CA when they were trying to catch a fled felon.
In Utah it is the cars, the bad drivers who scare me!
Red lights seem to be simply a suggestion to the Utah natives.
The fact that one in 5 adults here can carry concealed and 1 in 2 Utahans own guns doesn’t scare me a bit.
Rasmussen hasn’t framed the question properly, in my opinion. I prefer living in a neighborhood where responsible residents own guns. I don’t want guns to be quite so readily available to irresponsible neighbors. I regularly encounter people who aren’t even responsible enough to have a cell phone in their automobile.
@Greg:
If you don’t know your neighbors own a firearm because they are not outside waving it in the air, or in your face, chances are they are being responsible with them. As a matter of fact, how would you even know that someone you consider to be irresponsible owns a firearm if they don’t tell you or show it to you? And what bench mark are you using to apply the “irresponsible” label?
You lefties are pathetic.
And you’re an idiot.
A few years ago a fellow half a mile down the road a man shot and killed his wife, who was sitting across the table as he was apparently preparing to clean and oil his handgun. All of his cleaning equipment was laid out in front of him, alongside a cup of coffee. He was evidently so distraught that he then shot himself. That’s the official story, anyway. The newspaper said there was nothing suggesting he would have shot her intentionally.
I suppose you’re entitled to your own opinion. I am not, however, angry, hateful, or gratuitously insulting. I own a firearm, by the way, and have for the past 45 years. Your stereotyping or profiling or whatever it is would seem more often than not to be way off the mark.
@Greg:
So because of an anecdotal story of a man allegedly “accidentally” shooting his wife then himself, people should not be allowed to own guns? Using that logic, people shouldn’t be allowed to own cars, chainsaws, or knives.
A gun is a tool. Like any tool, it can be used improperly with potentially fatal results. Banning ownership of guns by lawful citizens makes no sense, because criminals inherently do not obey laws, so laws banning guns serves only to make the lawabiding more vulnerable to criminals. If someone is uncomfortable with the idea of personally owning a firearm, there is no law in the US that forces them to do so.
@Greg:
These are the 4 questions:
It is pretty obvious from that 4th question that legally owned guns are at issue.
See how it says: “allowed?”
That means you can get a permit (like in CA), or you can own without a permit (like here in Utah).
When permits are required, reasons are often demanded.
One reasonable reason is ”for your own protection.”
Guns stolen or bought under the table are not included in that 4th question.
@Pete, #5:
Where did I say people should not be allowed to own guns? Some people should not be allowed to own guns. Nearly everyone has probably known of such a person.
@Greg:
You don’t see the inherent danger in what you most certainly do mention with your “responsible” gun owner comment? Who gets to define “responsible”, in a world where genetic males are trying to define themselves as female, or white people are trying to define themselves as black – all based on “feelings”?
Simple, concrete, black and white handling of firearms would be to follow the 2nd Amendment, then actually PUNISH people who commit crimes with guns, rather than allowing them to plea-bargain away weapons charges. When a gun is involved in the commission of a crime, there should be no allowance for plea-bargaining. If you use a gun to commit a crime – a real felony, not trumped up SJW lies about people defending themselves from thugs – and you kill an innocent, then you get the death penalty. If you use a gun in the commission of a verifiable felony but no one is killed, you spend the rest of your life in prison without parole.
What our courts allow with regard to plea-bargaining away firearms charges is just as pathetic as what our courts do with DWI offenses.