Poll: Most Republicans support assault weapons ban, despite Trump saying 'no appetite'

Poll: Most Republicans support assault weapons ban, despite Trump saying 'no appetite'

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/07/poll-most-voters-support-assault-weapons-ban-1452586

Most Republicans would support legislation banning assault-style weapons, a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll found Wednesday — a finding that contradicts President Donald Trump's claim earlier the same day that there's "no political appetite" for such restrictions.

The poll found that nearly 70 percent of all voters would back such a ban. Support for an assault-weapons ban was higher, at 86 percent, among Democrats, who have been pushing for new restrictions on the firearms in the wake of two mass shootings over the weekend.

But the poll found that 55 percent of GOP voters were comfortable with banning assault weapons, and 54 percent said they would support stricter gun laws more generally.

And it's even higher for Universal Background Checks,

Ninety percent said they would back universal background checks for gun sales.

Voters almost unanimously want mandatory universal background checks on gun purchasers. More than 91 percent support requiring background checks for all gun sales. Only 5 percent of voters oppose background checks.

But that NRA money is just too good I suppose. The GOP really seems to hate the will of the people on these big issues.

Nah, I find it hard to believe that there's a large swath of Republicans that support banning assault rifles. Saying that it's just the NRA alone and it's lobbying is simply being naive.

@babyjoker1221: not really. NRA called Trump directly Wednesday and told him to back off background checks because it might hurt sales.

The answer is no. When those that support gun control elect enough politicians that support control to enact change then there will be new gun control laws.

Until then, this is it. And that's that.

Assault weapons are currently illegal by law. What good would a ban on them do?

Shhh. If the media pushes the phrase long enough, it must be true, right?

Then you have to take money out of politics because until you do the NRA will keep spending it.

That's not entirely true. Some are.

That's not completely correct. It's like you two are trying to mis-lead.

https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/hardware-ammunition/assault-weapons/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapons_legislation_in_the_United_States

The American people seem to understand this, and want them banned.

The "AR" type firearm a person can purchase is not "military grade" in the logical sense That is a falsehood the msm tries to push on the ill informed masses and obviously some people believe it.

You're stuck on semantics and technicalities. People want high capacity weapons like AR banned and they aren't stupid when they check that option in the polls.

You are the one who posted a link about semantics. Honestly, if people are going to have an opinion on banning something, I'd expect them to understand what that something IS.

Your wiki link shows liberals banning whatever they are afraid of? Color me shocked.

The ban applied only to weapons manufactured after the date of the ban's enactment. It expired on September 13, 2004, in accordance with its sunset provision.

The law also categorically banned the following makes and models of semi-automatic firearms and any copies or duplicates of them, in any caliber:

Name of firearm	Preban federal legal status
Norinco, Mitchell, and Poly TechnologiesAvtomat Kalashnikovs (AKs) (all models)	Imports banned in 1989*
Action Arms Israeli Military Industries UZI and Galil	Imports banned in 1989*
BerettaAR-70 (SC-70)	Imports banned in 1989*
Colt AR-15	Legal
Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN-LAR, FNC	Imports banned in 1989*
SWD (MAC type) M-10, M-11, M11/9, M12	Legal
Steyr AUG	Imports banned in 1989*
INTRATEC TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22	Legal
Revolving cylinder shotguns such as (or similar to) the Street Sweeper and Striker 12	Legal

Please stop thinking these polls are pollsters are incorrect when they aren't.

Most people want that shit banned, including AR. Most people want Universal Background checks. GOP wants that new Yacht from the NRA gold.

Are you now saying there are not bans on certain semi auto rifles in liberal shitholes?

I know I know. Polls are always correct.....as long as it coincides with your belief. I can post links where majority don't support polls but that wouldn't change your mind.

Sick and tired of the knee-jerk reaction of banning guns and more gun control. Lets look at some examples of failed liberal policy. The UK- Took all the guns and have higher murder rate than before. Constitutional Carry states, who have the MOST RELAXED Gun Control laws, are the safest states to live in, with the least amount of gun violence. Taking away the liberties of law abiding citizens because a few nut jobs is not the way to go.

The 2nd Amendment was put into place as a unalienable right to protect its citizens from not only home intruders but also the Government.

Your own posts shows your earlier stance to be wrong. And that is NOT semantics.

Link? Also gun deaths are way down in the UK.

The Second Amendment states well regulated militia. Why do you pick and choose the Second Amendment wording?

Tell me why I am wrong. Are you also saying there are not bans?

You contradicted yourself from all to certain. Your statements.

Par from the course from you: Everyone else is wrong yet never support your stance.

Guys, if you want to prove otherwise, why not link to other polls that show that most people do not want to ban assault weapons and/or better background checks? I mean you could perhaps shut down OP completely by showing that shortly after a mass shooting, people tend to support stricter gun laws, but two weeks later it is all forgotten and people want more relaxed gun laws.

But if you want to argue that polls are fake, go ahead, I won't stop you unless it can be considered trolling.

He's the biggest troll on the site.

I'm saying most people support a total ban on Assault Rifles, which historically includes semi-auto rifles like AR-15s.

I'm saying it because a new poll was released showing it. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

So you disagree with most Americans, not my problem.

Then link a recent one that shows this instead of slinging random shit.

Go ahead.

I'm not sure why you are using this adjective when conservative areas are bigger shitholes on average.

Seriously what citizen needs an assault weapon?

Par for the course? I just stated YOU made the contradictions. Are you unaware of your own stances n the same thread?

An assault weapon is a fully automatic weapon. The size of the clip does not make it an assault weapon as some would argue.

An assault rifle is a weapon that uses selective fire and a cartridge. It does NOT have to be fully automatic.

@zaryia: Your source doesn't seem to understand though. No military grade weapon is currently legal. It seems like the general public specifically liberals are prey ignorant on the issue.

Liberals are the ones trying to squash people's rights in places like CA, Maryland, Mass., Jersey, etc.., Those places like to infringe upon the 2a as much as possible. Read about how these democrats address "assault weapons".

Random shit?

Most people don't believe polls and that's from a half year ago: https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/423023-a-majority-of-americans-are-skeptical-that-public-opinion-polls

This past October the majority did not favor bans: https://news.gallup.com/poll/243860/snapshot-majority-oppose-ban-assault-rifles.aspx

The link about is from October but it shows you how views change once the vitriol dies down. You see it with every poll about the specific topic. "Support" was "high" after the Orlando shooting and then guess what happened?

https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/will-public-opinion-turn-against-assault-weapons/

@horgen: but that would mean they would have to debate.

Their only strategy in every topic is to just slobber on someone until that person is tired of getting wet.

If you ban assault rifles how's the NRA gonna have the infrastructure to filter foreign campaign money?! Can't have that shit!

That is correct, weapons on the market for the general public do not have that selection. They have only one rate of fire that takes a person to pull the trigger to fire the weapon. They can't hold the trigger and fire the weapon continuously. I know that you are aware of this, this comment is for those who do not know how an assault weapon works.

People don´t need to link to arbitrary polls. All people need to do is show who is in control of most of the state legislatures

If people really wanted a ban they would not vote as they do.

Gerrymandering.

Funny :)

Good joke though.

Hey, Trump won with 3 million less votes.

Maybe that single issue isn't enough for people to vote different. Even if Us turned blue over night, a ban on assault weapons wouldn't be done tomorrow.

And you know why that was when you lose California with over 3mill votes, it kinda goes without saying.

See my first(or second depending on interpretation) response again.

Horgen, I like you. I really do. You seem like a good mod and upbeat chap but for the love of god please gain some perspective on how we elect a President.

Oh I know how you do it. That not every vote weighs the same is not unique to US. You will find the same in Norway. In one of the latest elections, a small party that did it well in region (compared to earlier) ended up with one seat in what equals the parliament here thanks to 45K votes, while another small party did it fairly well up North and earned two seats thanks to 14K votes or so.

I understand the reasoning behind doing so, I see the necessity of it. But I will still poke at unfairness of it from time to time.

Gerrymandering on the other hand. Pure and utter BS.

Not sure how that's relevant. National opinion polls are still objectively highly accurate.

This past October the majority did not favor bans: https://news.gallup.com/poll/243860/snapshot-majority-oppose-ban-assault-rifles.aspx

The link about is from October but it shows you how views change once the vitriol dies down. You see it with every poll about the

specific topic. "Support" was "high" after the Orlando shooting and then guess what happened?

https://democracyjournal.org/arguments/will-public-opinion-turn-against-assault-weapons/

Correct. But currently most Americans want them banned.

Seats =/= Votes.

For example, there are more GOP seats in Senate. Yet Democrat Senators had 10million more votes. Red areas control most of the USA map, yet Democrats had more voters in 2016 and 2018. Last I checked, empty land doesn't have a public opinion and can't do a poll.

You have more legislators because you have more empty land (Several small states vs a handful of big states). Dems have more voters.

These polls are very accurate. The GOP is against the will of most Americans on most major issues. Gun control, abortion, cannabis, climate change, health care, taxing the rich all polls heavily in the favor of Dems. Hence them getting far more votes the last few elections nationally. Because most Americans are on their side on these issues. Sadly the maps don't give a shit about that fact.

We weren't talking about how we elect a president.

We were talking about public opinion, and then Jacanuk deflected to who gets more seats through empty land rather than who has the most voters (aka public opinion polls).

Read the quote chain next time.

Watching the left and the media attempt to define what "assault weapon" even entails is pure comedy in of itself.

I've already made my proclamation, that as a civic duty, I'd hand over my only assault rifle if a rally downtown was planned and some company would melt down the metal like a book burning session. Its an antique to me and a prized memory of my Dad, that I used once to make sure it works, but to a psycho, an old Russian SKS is a weapon of mass destruction. Although, I would keep the stuff that came with it, like the soldiers rifle book, as sad as i would be to give up my first gun my dad bought me, I'd do it, even if I don't believe removing guns is viable solution.

I think like a suicide watch, we need the terrorist watch to include loners/creepers/haters. I've never really seen anyone like that, the closet I've been, is a kid from Jr. High who's brother was in my Spanish class, and the kid sold guns to a dude who did the Trolly Square Massacre. At least that is what people called it, but 5 people doesn't sound like a massacre anymore, that was 2007 compared to 2019 today.

To me, this means there was a version of history where I become friends with kid in Spanish class and by acquaintance his brother. His brother could have stolen my guns and sold them to a deranged person who kills innocent people. Chances are, in this universe, destroy my single gun, would likely lower chances of a mass shooting by 0.01%, but anything I could do to help. I thought about selling it and using funds for a charity, but then the gun would still exist, and would have way higher chance of killing someone.

What are these "assault weapons". I dont know anyone who owns full auto, thats illegal unless you go through a very extensive background check and get a specific licence for it.

All guns owned by the general public are semi auto, pistols, rifles and shotguns.

I saw Bernie Sanders come on joe rogans podcast and he was saying the same thing, that he supports the 2nd amendment but wants an "assault weapon" ban. But never does he mention what guns he considers an "assualt weapon".

WUT....

Liberals need to stop throwing these words around like "assault weapon" without actually defining what guns falls under this Term. I've always seen assault weapon as firearms with full auto and burst fire options. I feel like people are trying to use this term to umbrella more firearms under its definition. What guns are "assault weapons". Honestly its a stupid term in general, a baseball bat could be used as an "assault weapon". Might as well just call all guns "assault weapons". That's probably the lefts goal by using this term honestly.

Those people toss around the term with much haste and little thought. Facts show us how very little a semi auto sporting firearm is used in shootings. Going after something used in single digit amounts of shootings and I should think eventually they won't be gunning for other firearms? Democrats should never be trusted with the 2A.

Nice deflection there.

You can try to argue all you want that "red have more land" but "Blue has more votes" which has no bearing on the inaccuracy of your claim that polls are accurate.

Either you have a poll which polls only among similar minded people, which means it´s biased as .... or you claim that it takes a neutral poll of a random group which is then disproven by the fact that people vote in people who are not following the polls.

Also, again opinion polls are and never will be facts, we are talking pretty basic 101 knowledge here.

That's not deflection, becase you brought up Legislators which makes no sense as the votes are not 1:1 for states. Which is why there is far more Red Areas on a US Map yet far more BLUE VOTERS.

National opinion polls are generally accurate. The 2016 ones had a 1.2% error and correctly measured the winner.

Can you prove the polls I linked in the OP are inaccurate?

I didn't say these polls were facts. They are good estimations though.

Most Americans want background checks (~90%). Currently most Americans want assault weapon bans (~70%). I can say that with a high level of confidence going by the error margin of these polls.

Just like how I can say most Americans disapprove of Trump's job performance, are against abortion bans, against deporting Dreamers, against Trump's wall, for Net Neutrality, for taxing the very rich, etc.

Polls will never reflect votes when votes aren't weighted 1:1 as happens in polls.