The Times They’ve Been A-Changing
By Mitch Berg
When I first got involved in politics, and political punditry, 30 years ago the gun control movement was pretty much at its apex.
The media glibly reported that “85% of Americans favored gun control” (although naturally they never broke out what form of gun control those 85% favored).
Accurate and honestly reported or not, the surveys had a point; a plurality, if not a majority, of Americans were uncomfortable around guns.
I’m not exactly sure what the answer to this poll question would’ve been in 1985 – but the verdict today is unmistakable:
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 national survey of 977 Likely Voters was conducted on June 8-9, 2015 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
This poll is not grounds for complacency, much less overconfidence.
But it does show how powerful at least one facet of conservative ideology can be, when a group of motivated grassroots people search their minds to it, and devotes the time and patience it takes to make the changes stick.
June 15th, 2015 at 8:04 am
Well before everyone gets exhausted from patting themselves on the back you should pay attention to what the “progressives” have scheduled.
First, pieces of the emerging narrative;
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/419743/most-americans-expect-long-hot-summer-racial-unrest-moynihan-would-not-be-surprised
then Bill Clinton says :
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/06/14/bill-clinton-you-cant-have-people-walking-around-with-guns/
Money quote: “You can’t have people walking around with guns. I used to tell people when we did Bosnia, Kosovo anything like that, you get enough people with weapons around and there will be unattended consequences. People make mistakes People do wrong. Things happen. To hold a community together you got to have a high level of community trust.”
and this from Johns Hopkins/Bloomberg: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2015/06/12/gun-killings-fell-by-40-percent-after-connecticut-passed-this-law/
For the progressives Sandy Hook was a failure because it wasn’t part of a continuing trend – after the initial emotional response people saw it as what it was: an isolated incident. What the progressives need is a continuing string of increasingly violent incidents to build their narrative. #blacklivesmatter gives the thugs permission. The progressive de-policing (think “more blacks charged than whites” BS) initiative will destabilize the operational management structures of most police departments leaving the street cops screwed from both sides.
What we can look forward to for the next 16 months is a perfect storm of #blacklivesmatter/progressive de-policing/Hillary for President where Hillary does a Richard Nixon and presents herself as a “Law and Order” candidate here to stop the runaway bloodshed that comes from unregistered, unlicensed, uninsured gun owners. Her promise; once elected the first thing she’ll do is sign meaningful gun control legislation.
Between Bloomberg, Soros, Buffett, and The Clinton Family Foundation there’s plenty of money to fund this so expect things to get reals serious.
June 15th, 2015 at 11:03 am
don’t get me wrong, I’m not characterizing cops a innocent victims – there most assuredly are bad cops, and I’ll grant there are even some departments that are badly bent (the unicorn rots from the horn down).
What the progressives are trying to engineer is a race war between the police and urban blacks. The goal? How about “The 2017 Police Reform and Gun Control Act” or something with a similar name that effectively nationalizes the police and mandates gun licensing and registration.
June 15th, 2015 at 11:50 am
When I was living in Texas in the 1980s, almost everyone on the block at least had a shotgun. The ones that didn’t, got one after four of caught a couple of burglars one night and held them at gun point until the county sheriff’s deputies arrived.
Here in my Bloomington neighborhood, only two of us have weapons. Funny, since one of my neighbors works for a large defense supplier in town. Of course, he is only about eight years removed from New York, yet his wife, who is from southern Illinois and his daughters have told us that they feel safer knowing we have guns. I wonder if the stickers on my doors proclaiming that “I don’t call 9-1-1” with a picture of a Glock 19 has anything to do with that?
June 15th, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Mitch:
Lets not forget in 2000 I believe Al Gore was complaining in a presidential debate to have George Bush agree to a gun control bill. I guess in a narrow loss for Gore that helps to explain the loss.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
June 15th, 2015 at 2:52 pm
Kel, look at the data, however. What I see is this:
1. They are starting the study right at a high point in the data–about 15% above the ordinary trend.
2. The drop in firearm deaths starts in 1992, not 1994–really when police started to get a handle on the crack trade, if I remember correctly.
3. The rest of the nation’s firearm homicide rate dropped about 20% in the same time as well.
4. The researchers flat out lied about whether non-firearm deaths died–if you do best fit, the trend, which starts at least in 1985, is clearly down.
So that is an example of “figures lie, and liars figure”.
June 15th, 2015 at 2:56 pm
#4: the paper lied about whether non-firearm deaths dropped–yes, you can get confused by the variance, but if you do best fit, it’s been down since 1985 or so.
And the Missouri example: again, if you use “best fit”, there is no inflection point in 2007. It’s been, for whatever reason, a gradually increasing trend since 1999. I would guess part of the issue is that gang-bangers discovered St. Louis around that time–Colorado had a similar spike when Californians discovered the state had low taxes and such and the Crips and Bloods came to town.
June 15th, 2015 at 5:00 pm
bikebubba,
I agree with all your objections to the study, but it has been circulating extensively through the antigun crowd and I believe will be part of the pattern the progressives will use going forward.
Specifically, local or regional studies comprised of cherry picked data with “adjusted” values. They get to slap a patina of “research” or “science” on it and peddle it to news outlets like NPR/MPR, gullible city councils and state legislatures.
The idea being they can keep pro gun control “research” in the news at the same time with stories of continuing race based unrest and police misconduct.
What the progressives have figured out is that the “Occupy” model (activism springs up simultaneously in a dozen cities) fails because it gets cumbersome to manage and maintain whereas a small group of “activists” can (as they already have) move from city to city i.e. Ferguson, New York, Baltimore etc, foment/facilitate unrest and move on. The press likes that better because they can follow behind like seagulls following a garbage scow.
The end result; some time late next summer Hillary can position herself as the “Law and Order” candidate who’s willing to confront the scourge of guns and crime.
The point I’m making is that 16 months of perception manipulation via MSM can change that Rassmussen poll and the moderate voters that will carry the election.
June 15th, 2015 at 7:23 pm
here’s an example:
“ATF To Join NYPD In Fighting New York City Gun Crimes”
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2015/06/15/cbs2-exclusive-atf-gun-crime/
with this led:
“NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — Bullet-riddled windows, yellow crime scene tape, and evidence markers denoting where shell casings fell on the sidewalk are becoming all-too-familiar sights on New York City streets.
Now in an unprecedented move, a federal agency is joining the effort to get gun crimes under control, CBS2’s Marcia Kramer reported Monday.”
This isn’t a one off.
If this works (as if) then there’ll be an effort to formalize this relationship between the BATFE and local cops nationwide via statute.
June 15th, 2015 at 8:41 pm
Here’s another example:
“Democrats Introduce Licensing Requirement For All Handgun Buyers”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/15/democrats-introduce-licensing-requirement-for-all-handgun-buyers/
The Handgun Purchaser Licensing Act of 2015/strong>
is sponsored by
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md-8th Dist.) and
Rep. Elizabeth Esty (D-CT-5th Dist.) and
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT).
June 15th, 2015 at 8:42 pm
June 16th, 2015 at 8:56 am
Kel; I wish, wish, wish I could argue with you, but at this point, I’m simply left with the old adage about a lie traveling halfway around the world while the truth is still getting its shoes on. Sigh.
June 16th, 2015 at 11:35 am
One other thought; it is interesting that the ATF is going after gun crimes in New York City and not other cities with a much higher murder rate like the District of Columbia, Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore, Chicago, and the like. One might infer that the goal is not to reduce deaths–one could do that close to home and have a much bigger impact–but rather to (a) give agents a nice road trip and some Broadway shows and (b) get the agency some good press.
A second thought is that it’s very interesting how quickly the murder rate responded to diBlasio’s inflammatory comments towards the police. It is as if crooks know that the things that brought the crime rate down are no longer in place.