Troubling Public Opinion Trends for Gun Rights and Civil Liberties
By Anthony Gregory • Thursday January 24, 2013 10:54 AM PDT • 11 Comments
On how to respond to mass shootings and violent crime, the public opinion trends frighten me, especially when broken down by political identification. Predictably, Democrats are in favor of gun control by wider margins than Republicans. But still, 92% of Republicans favor universal background checks, which I consider as bad a proposal as any being offered. It will mean the death of gun shows as we know them. The relative freedom with which Americans privately trade firearms is one of the greatest spheres of liberty in the country, something that sets the United States apart from most places. Ninety-one percent of the population wants to abolish the freedom (independents being slightly more reluctant than either Democrats or Republicans to support such a measure). This would be the most significant strike against gun rights, and one of the most important violations of the Bill of Rights in general, in modern times.
One theme I try to focus on in these discussions is how gun control is merely one of many core elements of the police state, and that those who oppose criminal justice and police abuses should be more skeptical of gun laws, and those who favor the right to bear arms should be much more skeptical of militarized policing, prosecutorial shenanigans, the prison system, the drug war, and so many other heavy-handed government measures that contribute to violent crime and boost the rationale for gun control. It never made sense to me that those who favor gun control would decry racism in the courtroom and those who see gun rights as a bulwark against tyranny would deny the pervasiveness of police brutality.
Well, for once, at least these poll results enjoy some internal consistency. 63% of Republicans want to see 15,000 more police on the streets. Not to be outdone, 81% of Democrats back the same proposal.
Tags: Civil Liberties, Constitution, Criminal Justice, Culture, Gun Control, Law, Liberty, Personal Liberty, Police, Politics, Power, Racism, Second Amendment, The State, Weapons 
So we get more cops on the street, who is going to pay for them?
Jim Tuggle | Jan 24, 2013 | Reply
I agree, Anthony. However, such seeming inconsistency points to a failing not only in the more mainstream ideologies, but even in libertarianism as well. People don’t, in my view, have a rubric for determining truth from falsehood; a solid epistemology, if you will.
For instance, many, if not most libertarians would say they subscribe to the Non-Aggression Principle, but I sense that some percentage of those same people would not understand that private property is the concept that undergirds and in fact justifies the NAP.
So then, for a supposedly progressive Democrat to oppose police injustice but support gun control simply reflects a lack of understanding of WHY an individual should be able to arm himself as he sees fit. Ditto for a conservative Republican supporting the right to bear arms while simultaneously supporting the war on (some) drugs. Cognitive dissonance, it’s what’s for breakfast?
Wilt Alston | Jan 24, 2013 | Reply
The problem is not the “background check” as such, but what is done with the information gained. With universal background checks the government can build up a database with the names of everyone who owns firearms. Something especially easy today with modern computer technology. Historically this has been the “means” used by governments when they wish to collect up the guns owned by the people. The agents of the government simply go around to every gun owners house and demand that the guns are turned over. We should not forget that many governments eventually start to view gun owners as a “threat” to social order. Private sales are one means where people can obtain firearms (at least rifles and shotguns) without ending up on a government database somewhere. The history of the last century has shown that there is no such thing as a “trustworthy” government. That even if a government is “trustworthy” now does not mean that this condition will continue into the future.
Jerome Bigge | Jan 28, 2013 | Reply
@ Jerome
No, the background check is a problem, because it is an infringement.
Messianic Theonomist | Jan 29, 2013 | Reply
The bad or sick people will always have Guns from one source or another. What about the good people that go by the law? Crime in all the states has went down; Where a person can carry with the background check and pass. There are enough laws on guns; do not need more. Let’s stand up for our Bill of Rights.
clark powers | Feb 10, 2013 | Reply
Would a “permit/license” showing that you have cleared a background check be a possible compromise? Like showing a second form of ID, but not recorded when you made a firearms purchase. Personally, I think universal background checks are also just to generate funds, an extra tax, on any firearms purchase or attempted purchase.
aought | Feb 10, 2013 | Reply
When I purchase a gun in my state I pay a fee to DOJ so they can determine if I’m legally able to own one. Now keep in mind that I already own several other guns already, but still have to pay a fee every time I purchase a gun. I do not see why I would have to register my guns when I have NOT committed any crime or do I see how this process would deter a criminal from committing a crime. I say if our law makers are going to try to pass any kind of law that they would have to prove that these laws would actually work and not just be another law on the books that infringes on my rights.
Bob | Feb 10, 2013 | Reply
We are forgetting something here. Gun control is not about controlling crime, it is about disarming the public! It is about who will be in control when we go to a One World Government. It is a large scheme to put our country under the leadership of a dictator so that when the one world government comes along we, in the U.S., will be all docile and welcome it with open arms and the dictator who is in control at the time will be our country’s leader and all will be well for him/her! For the rest of us it will be a literal hell.
Duffy | Feb 13, 2013 | Reply
I think it is possible to overstate the issue. Oregon and Colorado have gun show background checks. This has not killed gun shows in those states despite the advantage the private non-show transfers have there, of not requiring background checks.
And let’s be honest, the government already knows approximately who has the guns, via the 4473′s – or it could know within a week via an executive order requiring their examination.
If only 1% of Americans had guns, this would be worrisome. As it is, the government might as well assume that all Americans have guns. It is information not very useful to them.
The line in the sand is not some paperwork coup they put over on us. It is whether enough of us are willing to kill anyone attempting to confiscate our guns. I think there are easily enough to stop any confiscation dead in its tracks. Even the county sheriffs must think so, since so many have bailed on any gun law enforcement. They don’t want to be shot by their neighbors.
Look at the bright side. “Universal” background checks will create a thriving black market that we all can utilize. The more laws they pass, the more laws we ignore.
Paul Bonneau | Feb 14, 2013 | Reply
All those who oppose the 2nd amendment do not belong here. A great deal of our history as Americans has to do with firearms, our national anthem was written in the midst of war. Let them come and TRY to take our right to bare arms O f***ing dare them and we the people (true Americans) will bring the wrath of America down upon them all. You don’t f*** with US you dont f*** with America.
michael | Mar 31, 2013 | Reply