Polling Over Gun Control

[Kirk Freeman]

Many times on INGO we hear members express frustration at certain polls in favor of control. "99.7% of Hoosiers support Universal Background Checks" or the like and we hear responses such as "no one asked me". Well, there's a reason.

Short answer: the pollsters and the media are lying. Always keep this in mind: The media is lying to you.

I think the best historical analogy is to Washington State's I676 (mandatory training, trigger locks, other rubbish) which was polling by clear majorities up until election day and then was defended by over 40 points.

On Polling and Passing the Buck | Shall Not Be Questioned

 

[cobber]

So when we argue with the grabbers, why not just make up our own poll results? Since the media never seems to fact check this anyway?

I know, I know. Integrity. But maybe we're in a knife fight and need to focus on winning over style? The other side sure is...

 

[churchmouse]

I have been polled twice in my life. Both times I did not fit there profile and was hung up on.
Pollsters are looking for people (sheeple) that fit into category's so they get the desired results.

 

[cobber]

I have been polled twice in my life. Both times I did not fit there profile and was hung up on.
Pollsters are looking for people (sheeple) that fit into category's so they get the desired results.

So why don't GOA or NRA or the TP produce their own "scientific" polls and throw some really impressive numbers out there?

 

[Hop]

Fox59 just ran a STORY favoring the MAIG commercial playing in Indiana right now trying to sway people to call Congress urging support for UBC. They spouted that 92% of Hoosiers support background checks.

Call Fox59 and tell them to get their facts from a reliable source and not listen to these Marxists from NYC.

I called the news department (and got a human) to express my concerns about their gun grabbing agenda: 317-632-5900

 

[5.56'aholic]

Statistics never lie, and liars use statistics. Any data set can be manipulated to reflect what the investigator/poll wants to extract from the populace as "truth.".

 

[johnny45]

Are natural rights contingent upon the opinion of others?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Are natural rights contingent upon the opinion of others?

You just struck the heart of the difference which separates a republic from a democracy! The answer isn't 'no', but 'Hell no!'

For the uninitiated, a republic performs a minimum number of functions necessary for a free society to operate including and especially protecting natural rights which are above it and recognized by it, not granted by it. A democracy, by contrast, is tyranny by 51% vote.

 

[beararms1776]

I've never received a call from pollsters. Probably because they already know I don't fit their clique.
Which is fine by me.

 

[MaLfUnCtIoN]

Pollsters have an agenda. They only poll those known to share their core values.

 

[Paul30]

The best book I have read on the topic is by a now progun Dr. John Lott. His book "More Guns Less Crime" show specifically how statistics are not only manipulated by how they write the questions, but where they take the poles. For example you are much more likely to be harmed if you keep a gun in your home. We all know this old false statistic, but what isn't said is the statistics don't specifically say by THE gun you keep in your home. It stands to reason that if you keep one in your home, you probably live in an area where you need one. This alone raises your chances of being shot. The other little fact is they don't specify your gun shot you. So if someone keeps a gun in their home because they live in a crime saturated neighborhood and someone breaks in and shoots them, the statistic only shows they kept a gun in their home and were shot with a gun. By this line of reasoning, stay out of hospitals because statistically speaking, the majority of people who die visit a hospital first. This book shows where the questions are many times loaded so the only answers available are guaranteed to give them the results they are wanting. Not only how they ask the question, but having similar answers divides the statistical numbers. If you ever had a question about gun control and wanted real information we should all read this book by Dr. John Lott. Unlike other statistics, his are real. He doesn't cherry pick his demographic for results. He took statistical data from EVERY county in EVERY state. This means he will get real results. He just put out a new book called At the Brink, I saw an interview of him discussing the book but have not read it yet. It looks very relevant to our current political issues.

John Lott's Website

 

[jbombelli]

I once sat back and watched an online poll about gun control. It was eye opening. I refreshed the screen every 30 seconds for quite a while. Here's what I saw happening:

Every time I refreshed the screen, there were a random number of pro-gun votes added, usually between 25 and 50, and no more anti-gun votes. Then, on one refresh, I saw exactly 5,000 anti-gun votes get added to the poll numbers. Then as I kept refreshing, I saw pro-gun votes added to the poll with every refresh. Then after a bit, exactly 5,000 anti-gun votes were added to the poll. In the end, the anti-gun votes won the day.

It was on a well-known news website.

If anyone thinks these polls are worth anything at all, and not being manipulated as the web administrator/his boss/whoever wants them to be, you're deluding yourselves.