Déjà vu: Majority oppose “assault weapons” ban in WaPo/ABC poll, too

posted at 12:01 pm on December 16, 2015 by Ed Morrissey

The backfire from Barack Obama’s attempt to push gun control in the wake of a terrorist attack is now undeniable. Last week, the New York Times/CBS poll found a majority opposed to renewing an “assault weapons” ban for the first time in its 20 years of polling on the issue. Today, the Washington Post/ABC poll comes up with its own series first on the question:

A majority of Americans oppose banning assault weapons for the first time in more than 20 years of ABC News/Washington Post polls, with the public expressing vast doubt that the authorities can prevent “lone wolf” terrorist attacks and a substantial sense that armed citizens can help.

Just 45 percent in this national survey favor an assault weapons ban, down 11 percentage points from an ABC/Post poll in 2013 and down from a peak of 80 percent in 1994. Fifty-three percent oppose such a ban, the most on record.

Indeed, while the division is a close one, Americans by 47-42 percent think that encouraging more people to carry guns legally is a better response to terrorism than enacting stricter gun control laws.

Ouch. That was in fact the opposite argument made by Barack Obama in the wake of the San Bernardino terrorist attack that left 14 dead and two dozen wounded. In fact, when responsible gun owners (and a few law-enforcement leaders) suggested that preparing for self-defense might be a wise idea in an age of small-scale terrorism, Obama and his allies scoffed at the argument as irrational. Clearly, that argument and the attempt to exploit a terror attack to disarm law-abiding citizens has flopped. And when I write “flopped,” this is what I mean:

abc-wapo-assaultweapons

This is a “broad-based trend,” according to the pollster:

The increase in opposition to banning assault weapons since 2013 peaks in some groups – up 18 points among strong conservatives, 17 points among higher-income earners and 16 points in the generally more liberal Northeast. But it’s a broadly based trend. Many groups have moved from majority support for an assault weapons ban two years ago to majority opposition now: whites, 30- to 64-year-olds, suburbanites, political independents, moderates, residents of the West and Midwest, anyone without a post-graduate degree and those in $100,000-plus households.

So who does still support the ban? The usual progressive demographics, naturally:

These trends leave just seven basic demographic groups in which majorities still support banning assault weapons: women, Northeasterners, seniors, post-graduates, liberals, Democrats and blacks.

Perhaps the fact that California actually does ban so-called “assault weapons” might account for the lack of confidence in the idea of reinstating it nationwide. In actuality, nothing proposed by Obama and his allies in the wake of the San Bernardino terror attack would have had any impact on it at all. California not only bans “assault weapons,” but makes it exceedingly difficult for responsible Californians to use firearms in self-defense outside the home at all. That didn’t keep Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik from massacring them. Neither did the overweening scrupulosity from the Obama administration about vetting social-media postings in the visa process, and neither did Obama’s post-attack scolding about not being mean to Muslims.

It’s that lack of connection to reality that has Americans less confident in the government’s ability to prevent terror attacks — and in the case of “lone wolf” attacks (although that’s not what San Bernardino was), respondents are much less confident:

There’s lopsided agreement on another concern: Just 22 percent express confidence in the government’s ability to prevent lone-wolf terrorist attacks, with 77 percent skeptical about it. Confidence in the government’s ability to stop a large-scale organized terrorist attack is much higher, albeit still well short of a majority – 43 percent.

Not surprisingly under these circumstances, Barack Obama gets his worst job approval ratings in fourteen months for this series, 45/51. On handling terrorism, Obama gets a 43/53, a slight improvement from last month but among the worst ratings he’s gotten since his first term. He also gets a 35/59 on handling ISIS, about identical to last month’s 35/57. There is little evidence of confidence in Obama’s performance across the board in this poll, and little reason to expect to see any.

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The greatest gun salesman since 1776….

PatriotRider on December 16, 2015 at 12:03 PM

So who does still support the ban? The usual progressive demographics, naturally:

.
Ban ALL Liberals/Progressives/SJW’s/etc/etc/etc from owning ANY firearms!!!

Win!- Win!

PolAgnostic on December 16, 2015 at 12:05 PM

The New York

Daily News

needs more Kardashians, stat!

cbenoistd on December 16, 2015 at 12:05 PM

He’s the most dangerous man in the world for the next year.

butch on December 16, 2015 at 12:09 PM

Don’t worry. They’ll keep throwing the question out there and changing the wording until they get the response that they want.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on December 16, 2015 at 12:10 PM

He’s the most dangerous man in the world for the next year.

butch on December 16, 2015 at 12:09 PM

…and he will not go quietly.

roy_batty on December 16, 2015 at 12:11 PM

The real problem is hammers and clubs not adding a plasic grip to a rifle

gxbhkt on December 16, 2015 at 12:12 PM

It’s always good to have a “real” news outlet to link for Liberals.

Cindy Munford on December 16, 2015 at 12:13 PM

The real problem is hammers and clubs sickles not adding a plasic grip to a rifle

gxbhkt on December 16, 2015 at 12:12 PM

Rix on December 16, 2015 at 12:14 PM

Obama best gun salesman EVAH!!!!!!!

they lie on December 16, 2015 at 12:15 PM

This will come as a shock to Sen. Toomey another disappointment to conservatives who got his sorry ass elected.

they lie on December 16, 2015 at 12:17 PM

Just paint them all bright colors, then they won’t be dangerous any more – turns ’em all into harmless skeeter guns…..

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 12:22 PM

Majority opinions of the electorate take a back seat to “I won”.

antipc on December 16, 2015 at 12:24 PM

Slam dunk winning issue for the GOP right now. And of course they will screw it up….

cdog0613 on December 16, 2015 at 12:32 PM

Gonna ban “Apepper” weapons too? Just as real

PJ Emeritus on December 16, 2015 at 12:33 PM

“Indeed, while the division is a close one, Americans by 47-42 percent think that encouraging more people to carry guns legally is a better response to terrorism than enacting stricter gun control laws.”

Well, here’s a fine time to queue up my gun control proposal for a federal income tax deduction for a firearm and pistol purchase and possession; training classes — use and self-defense; and CCW permit.

Dusty on December 16, 2015 at 12:34 PM

In a free society nothing is banned. That is for dictatorships.

supersport667 on December 16, 2015 at 12:34 PM

When they banned “assault weapons” (no such thing) before, did the ban eliminate them from the country? No.
When they banned cocaine and heroin, did the ban make those things unavailable in this country? No.
If they ban “assault weapons” again, will it eliminate them from the country and stop them from coming in illegally across an open border? No.

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 12:35 PM

Someone needs to overlay gun sales and homicides over that timeline graph (Not suicides or legal self defense gun deaths).

tej on December 16, 2015 at 12:36 PM

President Lame-Duck I-Won Adult-In-Room doesn’t care about polls of the unwashed masses. You’ll eat the peas he serves with his pen and phone, and like them.

Marcola on December 16, 2015 at 12:37 PM

To hell with obama and Hillary.

When SB happened the dead were not even cold, yet, and they made anti gun pronouncements.

The two always dance on corpses. See Benghazi.

Schadenfreude on December 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM

The two always dance on corpses. See Benghazi.

Schadenfreude on December 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM

…no worries…we’ll be dancing on their dead “political corpses” in a 13 months…

Pelosi Schmelosi on December 16, 2015 at 12:43 PM

From what I understand, according to Wolf Blitzer on CNN last night, that poll makes it a law, so there is no longer a ban on assault rifles.

LoganSix on December 16, 2015 at 12:43 PM

One of the reasons people want access to firearms is because of the increase in terror the last decade and a half.

After a recent increase in terror activity, Democrats – strangely – want to reduce access to the very thing that comfort Americans in these troubling times.

If the GOP can’t make political hay out of this, they really are the party of stupid.

Atlantian on December 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM

Majority oppose “assault weapons” ban

Finally, one good thing to point to for which Jugeared Jesus is responsible.

He’s the most dangerous man in the world for the next year.

butch on December 16, 2015 at 12:09 PM

Next up: (another illegal) executive action

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 12:50 PM

Make no mistake – the national Socialist Left’s ultimate goal is Confiscation:

Mr. Cuomo, speaking on WGDJ-AM, said: “Confiscation could be an option.”

MSNBC’s Ed Schultz Talks Gun ‘Confiscation’

“A couple of decades ago, Australia had a mass shooting similar to Columbine or Newtown. And Australia just said, well, that’s it — we’re not seeing that again. And basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws.” Obama June 10, 2014

You say gun control doesn’t work? Fine. Let’s ban guns altogether.
LA Times May 28, 2014

“In the Australian example, as I recall, that was a buyback program.”…..“I think it would be worth considering doing it on the national level” Hillary Clinton October 16 2015

Yes, They Want to Take Your Guns Away The Daily Beast November 2015

A gun-free societyThe Washington Post October 2015

We don’t need gun control. We need domestic disarmament @huffpostblog

It’s Time to Ban Guns. Yes, All of Them. New Republic
December 10, 2015

End the Gun Epidemic in AmericaThe New York Times

Torcert on December 16, 2015 at 12:54 PM

that british guy they had on MSnbc was there for one reason only…

to take away guns from Americans.

he did not last long.

Senator Philip Bluster on December 16, 2015 at 1:01 PM


Torcert on December 16, 2015 at 12:54 PM

Molon Labe, bud. Any chance they had of really doing that evaporated in 1776 or so…. They can try….but they will die

HomeoftheBrave on December 16, 2015 at 1:12 PM

Torcert on December 16, 2015 at 12:54 PM

I find it entertaining how the gun control topic comes up after every shooting but the talking point usually refers to assault weapons and more registration restriction. The real thing they all want is full banning of all guns but they are afraid and have decided it’s better to blame gun issues on the NRA. The NRA doesn’t make guns or kill people with guns so I miss the point. I doubt seriously that most criminals performing gun violence belong to the NRA.

tej on December 16, 2015 at 1:13 PM

Speaking of Polls:

PEW: Americans Trust GOP Over Democrats On Guns, Terrorism, Economy – Breitbart http://bit.ly/1UzlDSQ via @BreitbartNews

Torcert on December 16, 2015 at 1:14 PM

If anything has convinced the public of the advantage of arming for self defense, it’s the adage, “When seconds count, the police are minutes away”.

While that adage has been a round a very long time, the truth it represents has been brought clearly into focus by mass shootings but more so the threat of many more of them of the Islamic terrorism variety. Worse still, the threat of the latter Islamic terrorism, is looking to be unique in one respect — duration and ending.

Up until recently, mass shooting events have a somewhat staple scenario of bursting in shooting people until the arrival of police whereupon the shooter kills himself or surrenders. The faster the police arrive and act, the quicker it is over. Islamic terrorism events are not quite like that at all. Those can last hours in a surrounded scenario or in fleeing one, hours (San Bernardino) or even days (Boston Marathon, Paris I and II, mali Radisson Blu, and others) and the terrorist has to be taken out by the police to end the event.

Okay, I’ve over elaborated. The point is now that we are steps into the domestic Islamic jihadi era, having a firearm in hand in the unfortunate event of finding oneself in the midst of a jihadi attack, even if one decides to only shelter-in-place until the police secure the scene, is going to give one a better chance to survive than not having one.

Dusty on December 16, 2015 at 1:14 PM

Posted on the other thread before I saw this one—

Genuine question without debate: I saw online that for about $100 and some mechanical inclination, one could turn a semi-automatic rifle (the example shown was an AR-15, but others were referenced) into a fully automatic. For those of you who are in the know—is it really this easy? (The vid I watched made it clear that it wasn’t legal, but it also seemed pretty accessible.) Thanks in advance for the knowledge.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:17 PM

Molon Labe, bud. Any chance they had of really doing that evaporated in 1776 or so…. They can try….but they will die

HomeoftheBrave on December 16, 2015 at 1:12 PM

Exactly, those are but a few examples of the gun grabbers letting the mask fall off.

Seems like they have forgotten the methodology employed in the UK – get people to register their guns while promising to NOT confiscate them, and then using said lists to do exactly that.

Out of sheer desperation the gun grabbers have skipped a crucial step.

Is anyone going to be daft enough to register their guns now?

Torcert on December 16, 2015 at 1:20 PM

Is anyone going to be daft enough to register their guns now?

Torcert on December 16, 2015 at 1:20 PM

Yes – some. Most are not.
See the gun registration compliance rates in NY and CT.

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 1:29 PM

overweening scrupulosity

I’m not sure what this means, but it doesn’t sound good….

Also, when asked what laws would’ve prevented any mass shootings, Josh “I’m so full of excrement my breath smells like a toilet” Earnest couldn’t answer.

He also doubled down on his stupidity on the no fly list. We desperately need some adults back in the white house….

Hank_Scorpio on December 16, 2015 at 1:32 PM

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:17 PM

Yes – but it is illegal to do so.
And with basic machining tools and engineering knowledge that has been around for hundreds of years, people can build their own guns, even full auto, from scratch.
So what’s your point?
Why do you leftists keep pushing fantasies that can eliminate mechanical and engineering knowledge that has existed for centuries and actually prevent people from building things?

Heroin and cocaine are already illegal as well. How is that working out for eliminating those substances from society?

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 1:36 PM

Dentarthurdent
It was a question, not a point; I clearly stated that. Stand down, dude. Also, thanks for the answer.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:40 PM

It was a question, not a point; I clearly stated that. Stand down, dude. Also, thanks for the answer.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:40 PM

You always eventually turn everything into a leftist point.

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 1:47 PM

Aw. Sorry you’ve been hurt, dent. I said that my question wasn’t making a debate point, and I meant it. No one’s gonna hurt you, I promise.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:59 PM

Posted on the other thread before I saw this one—

Genuine question without debate: I saw online that for about $100 and some mechanical inclination, one could turn a semi-automatic rifle (the example shown was an AR-15, but others were referenced) into a fully automatic. For those of you who are in the know—is it really this easy? (The vid I watched made it clear that it wasn’t legal, but it also seemed pretty accessible.) Thanks in advance for the knowledge.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:17 PM

Also posted on the other thread, just for shlts and giggles:

Dick Richard on December 16, 2015 at 1:29 PM
So—you don’t know, or just don’t want to talk about it?

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:38 PM

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:38 PM

Perhaps he does not trust your motives.

♫♫♪

he’s making a list
and checking it twice
gonna find out
whose naughty or nice

♫♫♪

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 1:51 PM

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:06 PM

Aw. Sorry you’ve been hurt, dent. I said that my question wasn’t making a debate point, and I meant it. No one’s gonna hurt you, I promise.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:59 PM

I’m fine. I just know in advance what kind of @sshole you are – and right on cue you proved it yet again, quite well.

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 2:07 PM

Aw. Sorry you’ve been hurt, dent. I said that my question wasn’t making a debate point, and I meant it. No one’s gonna hurt you, I promise.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:59 PM

I wouldn’t believe you if you swore you were lying.

:>P

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:11 PM

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 2:07 PM

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:11 PM

You know, for macho Internet tough guys, you sure are sensitive, the pair of you. Maybe your fantasies of the coming armed rebellion have got you paranoid? Just something to consider.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 2:33 PM

Poor kid. Nobody likes him and he can’t imagine why.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 2:40 PM

Posted on the other thread before I saw this one—

Genuine question without debate: I saw online that for about $100 and some mechanical inclination, one could turn a semi-automatic rifle (the example shown was an AR-15, but others were referenced) into a fully automatic. For those of you who are in the know—is it really this easy? (The vid I watched made it clear that it wasn’t legal, but it also seemed pretty accessible.) Thanks in advance for the knowledge.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 1:17 PM

It can be done, but it is not as straightforward as is commonly described. You need a pattern (probably illegal to own) or plans, access to a machine shop, several hours of time, and a good bit of skill. Once done, it probably won’t be safe or reliable–at least not the first attempt. Case in point: Sayeed Farook tried it, but it didn’t work.

I am neck deep in “gun culture” and don’t know anyone who would even think of trying it. There is very little upside and a ton of downside to possessing something like that. Of course, I am NOT involved in the criminal or jihad culture, so I don’t exactly know how those people think.

Serious Drivel on December 16, 2015 at 2:51 PM

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 2:07 PM

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:11 PM

You know, for macho Internet tough guys, you sure are sensitive, the pair of you. Maybe your fantasies of the coming armed rebellion have got you paranoid? Just something to consider.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 2:33 PM

What in refried hell are you talking about?

Get a grip, or take a laxative or sump’n. Maybe a nice long walk? Stick your head in a bucket?

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:53 PM

Stick your head in a bucket?

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:53 PM

Fill it with cole slaw first.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:00 PM

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 2:53 PM

I’m talking about how a coupla tough-talkers get their backs up by being asked a simple question. It’s comical.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 3:01 PM

Nonpartisan hardest hit.

Bishbop on December 16, 2015 at 3:01 PM

Fill it with cole slaw first.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:00 PM

Mmmmm. Cole slaw.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 3:02 PM

Serious Drivel on December 16, 2015 at 2:51 PM

Hey, thanks for that—good info.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 3:10 PM

You know, for macho Internet tough guys, you sure are sensitive, the pair of you. Maybe your fantasies of the coming armed rebellion have got you paranoid? Just something to consider.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 2:33 PM

Whatsamatter pajamaboy – your hot cocoa get cold?

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 3:11 PM

I’m talking about how a coupla tough-talkers get their backs up by being asked a simple question. It’s comical.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 3:01 PM

Well, us gun nuts all have those skeery back thingies that go up dontcha know – and that makes us reeeeeally dangerous….

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 3:13 PM

Fill it with cole slaw first.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:00 PM

That would be unethical. Green beans — maybe.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I’m talking about how a coupla tough-talkers get their backs up by being asked a simple question. It’s comical.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 3:01 PM

Tough-talkers?

Get their backs up?

Maybe that bucket wasn’t such a good idea.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 3:24 PM

King Barack doesn’t give a shit. Thanks to Pelosi’s congress, King Barack will have LIFETIME Secret Service protection.

And given the problems of the Secret Service, one can only hope The King gets the JV team when he leaves office.

GarandFan on December 16, 2015 at 3:24 PM

Well, us gun nuts all have those skeery back thingies that go up dontcha know – and that makes us reeeeeally dangerous….

dentarthurdent on December 16, 2015 at 3:13 PM

Yes, but it’s talking about them (that, and knowing what they’re really called…) that makes you seem so bad-ass, you tough-talking, braggadocious, macho man, you.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:26 PM

That would be unethical. Green beans — maybe.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 3:24 PM

Creamed corn?

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:31 PM

Creamed corn?

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:31 PM

Good sir, I must strenuously object to the suggestion that you befoul the bounty of this good earth in such an egregious manner.

~~~~ or ~~~~

Yuck.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 3:36 PM

Good sir, I must strenuously object to the suggestion that you befoul the bounty of this good earth in such an egregious manner.

~~~~ or ~~~~

Yuck.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 3:36 PM

Fine then. Tofu! And that’s my final offer.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:39 PM

Fine then. Tofu! And that’s my final offer.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 3:39 PM

Hmmph. You just HAD to go there, didn’t you?

Boyo, now you’ve done it. Don’t you realize I’m a known tough talker and might just get my back up?

I have it on the highest authority.

Tofu indeed.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 3:52 PM

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 3:52 PM

Well, if you’re gonna be that way about it…

What do you want him to stick his head in a bucket of??

Hummus?
Wheel bearing grease?
Fat-free mayonnaise?

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 4:41 PM

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 4:41 PM

① Yes.

② Yes.

③ Yes.

Or, considering the leftist bent of the head-in-bucketee, free-range, farm-fresh chicken shizzle.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 4:53 PM

This is a nice break from the Trump/noTrump battle royale, eh?

Maybe a wee bit off topic, but needed.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 4:57 PM

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 4:41 PM

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 4:53 PM

You guys are adorable.

CivilDiscourse on December 16, 2015 at 5:41 PM

① Yes.

② Yes.

③ Yes.

hillbillyjim on December 16, 2015 at 4:53 PM

It was a trick question. Those are all the same thing.

CurtZHP on December 16, 2015 at 5:49 PM