Poll: Less than half of Americans upset about gun vote
April 24th, 2013
09:16 AM ET

Poll: Less than half of Americans upset about gun vote

Heading into last week's gun control vote, polls showed that nearly nine in 10 Americans favored background checks not currently required by law for gun sales–a rarely seen, overwhelming amount of support for a piece of legislation in Washington.
Now that the Senate actually failed to pass such a measure, a new poll indicates Americans aren't as upset about the unsuccessful bill.

The Washington Post/Pew Research Center poll suggests that post-vote attitudes stray from the wide support for the background check measure before the debate, which hovered around 85% in multiple polls.

A plurality of Americans - 47% - say they are either "angry" or "disappointed" with the Senate's action on gun legislation, far different from the amount of people who strongly approved the proposal before the vote. Meanwhile, 39% say they are "relieved" or "happy" about the vote.

Post by:
Filed under: Gun Control • Politics
soundoff (52 Responses)
  1. Joey Isotta-Fraschini ©™

    I think that many USA citizens do not actually comprehend questions asked during polling, and simply give the response they think is more PC or pleasing to the pollster. Sometimes the wording of a question indicates the preferred answer.

    April 24, 2013 at 9:36 am | Report abuse |
  2. bud

    the criminals hate guns it makes what they do more dangerous

    April 24, 2013 at 9:45 am | Report abuse |
    • Ope and Change

      Exactly. If one side of the two major political parties wants our weapons gone, they should step up to the plate and first get rid of all violent crime in the U.S.......or make 911 an instant public service (dial it, and a armed cop is at the door in 3 seconds).

      April 24, 2013 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
    • Change

      Exactly, Bud. If the left wants our firearms so much so, then they should first do the right thing and completely get rid of violent criminals.....all of them.....simple solution, no?

      April 24, 2013 at 11:43 am | Report abuse |
  3. n-juh-near

    I come from a very pro-gun stance, being a country-boy at heart from the Missouri Ozarks. I have had several debates with my friends and families on this matter, but I absolutely support requiring background checks for all firearms purchases. Just treat the transfer of firearms the way new purchases are handled in the store with the question sheet and instant background check over the phone.

    The reason I have come to this is that I know of many farmers' market places where you can legally get a gun out of the back of some dude's truck if you show up with $3-500. The problem with this is a felon can show up and drop a few bills on a used gun and no one is the wiser if he neglects to tell anyone about his criminal history. This almost never happens in an established store with the current background check requirement.

    Yes, it would be slightly frustrating to do the paperwork for every transfer, but it would in no way infringe on the right of law abiding people to acquire firearms for lawful purposes while closing a major loophole that allows felons to go buy guns casually in broad daylight.

    Will it solve the problem of bad guys getting guns? No, of course not, they can still be acquired in the dark alleys in the middle of the night and other places with less than reputable salesmen, but this would close up the easiest way for a felon to get a gun aside from them having someone buy one for them.

    April 24, 2013 at 10:33 am | Report abuse |
    • Injun Ere

      Yeah, stealing a gun would never happen. Nope. Only transactions involving money happen in your world? Strange.

      April 24, 2013 at 7:22 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Mary

    As for Americans being upset on the gun vote... Nice job main stream media, you're obviously trying to lull the public into accepting another right being striped away from our nation. Or should I say "privilege"

    April 24, 2013 at 10:53 am | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      What privelege or right is trying to be stripped away?

      April 24, 2013 at 10:57 am | Report abuse |
    • Hamsta

      @ Mary, you are confusing a right with a privelege. @ banasy Marriage is a privelege that is being taken away. Marriage is a privelege bestowed upon us by God. Marriage is a holy agreement between 1 God, 1 man and 1 woman. Government has no place in that holy agreement and is sacreligous, better yet satanic to interfere.

      April 24, 2013 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scottish Mama

      Governments do not see religion as a factor. So governments can see marriage with anyone you want to marry and make it so. Marriage is not just for religion it is for legal purposes for anyone who loves another and wants to make that committment to the one they love. Governments recognize people not gender. Equality for all.

      April 24, 2013 at 2:20 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mary

      Hamsta, I believe in America we really have no rights, just priveleges. However, we all do have our God given natural rights...

      April 24, 2013 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hamsta

      God invented marriage, government has no place in that agreement end of story. Man invented guns and our founding fathers granted us our second ammendment right in the bill of rights. They call it the bill of rights because those are the ammendments that cannot be altered. Government has no place there either, END OF STORY.

      April 24, 2013 at 3:02 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA)

    We have yet another threat to our Freedom of Information as we know it. This year the Internet has been under attack by bills and treaties such as SOPA, ACTA, PIPA and others.if passed would big government and large corporations power to monitor and censor what you do on the internet.

    April 24, 2013 at 11:13 am | Report abuse |
  6. Ope and Change

    Here's a plan that makes a bit of sense = first get rid of the possibility my family will ever meet a violent criminal, THEN ask me to disarm (I'll certainly be more agreeable).

    If so many members on the left want our weapons that much, then they'll first do their part and rid our country of all violent crime....otherwise, you stand guard at my door and with my family as we're out and about.

    April 24, 2013 at 11:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Hamsta

      You haven't figured out what hope and change mean yet? Just look at the stub from your paycheck. You see that money that's missing? It's called tax. Obama HOPES he can empty all the CHANGE from your pocket. Pay attention to that tax, Obama is taking more of that from your pocket this year. Considering that's his definition of hope and change, I don't want to know what he means by "forward". I'm to frightened that he means bend forward.

      April 24, 2013 at 3:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mary

      LOL to you Hamsta !
      I award Hamsta's 3:25 post, the best of the day... hands down! 😉

      April 24, 2013 at 3:35 pm | Report abuse |
  7. saywhat

    I tend to agree with @JI-F

    April 24, 2013 at 11:38 am | Report abuse |
  8. saywhat

    And then perhaps we are now rendered unaffected by lobbies winning and the people losing. Its now the rule.

    April 24, 2013 at 11:41 am | Report abuse |
  9. Change

    What's with all the censorship here? Clearly, CNN has become a member of the very-left-of-center political party.

    Want my weapons? Fine. First, you have to get rid of violent crime. Simple.

    April 24, 2013 at 11:41 am | Report abuse |
  10. Mary

    The wording to a preferred answer is more likely the case; I'm in agreement with you both there.

    April 24, 2013 at 11:44 am | Report abuse |
  11. Mary

    In order to get rid of violent crime (the kind we've witnessed in the last 20 years) you must get rid of the meds...

    April 24, 2013 at 11:46 am | Report abuse |
    • Hamsta

      I have been saying that since Columbine, Mary. You don't see these gun control freaks surrounded by gun free zone signs, they are surrounded by other people with GUNS.

      April 24, 2013 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |
  12. BOMBO

    Oh well. Maybe there will be positive change after the next massacre.

    April 24, 2013 at 12:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Maybe

      That's like saying, "Oh, well. Maybe there will be a positive change (abolishment of alcohol) after the next family is violently smashed to death in a DUI"

      More innocent children die from the illegal use of cars, and I don't hear folks calling for safe 10 mph national speed limits, or legal/psych 'background' checks at car dealerships (and private auto sales)........maybe when the next 1,000 innocent children are violently crushed to death from scofflaw drivers (in the next 30 days), we'll see some of that "positive change" you're pining for??

      April 24, 2013 at 2:24 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Mark

    You don't have to be outright angry at those who were too cowardly to impose even a background check for all weapon sales. Just remember when election time comes in 2014.

    April 24, 2013 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hamsta

      You don't have to be angry at the politicians that have your kids locked in a shooting gallery known as a gun free zone with nowhere to run, who are to cowardly to put really big GUNS in every teachers hand. Just vote them out of office in 2014 and 2016.

      April 24, 2013 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Hamsta

    R. Lee Irming( Gunny, the gunnery sergeant that likes to shoot big guns ) stars in one of my favorite commercials. he plays the role of a psychiatrist. His patient, laying on the couch says " I don't like the color yellow, it makes me sad.". R. Lee Irming picks up a box of tissue and throws it at him, asking him " You want a tissue, you jackwad!? Are we in namby pamby land!?". the commercial makes me imagine Bush and Colin Powell throwing a box of tissue at Obama and Hillary Clinton. Bush never whined that Bill Clinton got us in the mess we are in, he just did his job. Some talk about what they can do, others do what they can do. An empty wagon makes a lot of noise.

    April 24, 2013 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Scottish Mama

    @Hamsta-Bush is a d-bag. War mongerer.

    April 24, 2013 at 2:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Hamsta

      I'm supposed to believe that Al Quaeda is on their heels and Chevy is alive after I just towed the fourth crappy new Chevy to the shop with my 10 year old Toyota that has never been to the shop and Benghazi was the result of a youtube video? I think Clint Eastwood had it right, that is an empty chair making a lot of noise banging around in an empty wagon. The war mongers are muslims, we were attacked. Trying to be politically correct and being the muslims friend isn't exactly getting the job done is it?

      April 24, 2013 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Embassy and Consulate Attacks During the Administration of George W. Bush

      6/14/02 Karachi – US consulate in Pakistan. 12 killed, 51 injured.

      2/20/03 Riyadh – International diplomatic compound in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 17 killed.

      2/28/03 Karachi – US consulate in Pakistan. 2 killed.

      7/30/04 Taskkent – US embassy in Taskkent, Uzbekistan. 2 killed.

      12/6/04 Jeddah – US consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. 5 killed, 10 wounded.

      3/2/06 Karachi – US consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. 4 killed.

      9/12/06 Damascus – US embassy in Damascus, Syria. 1 killed, 13 wounded.

      1/12/07 Athens – US embassy in Athens, Greece. Grenade – no injuries.

      7/9/08 Istanbul – US consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. 3 killed

      9/17/08 Sana'a – US embassy in Sana'a, Yemen. 6 killed, 16 wounded.

      April 24, 2013 at 4:19 pm | Report abuse |
1 2