From: uk09365@nx03.mik.uky.edu (robert i kesten)
Subject: Re: Gun-Free School Zones and Gun Cases
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 21:22:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
X-Bytes: 

In article <1992Apr16.135743.9216@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>  
rats@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (Morris the Cat) writes:
> 
> In <1992Apr14.200433.24330@ms.uky.edu> robert i kesten states:
> 
> |> [material deleted]
> |> And of course, there are gun owners who think only their favorite
> |> firearm is worth keeping; everyone else's be damned. A NY Times poll
> |> published in the March 12, 1992 edition, A16 has this:
> |> [edited for brevity]
> |> 	Would you favor or oppose a ban on assault weapons - that is,
> |> 	semi automatic military-style rifles that can hold up to
> |> 	30 bullets?
> |> 	
> |> 		General population:		
> |> 		79% YES 		
> |> 		12% NO		
> |> 		 2% DON'T KNOW
> |> 				
> |> 		Gun Owners:		
> |> 		76% YES
> |> 		24% NO 		
> |> 		 1% DON'T KNOW
> |> 		
> 
> |Is this the VERBATIM wording of the question and results?  
> 
> Yes, it is verbatim. The results are part of bar graph chart.
> 
> The bottom of the chart states:
> 
> 	Based on a syrvey of 1,281 adults nationwide conducted by
> 	telephone Jan. 22-25.
Then my criticism of the survey / response wording is valid.
The text of the question uses the terms "opposed" / "favor"
while the possible responses are "yes" / "no" / "don't know"
Although many would assume at first glance that YES means
FAVOR, that is not necessarily how respondents interpreted
their possible choices.  Until I find out more information to
indicate that interviewers explained what respondents were
choosing; I will hold that this survey is methodologically flawed.
[my comments about single issue surveys and relevance to actual
voting patterns deleted]

> My only point is that since most gun ownership is for non-protection
> reasons, weapons that are oriented toward militia use are considered
> by even gun owners to be non-essential, and hence, a bone to be thrown
> to the gun control wolves.

I can't disagree with you here.  The fragmentation of 
pro-gun interests is definitely a problem.

>[example of writer driving a wedge between NRA support for assault
> rifles and 'normal peoples' sporting guns deleted]

> It never dawns upon these very same people that for years, the gun
> controllers claimed to be only after "Saturday Night Specials,"
> cheap handguns, handguns, small handguns, non-sporting handguns and
> now, they have implemented bans on shotguns and rifles. These
> people are so blind, so willing to "go along to get along" they've
> lost their ability to think.

They've also gone after rifles with scopes before. (deadly unsporting  
killer military sniper weapons)
> 
> Perhaps that would make a great NRA advertisement; put photos of
> various editorials proclaiming "handguns only" bans from newspapers,
> and then editorials whining about the awful military-semi-auto
> after the Stockton, CA incident. The caption would be: 
> 
> 		Trust Us. Handguns. That's what we always
> 		wanted. We would never lie to you.

Sounds good.  I'd like a compendium of gun grabber lies, "only your  
handguns", "registration doesn't mean confiscation" etc., to show the  
people around here who keep spouting these lines.

RIK
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns