Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Prof. Nick Johnson's new book | Main | 1933 Arizona Legislature ... the good old days »

Survey data on handgun bans

Posted by David Hardy · 27 January 2014 08:25 PM

An interesting graphic. Starting with the first poll on the subject, in 1959, the support for a handgun ban was in the lead, 60%-38%. From that point on, support fell, with the two levels reaching equality in 1967. Then really began to decline, to where today opposition to a ban leads 74%-25%.

5 Comments | Leave a comment

old Guy | January 28, 2014 8:31 AM | Reply

Okay not saying the numbers are valid but you need to look at methodology. How was the survey conducted, by mail? by phone. How and where were the survey participants found.
Think on this in 1959 many people still did not have phones in their homes. I grew up in NYC, basically middle class, we moved in 1958 to an apartment that had a phone in it. The apartment that we lived in before that did not have a phone, in fact only one person on my floor had a phone. They were still rare and even rarer in the more rural areas. The respondents may have been mostly from the cities and the more wealthy.
It would be interesting to see the history of there selection process to see ( if they did) how they went about trying to find a representative sample and how they defined representative.

old Guy | January 28, 2014 8:32 AM | Reply

sorry Typo, that should be: not to say the numbers are NOT valid

Jeff | January 28, 2014 9:25 AM | Reply

I would be curious to hear people's opinions about whether the anti gun people still have enough viability to affect this trend(?)

Carl from Chicago | January 28, 2014 4:01 PM | Reply

My first thought is not whether the survey results are trustworthy or indicative of general trends. Typically, these longstanding polling data by relatively scrupulous pollsters (eg. Gallup) are somewhat meaningful.

No ... my first thought is that the prevalence and widespread popularity of liberalized "concealed carry" laws since the early 1990s has done nothing to harm the general acceptance of guns in mainstream society.

Old Guy | January 29, 2014 8:06 AM | Reply

Carl from Chicago, yes in general the national pollsters are scrupulous but methodology has changed. The ability to reach people is much more extensive than it was years ago especially in more rural areas.
A different problem for today, Many people no longer have land lines, they rely on cell phones, this is especially of the "younger generation" even up to the thirties and somewhat beyond.
It would be interesting to know more about how they conducted the polls over the years.

Leave a comment