Tag Archives: poll

Rorschach Research Associates

The news today is full of the latest poll alleging massive support for an “assault weapon” ban, universal preemptively-prove-your-innocence checks, and more human/civil rights violations. The numbers claimed were so outrageous I was sure it would prove to be another Quinnipiac poll.

But not this this time; it was conducted by Langer Research Associates, an outfit of whom I’ve never heard before.

I had some time to kill, so I took a look at the poll data. This was a “nationwide” telephone survey of 1,003 people, supposedly randomly dialed. There is no further information on methodology. But given the questions they asked, no methodology was going to save them.

16. Would you support or oppose a nationwide ban on the sale of assault weapons?

They failed to define “assault weapon,” a term with different meanings in a few jurisdictions and none in most. Therefore the question has zero meaning, or a wildly variable meaning in the mind of each individual respondent.

Did they mean an “assault weapon” as defined by the 1994 federal law? A Massachusetts assault weapon whose definition was based on the ’94 federal law until it was bureaucratically expanded? The NY definition which encompasses both more and less? The CA definition which covers even more, while missing things covered by the others? Respondents were left to their own imagination.

17. Would you support or oppose [ITEM]?

a. requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers, including private sales and gun shows

All retail sales require background checks already. It’s already unlawful to knowingly transfer a firearm to a prohibited person. The question should mention costs, too. It should note that nearly all firearms used in crimes are obtained unlawfully, bypassing any required checks.

b. a nationwide ban on high capacity ammunition clips, meaning those containing more than 10 bullets

“Clips” are devices used to load magazines, and hold cartridges, not just bullets. The most common clips already hold 10 or fewer cartridges.

c. a law allowing the police to take guns away from people who have been found by a judge to be a danger to themselves or others

Such laws already exist. Their summary refers to “red flag” laws, so for the question to have meaning, they must specify that the order would be ex parte and the subject would not have the chance to speak in his defense and that the accuser need provide no evidence (if there were evidence, a regular arrest warrant could be issued).

d. a mandatory buy back program in which the federal government would require assault weapon owners to turn in those weapons in exchange for payment

Again, “assault weapon” must be defined, and the payment specified. For instance, New Zealand’s new ban specifies a maximum payment below market value, which may be part of why compliance is running below 10% (and dropping with each “buyback” event).

18. Who do you trust more to handle gun laws in this country – (Trump) or (the Democrats in Congress)?

That question is so biased that, if I had been polled, I would have hung up on the idiots. It presupposes that more gun laws are desirable. It frames the debate as an individual vs. a Dem majority. (Incidentally, Trump has implemented more new firearm restrictions in this year, than the Democrats have managed in the past twelve years.)

19. How confident are you that [ITEM] would reduce mass shootings in this country – very confident, somewhat confident, not so confident or not confident at all?

You failed to define “mass shooting.” The GVA definition, which includes people not shot? The CRS/FBI definition which excludes gangbangers shooting it out over turf and revenge? Meaningless question.

21. Do you or does anyone in your house own a gun, or not?

I’ve always found that question amusing. Imagine answering your own phone one day and hearing, “Hi! I’m a stranger randomly dialing numbers, so I don’t really know where you live. Will you tell me if you have valuable merchandise that’s easily stolen?”

It gets even better when you toss that question in with the suggestion of confiscation.

All in all, the clowns didn’t find “support” for anything specific. They conducted a verbal Rorschach test of “support” for whatever was in the mind of each individual. They might as well have asked, “Do you support or oppose color?” And left it to each person to guess if they meant color vs. B&W imagery, people of color, or red vs. blue.

I’d like to see more detail on the methodology. Did they ask the questions of whomever answered the phone, or ask for youngest likely voter? Someone else? What regions did they poll, and how did they weight responses? It doesn’t much matter, given the questions, but I’d like to further ridicule them.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited, and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with ISP and web host bills. And the rabbits need feed. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)
Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

BSTD Bump-Fire Ban Compliance Rate [POLL]

The deadline for compliance with the irrational “bump-stock-type device (BSTD)” — bump-fire — ban has passed. So how effective has the imperial fiat been at making the nation safe from inert “machineguns”?

Who the hell knows? No one even knows how many there were; the ATF’s “estimate” (“SA Smedley! Quick; bend over so I can pull a number out.”) was 280,000 to 520,000 BSTDs sold. I’d like to see them give a 95% confidence level for WAG.

But I was interested, so I’ve been collecting turn-in reports. Such as they are. The majority of reports of turn-ins and destruction were merely unsubstantiated, vague claims that “people” are “complying,” without so much as a single example. I don’t count those.

The biggie, of course, was RW Arms who turned in for destruction 60,000 items they still had in stock. I’m not counting those because they hadn’t been sold; they weren’t part of the 280-520K giggle-guess.

After that come the great state of Washington, with a reported 1,000 turned in during their “buy-back”.” The problem with that number is hiding in the details. People were supposed to be paid $150 for each bump-fire stock. But the most detailed report stated that they only paid for 122 of 150 stocks surrendered. I suspect they were paying for commercial products, and some maliciously compliant smartasses (bless ’em) slapped together some bump-fire stocks from hunks of wood or PVC pipe.

So my wild ass guess is that only 81% of the WA turn-ins would count against the ATF “sold” estimate: 810.

Florida, which also banned bump-fire ahead of the federal rule, saw a whopping “handful,”, which I’ll call 5 (for the digits of a hand). Moving right along…

Illinois saw “a few” but a more detailed report clarified that “few” meant “1”.

Massachusetts, again with an earlier state ban: “only a few”. Since “few” doesn’t appear to be defined in statutory law, let’s say that between “handful” and “dozen.” Call it 8.

In North Carolina, the ATF claims “some” were turned over, but declined to give numbers. How many is “some”? I’m feeling generous. It was “steadily […] over the last few weeks.” Steadily = 1 per week. Few = 8. So call it 8 more BSTDs.

Vermont has some hard numbers. They got… 2.

The only other reported numbers were Rhode Island, New Jersey, and the City of Denver: Zero, 0, zip, nada, each. Zero is a number.

So, nationwide, I can only document 834 bump-fire stocks turned in. For some values of “document.”

But one can comply with the Royal Whim by destroying your valuable property. That’s going to be a little tougher to nail down.

I had no news reports specifically describing any destructions, just the aforemention vague “people are doing but we don’t know.” So next I turned to YouTube.

Frankly, a couple of searches there surprised me. I honestly thought I’d find more. As with news reports, it was mostly, “I’m going to,” or “I did, but I’m not showing it.”

The only videos I located which showed the destruction or the finished “product” numbered just…

11.

Of those eleven, we have 1 which went out in a blaze of glory in a Viking funeral (the dildos were a nice touch), 1 destroyed in the shop, 1 more chopped, 3 barbecued to death, 3 lost in a horrible dumpster fire, 1 homemade pistol bump-fire device rendered inert, and 1 lost in a tragic boating accident just before it was turned in.

Scratch the homemade unit (only counting those the ATF estimates “sold,” you know), and we have 10. We’re now up to 845 mass murder tactical death machines safely off the street.

845. Across the nation.

I searched a few firearms forums as well. Not a single turn-in or destruction mentioned. It was mostly, “They’re stupid; I never had one,” “I had one, but it wasn’t as good as I thought, and I got rid of it years ago,” or “They look like fun, but I never bought one.” I rather expected a “few” from my cold, dead hands declarations, but didn’t spot any.

845.

Taking the ATF’s low estimate of 280,000 BSTDs sold, they have achieved a miraculous 0.30% compliance rate.

Using the highball guess: 0.16%.

Trump must be so proud.

Zelman Partisan regulars are fine, upstanding people who obviously do their best to comply with constitutional laws. No doubt any of us who happened to own one of these evil machineguns has done the right thing. So quick poll of those who had them.

[Permission to republish this article is granted so long as it is not edited and the author and The Zelman Partisans are credited.]

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs (too late; I’m selling the truck) and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

POLL: What to do with Bump Stocks

The deadline approaches: On Tuesday, March 26, 2019, those still holding bump stocks (with a bare few exceptions) will magically become felons as inert chunks of plastic mystically morph into post-’86 machineguns.

Hypothetically speaking (because none of TZP’s regular readers could possibly mean to become malum prohibitum criminals), what will/are you doing with your “bump-stock-type device?

 

Perhaps we’ll be seeing reports of “compliance”, especially the rubber band sort.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Would military personnel deploy nuclear weapons?

By now, I hope you are aware of threats by California Democrat Rep. Swalwell to use nuclear weapons to enforce gun control laws (newsletter subscribers will get an early look at a detail column on the subject; others will wait until Tuesday).

He’s trying to walk back the threat as sarcasm (it wasn’t) or hyperbole to demonstrate that the government has gun owners out-gunned.

Nonetheless, he is working on the assumption that military personnel will be willing to — illegally — exercise overwhelming military force, including Weapons of Mass Destruction, against American civilians to enforce gun control laws.

A couple of decades ago, military personnel were surveyed on a similar issue; the infamous Twenty-Nine Palms Combat Arms Survey. The results were very disturbing.

Swalwell has now upped the ante by suggesting that military personnel would go so far as to conduct nuclear weapon strikes against Americans for the sake of gun control.

I would like to limit this poll to current military personnel and veterans. I suggest reviewing the Posse Comitatus Act before taking the poll.

Please share this poll, to reach as many people as possible. If limited to regular TZP readers, I expect I’ll see a strong bias in responses.

The Question: “The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms (“assault weapons”). A thirty (30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to be turned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, a number of citizen groups refuse to turn over their firearms. Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.”

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Do you care about bump-fire?

Recently, I’ve put a fair amount of my time into tracking bump-fire bans, new rulemaking and legislation alike. I’ve noticed thatrelatively few people seem to be speaking about the subject, and the majority of those who bring it up at all indicate that bump-fire stocks (and trigger cranks, etc.) aren’t worth bothering with.

Obviously, I disagree with that assessment.

Web site traffic analysis also indicates that bump-fire is a low-interst topic.

What do you think? Am I wasting my time and yours? This a two-parter; two separate, but related, polls.

 

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: National Concealed Carry Reciprocity

Last week James Yeager made an argument against national concealed carry reciprocity based on “states’ rights.” That is, that federal legislation requiring states to give full faith and credit to licenses of other states violates states’ rights to self-determination.

Do you agree with Yeager that national concealed carry reciprocity (H.R. 38) should be stopped?


Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Rate Trump’s first 100 days of RKBA

When Donald Trump first started campaigning for President, many people were dubious of his new-found commitment to the right to keep and bear arms given his history on the subject: gun bans, preemptively prove your innocence, waiting periods, and more.

But once he hit the campaign trail he started talking a good game. The question was, could he walk as well as talk?

One hundred days in, he’s still talking, but he has also done some good things like ending the Social Security abuse. On the other hand, Obamacare 2.0 attempts still have RKBA problems, federal gun-free zone requirements are still there, and his Second Amendment advisory group is vaporware.

Since everyone else is rating Trump’s first 100 days in office, how would you rate him on RKBA?


Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Do you care?

election-2016Well, it’s almost that time. We are less than a month away from Election 2016, and I’m wondering how our readers and members feel about this year’s election.

This is the most contentious election I’ve ever seen. Friendships have been threatened or downright destroyed. Bitter disagreements over politics have taken over civil conversations. It’s good to see people get passionate about the future of this country, but when the passion transforms into something toxic, ending camaraderie and civil discourse and understanding, one has to wonder why.

So today’s poll question is: do you care about this election, and if so, how much and why?

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Shanah Tovah

roshhashanahimagecroppedIt’s hard to believe it, but we’ve reached the second day of fall. It’s also that time again – the Jewish New Year, or Rosh Hashanah. It begins tonight, and it ends Tuesday evening.

It’s a time for reflection for Jews that culminates with the Jewish Day of Atonement, or Yom Kippur, during which observers reflect upon and repent for any sins of the previous year and consider the year ahead.

So as we consider the year ahead, what would you – our members, readers, and friends – like to see the Zelman Partisans do, achieve, or change?

Obviously, the list could be huge and exhaustive, so I’ve chosen a few possible answers. However, you also have an “other” option in which you can provide your own answer and maybe even give us some great ideas we haven’t thought of yet!

Feel free to explain your answer in the comments section. Let us know what you’d like to see and how you’d like to see our organization grow.

L’Shanah Tovah, y’all!

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Reloading. Which components are most important to get your hands on?

beginners-guide-to-reloading-ammo-equipmentI remember when Barack Obama was first elected. Ammo was flying off the shelves. I had gotten my hands on a few boxes, but most stores in my area were limiting customers to a couple, and prices were nuts.

In March 2009, USA Today reported that concerns about the Obama administration imposing a new ban on some semiautomatic weapons drove gun owners to stockpile ammunition and cartridge reloading components at such a rate, that manufacturers were having problems meeting demand.

In Wyoming, the run on bullets and reloading components reached such a frenzy that Cheyenne retailer Frontier Arms recently began rationing sales, said Becky Holtz, co-owner of the shop. Holtz said she’s also been selling semiautomatic rifles as fast as she can put them on the shelves.

“You know there’s something wrong when I’ve got little old ladies coming in buying 5,000 rounds of .22 shells,” Holtz said.

I remember the guy I was dating at the time was a reloader. We would go to the range, and then we’d police all the brass others had left behind. The brass seemed to be what he lacked most. (Although that may have been because he had an actual armory in his house filled with dozens of various rifles.)

It does seem like people are preparing yet again as Election 2016 approaches.  Much like any other critical supplies ( think milk and bread lines at the grocery store before every severe storm warning or plywood and nails in coastal areas when hurricane warnings occur), reloading supplies are a must when we are expecting a societal storm.

So, for you reloaders out there – what components are most critical to you? Reply below. Explain in comments. Think.

Facebooktwitterredditpinteresttumblrmail