85% in Maryland Back Stronger Gun Controll

[BigBlue]

Looks like martin is doing the job the voters and people in Maryland want him to do.

Washington Post poll finds support for stricter gun control laws in Maryland - The Washington Post

Maryland residents overwhelmingly support Gov. Martin O’Malley’s plan to force gun buyers to submit to fingerprinting, safety training and more background checks, according to a new Washington Post poll.

Across the state, fully 85 percent back the governor’s licensing plan and 73 percent do so “strongly.” They also support banning high-capacity ammunition clips and assault weapons — two other portions of O’Malley’s (D) bill, which in the wake of the December school shooting in Newtown, Conn., would give Maryland among the nation’s strictest gun-control laws.

 

[Vince]

And when Gun Control is instituted we will all be safe and sound especially all the little children.

 

[thurley42]

Yeah...not sure where they got those BS figures. It's ok though, alot of us are leaving because of increased taxes and the stripping away of our rights....

 

[Vince]

It was proven in another thread that the poll in the Wash Post is bogus. They only polled like 1500 people in a certain area, but blueboy likes his propaganda. Got to hand it to the liberals, they know how to use the media and the lies to further their agenda.

 

[Pushrod]

It was proven in another thread that the poll in the Wash Post is bogus. They only polled like 1500 people in a certain area, but blueboy likes his propaganda. Got to hand it to the liberals, they know how to use the media and the lies to further their agenda.

1500 is an appropriate sample size for the population of Maryland. The problem was they called homes during the day in only Montgomery and PG county where there is a higher population of non-gun owners and people who are on government assistance.

 

[abcxyz]

Assault Weapon Watch

 

[NextJen]

Assault Weapon Watch

 

[Toxick]

Looks like martin is doing the job the voters and people in Maryland want him to do.

I'll bet that back in the day 85% of the people of Maryland were in favor of slavery too. Didn't mean they were right.


Oppression is oppression even if most people are in favor of it.

 

[vraiblonde]

You all really don't think a state that elected Martin O'Malley, an almost 100% Democrat legislature, voted overwhelmingly for redistricting to facilitate one-party rule, and gave in-state college tuition rates to illegal immigrants - you don't think they would be all about gun control?

I absolutely believe that a large percentage of Marylanders are in favor of gun bans. But, like Tox said, it doesn't meant they're right.

 

[RPMDAD]

Feel like this is just another step of MOM's war against Md. rural counties.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

BigBlue, were you polled?

I sure wasn't.

anyone else get this poll?

 

[nutz]

BigBlue, were you polled?

I sure wasn't.

anyone else get this poll?

nope, I never seem to get any of those type polls. Really make you wonder how they do the polling? Maybe in front of the Obama free phone places? welfare administration office?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

nope, I never seem to get any of those type polls. Really make you wonder how they do the polling? Maybe in front of the Obama free phone places? welfare administration office?

That's my point.

If I went to a McDonalds and did a poll asking if you like McDonalds, chances are it's going to be a high number.

You know, for a group of people that seem to claim numbers and stats can be manipulated, they sure love those number and stats when it suits them.

 

[exnodak]

The statistic is incompletely reported.

It is 85% of 10%

 

[Tilted]

Good for them. Rather misguided are they me thinks, but good for them. Knee jerky in a counterproductive way are they me thinks, but good for them. Seeking only the sensation of having done something, without regard to whether the something makes sense or will help the situation that has them fired up to do something to begin with, are they me thinks, but good for them. Not honest with thine own thinking selves are they me thinks, but good for them. Intellectually lazy in the face of a perceived problem are they me thinks, but good for them. Emotionally indulgent, in a bad way and to the point of being near cognitive paralyzation, are they me thinks, but good for them. Selfish are they me thinks, but good for them.

So... if that's what they think and want, fair enough. I suppose there's just that one last obstacle to deal with and then they can be on their way and enacting stronger gun control laws to their hearts' content - until they get distracted by something else, until their printers run out of ink, until they've successfully hidden from awareness the impotence they feel over not being able to vanquish the evil that exists in the world. That obstacle of course is the Constitution, specifically the 14th and 2nd Amendments there to.

The good news is that the Founders had them in mind when they drafted the Constitution, particularly when they drafted Article V. Even better news is that, if they have 85% support in one state they might be able to scrape up 50+% support in each of 37 other states. If they can, they can amend the Constitution such that they'd be (rightfully) allowed to enact stronger gun control measures.

Once that pesky little chore is taken care of - i.e., making it constitutionally permissible to enact new gun laws - then we can move on to the conversation of whether its a good idea to enact those new gun laws. In the meantime, it's not terribly productive to discuss the propriety of policies that we aren't (supposed to be) allowed to enact anyway - you know, it's that whole cart before the horse thing.

Seriously though... advocates of greater gun control: When you're honest enough to admit that, rightfully, you'd need to change the Constitution in order to do that which you wish to do, then I'll consider it worthwhile to engage with you regarding the propriety of it. Until then, only one side of the conversation would be engaged in good faith. I've had my fill of such one-sided conversations, I choose to avoid them more often than not these days. I hope to make it my new policy with specific regard to this issue - more gun control laws - not to bother debating people if they won't first admit that what they want would require that the Constitution be amended. If they won't at least do that, I don't think good reason should be wasted on them.

 

[somdwatch]

Marylands last gun control measure (Concealed Carry) didn't work out too well for them, unconsitutional. Some of the requirements of this law infringe upon the Second Amendment. Any Bets that is will be deemed unconstitutional as well?

 

[bcp]

wonder what would have happened if they would have done the poll in Western Maryland where they are closer to the United States instead of pg, montgomery and baltimore where they are closer to some african country getting aid from the U.S

 

[exnodak]

Of course the measures being considered are unconstitutional. But, before they get their day in front of a court where that point can be affirmed or not, someone must pay a dear, dear price.

We must all resist lawmakers attempts to create unconstitutional laws which impose on our rights until such time as we can afford to enforce those rights.

It all starts with the fact that you get what you vote for.

 

[mAlice]

I have not been polled since I changed my party affiliation.

 

[SG_Player1974]

wonder what would have happened if they would have done the poll in Western Maryland where they are closer to the United States instead of pg, montgomery and baltimore where they are closer to some african country getting aid from the U.S

African country??.....

Perhaps a better way to put it would be:

"instead of PG, Montgomery, and Baltimore where they are closer to the United States , which is where most of these people are RECEIVING aid from on a monthly basis!