NH voters by 3:1 back assault weapons ban

[Tender Branson]

A New England College poll of 656 registered voters from the NEC Center for Civic Engagement show that a strong majority of voters support an assault weapons ban in New Hampshire (72% to 24%).

The poll conducted between January 21 and 22, 2013 by telephone showed some difference in opinion among men and women but men still overwhelmingly approved the idea (64% to 34%) as did women (80% to 16%). The margin of error in this poll is 3.82%

In a related question voters were asked about a national proposal for universal background checks for gun purchases voters overwhelmingly approved the idea (88% to 10%).

http://www.nec.edu/pdf-files-1/NEC%20Poll%20-%202013%20-%20Gun%20Control-pdf.pdf

Dominating ...

[fezzyfestoon]

Looks like the good people of New Hampshire choose to live free over their alternative

[justfollowingtheelections]

I was going to say the same thing.  Live free or die?  Well they obviously choose to live free.. of guns and good for them.  What will that bitch Ayotte do now?

[pbrower2a]

Maybe assault weapons no longer seem a realistic part of "Live Free" but they are very much a part of "Die".

[dead0man]

Do you know how many people were murdered in NH by all rifles in 2011?

2

TWO!

cite

That's right, more people in this thread have made "live free and die" jokes than were actually killed by "assault weapons" in the entire state last year.

[badgate]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large. The 2nd Amendment demands that we regulate the weapon market, so think about this: what is the singular, only purpose of an assault weapon? It's right there in the title. Assault. Attack. Kill. This is a weapon for the theatre of war, and making it available to civilians encourages a dangerous fetish. Personally, I think assault weapons bans should be done on the state level; it's too volatile an issue for the federal government.

[dead0man]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large.

Indeed, it's all about fear and ignorance.

[Franzl]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large.

Indeed, it's all about fear and ignorance.

Do you think legalizing bombs (that could, naturally, only be purchased in a proper shop after a background check) would lead to more people being killed by bombs?

[AkSaber]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large.

Indeed, it's all about fear and ignorance.

As is any prohibition, or war.

[dead0man]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large.

Indeed, it's all about fear and ignorance.

Do you think legalizing bombs (that could, naturally, only be purchased in a proper shop after a background check) would lead to more people being killed by bombs?

Probably, but I'm not sure what your strawman is trying to prove.  A more on the nose quseion would be, do you think if NH bans "assualt weapons" that there will be fewer deaths in NH?

[Franzl]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large.

Indeed, it's all about fear and ignorance.

Do you think legalizing bombs (that could, naturally, only be purchased in a proper shop after a background check) would lead to more people being killed by bombs?

Probably, but I'm not sure what your strawman is trying to prove.  A more on the nose quseion would be, do you think if NH bans "assualt weapons" that there will be fewer deaths in NH?

Humor me if you don't mind. Why do you think such a legalization would lead to more deaths?

[dead0man]

I figure if you can walk into an armory and buy a fully assembled bomb eventually a few somebodies with more money than brains would actually buy several, eventually one of them will be set off for fun or whatever and somebody will be hurt.  I seriously doubt there would be a big market for pre-made bombs though, they are kind of easy to make for, presumably, much cheaper than one would cost new.  Is there a big problem with murder via explosion in the US now?

So yeah, if you could go buy bombs legally in the US, a few people every decade might die from them.  I certainly wouldn't expect a sudden huge jump in murder via explosion in the US...would you?


are you going to dare and humor me?

[Franzl]

My point is that the mere availability of a product that can be used to kill others probably makes it more likely that they will be used.

Other factors are of demographic and economic nature. New Hampshire doesn't have a serious crime problem, but less fortunate areas in the USA do, and I have little reason to doubt that the easy availability of guns makes them more likely to be used.

[dead0man]

And my point is that just two people were murdered by rifles in HN in 2011.  In general, rifles are very rarely used to commit murder.  Banning a specific subset of rifles because they look scary and people that aren't involved in the hobby can't think of a good use for them isn't going to lower murder rates.

[Franzl]

And my point is that just two people were murdered by rifles in HN in 2011.  In general, rifles are very rarely used to commit murder.  Banning a specific subset of rifles because they look scary and people that aren't involved in the hobby can't think of a good use for them isn't going to lower murder rates.

But not everyone lives in New Hampshire.

The mere presence of assault weapons doesn't necessarily cause people to go on killing sprees, but it provides those that want to a very convenient way to do it.

Anything can be a hobby to someone, I imagine some people also might enjoy seeing bombs explode with no intention to harm others. Doesn't mean that we can't violate their "right" to do it.

[dead0man]

and again, very few people are actually murdered with rifles and fewer still with the oh so scary "assault weapons" (and nobody with a legally purchased assault rifle).  Banning "assault weapons" doesn't change murder rates.  Period.  It's just away to make the ignorant and scared think something is being done.

Look, some of the gun control proposals might actually lower crime without taking away that many of our rights.  Banning "assault weapons" isn't one of them.  No matter how scary and unneeded they appear to you.

[badgate]

^For me, the assault weapons ban isn't about how many people are killed by just assault weapons. It's about a weapon like this being available to the public at large.

Indeed, it's all about fear and ignorance.

I'm sorry that's what you have to tell yourself. I hope you one day get the help you need.

[dead0man]

Are you saying there isn't fear and ignorance coming out the ears of the gun control crowd?  Do you know how many times I have read that we must ban "assault rifles" in the past month?  That isn't ignorance?  You admit that it's not about how many people are killed, it's about a specific style of weapon (one rarely used to commit crimes) and you don't think that's fear?


Oh, and I don't expect people full of fear and ignorance to acknowledge that they are full of fear and ignorance, but it's rather obvious to those watching through the window.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I thought New Hampshire was an uber-libertarian state.  Apparently, when it comes to live free or die, they choose to die on this one.  Very sad.   Today I weep for New Hampshire.

[Holmes]

I thought New Hampshire was an uber-libertarian state.

It's not. By default it's center-left, but swingy as hell.

[Niemeyerite]

I thought New Hampshire was an uber-libertarian state.  Apparently, when it comes to live free or die, they choose to die on this one.  Very sad.   Today I weep for New Hampshire.

They choose to die? People here in Europe die every day because we don't have guns. I'm writing dead right now.

[fezzyfestoon]

I know the prevailing American opinion is to fall in line and allow any and everything to go unchecked until a tragedy actually occurs (and then usually ignore it still), but assigning ignorance to the banning of murder weapons strikes me as far more objectionable. But again the gun debate in particular is more about bullying via aggressive personal attack than almost any issue in the current American political landscape...except voting. Anyone who doesn't own/fervently support the right to own any and all the deadly weapons they want is anti-American, those who choose not to vote are anti-freedom. It's important never to actually man up and talk honestly about things in this country though, our collective values have already been decided for us and they're mandatory. Maybe if gun nuts spent half as much time on educating their own on how to responsibly own a safe, reasonable, appropriate civilian weapon as they do on barating non-fanatics as weak anti-Americans, we wouldn't be at the precipice of a national crisis...as usual. But by all means, a hobby is more important than other peoples' lives.

/rant

[Paul Kemp]

New Hampshire being a  "Live Free or Die" state has been a myth for some time now. It's not a libertarian state.

Are you saying there isn't fear and ignorance coming out the ears of the gun control crowd?  Do you know how many times I have read that we must ban "assault rifles" in the past month?  That isn't ignorance?  You admit that it's not about how many people are killed, it's about a specific style of weapon (one rarely used to commit crimes) and you don't think that's fear?


Oh, and I don't expect people full of fear and ignorance to acknowledge that they are full of fear and ignorance, but it's rather obvious to those watching through the window.

Fair enough but one should mention that "fear and ignorance" aren't exclusive to one side in the debate. The gun lobby/NRA/etc. uses "fear and ignorance" just as much, if not more.

[fezzyfestoon]

Fair enough but one should mention that "fear and ignorance" aren't exclusive to one side in the debate. The gun lobby/NRA/etc. uses "fear and ignorance" just as much, if not more.

Absolutely. Any hint of a move against heavy weaponry and the opposition wants to dismantle American society as we know it. The gun folks are experts at exploiting fear and whipping people into a false frenzy.

[Likely Voter]

The argument against assault weapons has never been reduction in overall murder rates, but to prevent their use in mass shootings  and also to prevent their use against police.  Banning them wont stop mass shootings but could reduce the number that get killed, especially the banning of extended clips, giving potential victims a chance to take down shooters while they reload.

You want to significantly lower overall gun death rates you have to ban or severely limit the licensing of handguns, but even in NY they aren't doing that. Not even semi-auto handguns. THe most they have done is limit clips to 7 rounds.