Stricter Gun Control Laws Won't Prevent Criminals From Getting Guns, Say 63% of Americans
When it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, 63 percent of Americans remain unconvinced that tighter restrictions on buying and owning guns will be effective, according to the latest Reason-Rupe poll. About a third (32 percent), said stricter regulations would be effective in preventing criminals from obtaining guns.
Seven in ten Republicans say stricter gun regulations would not be effective while just 26 percent say they would be effective. Democrats are more divided on the issue. While typically supportive of increased gun control, more than half (53 percent) say tighter restrictions on buying and owning guns would not prevent criminals from obtaining the weapons while 44 percent say they would prevent criminals from getting guns. Two-thirds of independents don't expect tighter restrictions to be effective while 30 percent think they will.
As education increases, so do expectations that tighter gun regulations will effectively keep guns from criminals. For instance, 29% of those with high school degrees or less believe such policies would be effect compared to 41 percent of those with post-graduate degrees. Nevertheless, majorities of all educational groups don't expect tougher gun laws to prevent criminals from obtaining guns.
Women are slightly more likely than men to believe tighter gun regulations would be effective (35 to 29 percent). However, considering race and gender finds that white women are no different than white and nonwhite men. However, half of nonwhite women think tighter gun rules would be effective compared to 44 would think they would not.
Nationwide telephone poll conducted Dec 4-8 2013 interviewed 1011 adults on both mobile (506) and landline (505) phones, with a margin of error +/- 3.7%. Princeton Survey Research Associates International executed the nationwide Reason-Rupe survey. Columns may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Full poll results, detailed tables, and methodology found here. Sign up for notifications of new releases of the Reason-Rupe poll here.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Nice that almost two thirds of Americans know obvious facts, and all. Are we going to put the law of gravitation up for a vote now?
It’s too bad state and federal representatives aren’t familiar with obvious facts.
If you put the various laws of physics up for votes in state legislatures and Congress I am sure some of them wouldn’t pass.
“After noticing that the laws of physics have been hampering proper exploitation of space, we have introduced legislation to reform them and encourage extrasolar development.”
The poll-tsunami continues…
Only 44% of Democrats think that tighter gun control would be effective, yet the percentage of Democrats in favor of gun control is significantly higher than 44%. This means that a lot of (and probably most) Democrats either:
1) Favor gun control for some other reason (culture war, I’m guessing)
2) Have no idea why they favor gun control
Whatever the justification, they will not base it upon fact or logic.
It’s more government control, and more government control is always good (except on abortion).
Partly it’s Yes, Minister-style “politician’s logic”: “We must do something, this is something, therefore, we must do this.” And partly it may be that even though they consider it ineffective, they think it’s a good step towards a total ban.
Pretty scary that as education level increases, so does the belief that gun control will work.
Sounds like the liberal indoctrination through education may actually be working.
Fortunately, I am an exception to that finding, as I have an MBA and am not convinced in the slightest that gun control would be effective.
No, obviously as their education increased so did their sheer brilliance. How could you see it any other way. That is the clear logic. The rest of us are all morons.
The higher the educational “attainment”, the longer they’ve been in the academic bubble and insulated from the real world. It causes actual common sense to atrophy.
Yet another poorly worded poll question.
Certainly, if the laws were draconian enough, restrictions could be effective in preventing criminals from obtaining guns. Same vagueness with “do you approve of the way Obama is doing his job?”: lots of his fans could answer “no” also.
More education doesn’t always mean more rationality. We have pomo/decon gibberish and navel-gazing identity studies to prove that.
New York has really stiff gun laws.
And combined with stop-and-frisk (effectively fortifying a police state), criminals don’t walk around with guns.
With stiff sentences of guns and drugs being found together, drug dealers are afraid of being caught with both. A Kilo can land you 3years in Jain. A Kilo plus an unloaded gun can get you 15years. This has significanly affected the landscape in the drug trade with respect to guns.
… criminals don’t walk around with guns.
Because there is no gun crime in NYC!
DERP!
Yes. because saying that “this has significantly affected the landscape in the drug trade with respect to guys” means there is no gun crime in NYC!
DERP!
If you like your facts, you can keep them.
diversity of appearance, not thoughts or opinions.
The champions of diversity seem more obsessed with race then some racists I have known.
Let the states decide how to handle this.
If a state wants to establish a police state and aggresively go after guns, let them do so. Let the voters and that state’s constitution decide that. If a state wants to have loose gun laws, let the voters and the and that state’s people decide that.
My opinion, Laws are useless. You either enforce it with aggresive police or don’t enforce it at all. This gun registration is silly when I can take a Pipe, some fire crackers, and some crushed rocks and make a gun.
Not to mention that anyone can get a gun from the black market.
I never ever really agree with John Stossel, but I agree on this, get rid of ALL Gun laws, they are silly and are only hurtles for hunters and gun sportsman. The people you are afraid of will have guns in absense of a police state.
Me, personally, I’d rather live with the Guns than the police state.
Re: Alice Bowie,
In New Jersey they have the police state and not even BB guns
Why should states be allowed to decide this? For that matter, why should other voters be allowed to decide my rights? The Constitution doesn’t stop applying just because you move across a state border.
As I say *every* time this comes up, why are you polling people on questions of fact? Either the statement is true and gun laws won’t prevent criminals from getting guns, or it is false and they will; peoples’ opinions of this have nothing to do with it. This kind of poll is a complete waste of time.
Ok, I take it back: the breakdown of the poll *is* interesting. This is evidently one of those situations in which more education actually makes people dumber. Heh.
I had a similar response. Why is this a matter of opinion…oh hey look at those details.