As Nick has pointed out on several occasions, Americans who value their Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms are extremely motivated to defend that right. Unlike people who favor ammunition magazine capacity limits and universal background checks without any more thought than Jessica Jane Clements [not shown] gives to the ethics of airbrushing, The People of the Gun back up their beliefs with activism. So when Hearst Connecticut Media’s four papers posted a poll on gun control, Gun Guys were all over it, from Connecticut and beyond! The results [published on ctpost.com] were nothing if not predictable . . .
More than 11,000 respondents took the poll on one of the websites of Hearst Connecticut’s four daily papers — ctpost.com, newstimes.com, stamfordadvocate.com and greenwichtime.com. Most respondents were overwhelmingly opposed to any and all efforts to tighten gun restrictions.
On the question of expanding the 1993 list of banned automatic weapons, 79 percent opposed, 20 percent approved and 1 percent were undecided. Similarly, 79 percent opposed to banning magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, while 20 percent approved and 1 percent were undecided. On the question of universal background checks, 53 percent were opposed, 41 percent approved and 6 percent were undecided.
Did this feedback from Gun Guys and Gals (and a bunch of just plain folks) please the papers’ editors and the Hearst heavies? It did not. Clearly.
Those results, however, were far different from the Quinnipiac University poll results released earlier this month. Quinnipiac found that Connecticut residents backed a majority of the post-Newtown gun control measures under consideration by a 2-to-1 margin, or more . . .
So what happened?
It turns out that only about a third of the 21,000-plus pageviews on Hearst’s gun polls came from the readership area in southwestern Connecticut.
And many of those nearly 14,000 non-local voters were, computer data showed, directed to Hearst’s newspapers by various gun advocate websites in and outside of Connecticut that urged firearms proponents to make a strong showing.
It was them damn furriners! Out-of-state gun-clinging bible thumpers! Just in case you think I’m reverse projecting here . . .
Some disappointed Hearst readers who posted comments on the poll seemed to catch on that something was amiss.
“Fairfieldjohn” wrote, “This poll has no basis in a factual representation of the people of Connecticut. The only people who click on it are the people who are really jacked up about … the boogey man coming to take their precious guns.”
Lose the bit about factual representation (absent factual representation), cut the sarcasm and substitute “perfidious politicians” for “boogey man.” Otherwise, spot on.
[Click here to take ctpost.com’s version of the survey and/or view the results.]