Poll Reveals Majority of Coloradans Reject Stricter Gun Laws
By Brenda Evans | 09/23/2012 | Issues, Safety, States | 30 Comments
Photo: Erik S. Lesser / EPA
Two months after the deadly theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado, new polling indicates that a slight majority of Coloradans reject stricter gun laws.
The Denver Post and SurveyUSA conducted a statewide telephone poll gauging how Colorado residents feel about tougher gun control laws. The results show that a majority of residents favor protecting the rights of gun owners over controlling gun ownership.
The poll asked, ”What do you think is more important — to protect the right of Americans to own guns? Or, to control gun ownership?” Out of the 615 polled, 56 percent said it was more important to protect the rights of gun owners opposed to the 39 percent who said controlling gun ownership was more important.
The results mirror those of a similar poll done by Public Policy Polling in August. The majority (58 percent) said no gun laws could have prevented the Aurora tragedy and only 35 percent believed they could have.
One respondent of the Post poll, Mark Baisley, 57-year-old chairman of the Douglas County Republican Party, stated he was against stricter gun laws:
“I actually thought about the Aurora incident in my answer. If there were more people in that theater who were armed, there would have been a greater chance of stopping that violence by people shooting back. Evil people are going to do evil things every now and then. You can’t just clamp down on everyone’s freedom in hopes that you’re going to stop an evil person from doing evil to others one of these days.”
The only two groups polled that favored stricter laws to reduce gun violence were Democrats (48 percent vs. 44 percent) and liberals (50 percent vs. 39 percent). They also thought controlling gun ownership was more important than protecting owners’ gun rights alongside Hispanics, non-gun owners, and those who support the legalization of abortion.
According to the Post, the survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
In the last five years, gun policy in the United States has become less restrictive overall. Concurrently, the American public seems to be moving away from supporting tighter gun control laws. In the wake of public shootings, more Americans see guns as protection. After the Columbine shooting, The Huffington Post reported that after an initial bump in support for stricter gun laws, support quickly fell a year later giving way to long-term decline.
Figures such as New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Senator Frank Lautenberg (NJ) have pushed the presidential candidates to discuss their gun policy, but such issues are unlikely to sway voters. A recent CBS/New York Times poll showed that respondents cited the economy as “the most important issue to you in deciding how you will vote for president.” Miscellaneous social issues such as gun control came in at only 2 percent.





Leave Your Comment →
30 Comments
Jermey Moore
09.23.2012
Gun laws won’t change a thing! It’s our society that’s the problem. I believe our society breeds these type of people news scaring people, violence everywhere you turn, and plenty of poor parenting to top it off. People will obtain weapons regardless of the laws.
Lois Merrill
09.23.2012
Unfortunately Jermey is right.
Trevor Britton
09.23.2012
i dont know how strict the regulations are in colorado, but im in favor of restricting all assault weapons and extended magazines.
Brenda Evans
09.23.2012
@brenda
Trevor, according to the Brady Campaign, as of now there are not limitations on assault weapons or magazines. But 58% of Coloradans in the public policy poll showed that they support a federal ban on assault weapons.
Jeff Yago
09.23.2012
One law abiding citizen carrying concealed can turn a mass-shooting into a minor shooting.
Michael Allen Mincy
09.23.2012
Restrict ammo purchases or monitor them ?
Chavis
09.24.2012
You clearly don’t go range shooting. 100 rounds is about 30 minutes worth of slow shooting, taking breaks to analyze the target sheet, reload the magazines, etc… and you rent the lane by the hour. If you were there with several magazines just shooting, 100 rounds would last you all of 10 minutes.
Most people aren’t buying 200 round boxes at walmart to go on a killing spree. It’s a rather enjoyable weekend activity.
Nathan Lambshead
09.23.2012
Restricting people of certain types of guns is all well and good, but people who do not understand the workings of them are not in a position to have an opinion. At least let an expert walk you through how a gun works. An old lever action cowboy rifle is every bit as effective as a nasty looking military type.
Look, crime has nothing to do with guns. It has to do with people. Mexico has the strictest gun laws in the world, and one of the worst violent crime rates. Switzerland has the most permissive gun laws in the world, and is almost absent of violent crime.
Just a couple of statistics that are left out, depending on the agenda of the statistician.
Stephen Bone
09.23.2012
This makes sense. The Aurora theatre was obviously chosen because of the local ordinance that ensured the audience would be unarmed and unable to defend itself. If even one of those military guys had had a weapon on him, many lives would have been saved. Gun bans kill the innocent, the guilty ignore them.
Tyler Rasmussen
09.23.2012
Let me make a short, opening, blanket comment. There are no bad guns, there are no good guns. Any gun in the hands of a bad man is a bad thing. Any gun in the hands of a decent person is no threat to anybody—except bad people. Charleton Heston.
Jermey Moore
09.23.2012
I agree disarming law abiding citizen is definitely not the solution either. In fact that’s likely getting rid of a solution to these sick people. Granted the guy was decked out in gear at the shooting in Colorado, but maybe someone armed could of made a difference.
JeffandWanda Camp
09.23.2012
Sadly I have to say on this one I have to agree with those who say changing gun laws won’t change much. It might change the number of people killed but it won’t stop the killing. Those intent on causing harm will find a way. We need so much more than just more “laws”.
Alex Birchfield
09.23.2012
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151065132165823&set=a.315759270822.163358.315744225822&type=1&theater
George
09.23.2012
We did that. From 1994-2004, there was an “Assault Weapon Ban”. Department of Justice data after the ban expired show that it had no measurable effect on crime.
Nanson Hwa
09.23.2012
The slight majority do no represent the family, friends and associates of victims who were killed by an insane gunman.
Nancy Bealmear Adams
09.23.2012
The last version of magazine restriction laws would have outlawed the OEM magazines of most semi-automatics (what law enforcement carries). The law was obviously written that way to those who know. I am for regulation of anything dangerous. We regulate and license cars. But to deliberately write laws that attempt to prevent me from protecting myself (and where I live this is a reality) is offensive to me.
Lisa Gilley
09.23.2012
No law is 100% effective. Why are gun laws held to an impossible standard where so many are saying, “You’ll never stop the law breakers from getting guns.” That’s not the point. The point is to deter and slow down the crime and make the bad guys think twice about the risk. If we held all laws to this standard, we’d have none! Let’s get rid of all speed limits, stop lights, jay walking laws, child support laws, on and on, because they’ll never atop the people from breaking them. Not logical. I’m all for sensible and balanced gun laws that make even a dent in gun violence and provide another tool for law enforcement and society to use.
Chavis
09.24.2012
Actually, recent studies have shown that roads without speed limits lead to drivers who pay closer attention and effectively lowers the accident rate on those roads. Oh and gun restrictions have repeatedly been shown not only to fail at preventing or slowing violent crime, but in many cases noticably increasing it. So if your goal is really to make people safer, you need to let the facts shape your opinion, and not your opinion shape your reading of the facts.
The location of the colorado shooting, a Century 16 theater, bans all guns on the premises, licensed or otherwise. It seems fairly likely that the shooter took that into consideration when deciding where he would go to hurt people.
Nicole J Hyke-Cintron
09.23.2012
Maybe just a bit more funding for psychiatric treatment……
Brian Thorp
09.23.2012
Lisa, the point is that because it’s an impossible task keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people, and the government cannot guarantee my safety from those who would do me harm, and I refuse to be a defenseless victim when that time comes, your way simply doesn’t work for me. It’s not the point that we are trying to hold gun laws to an impossible standard that is in question. Of course no law is 100% effective, but when it comes to gun laws, until you can somehow magically eliminate ALL guns and thus guarantee my protection from violent criminals, you should not be able to restrict the right for my self defense.
Scot Douglas
09.23.2012
Lisa, There is no connection between changes in gun laws and changes in crime rates. No gun laws anywhere have ever ‘made a dent’ in either ‘gun’ violence (a meaningless category) or all violence.
Ralph Ess
09.23.2012
Lisa, your thought process, while common, is very flawed. You want to deter crime with a gun?
Lets see here – in Arizona – where I am – first degree murder is a Class 1 Felony – the worst. Now, lets say I am contemplating killing someone. Don’t you think the Class 1 Felony (murder) should be sufficient?
Me: You know, I want to kill Joe down the street, because I think he is an ugly old cuss who doesn’t deserve to breathe. Oh wait! It is a crime to possess a gun! I’d better not kill old Joe down the street!
Completely silly.
Something I want to ask you, Lisa – in all fairness & gentle humility here… are you a dangerous person? Honestly… are you?
For the sake of this discussion, I will assume you answered that question along the lines of, “OF COURSE NOT! I AM A GENTLE SOUL WHO WOULDN’T HARM ANYONE!”
Now, Lisa – taking my above assumption as factual, if I handed you a gun, would you suddenly be a dangerous person?
If you don’t like them, fine – say you don’t like them. Just don’t think laws will fix anything – we already have over 25,000 laws (that don’t work and only restrict good people) and I’ve never seen a gun jump up and kill things.
Johnny Ritchie
09.23.2012
60 rounds per minute and 100 round clips should be outlawed to the general public……at least to crazies!
Louie Goitz
09.23.2012
guns are outlawed to crazies and felons.. most people who are murdered by someone they know. most people are murdered by people of their race.this is why i only associate with non white strangers.
Louie Goitz
09.23.2012
in the event of a zombie invasion, and from the documentary ” walking dead” i know is coming,i want a high cap assault rifle.
Dale A. Schoening
09.23.2012
Not surprised. It’s that Wild West mentality out there.
Justin
09.24.2012
Mostly from the police, which then trickles down into the populace. You can see Aurora’s latest accomplishment where the police held some, nearly ~30 people, handcuffed, lined up and with assault rifles aimed at their heads, for almost 2 hours, while trying to find an actual criminal.
Id prefer no gun laws, and less police, with good self defense protection laws. These days all they are is psychotic, totalitarians trying to get their kicks abusing innocent civilians. Its like all those NG at Kent State got pushed into the police force. America is becoming a police state, slowly but surely.
Louie Goitz
09.23.2012
youll get my gun when you pry it from my cold undead zombie hand.
Christopher Hood
09.24.2012
I think that crazy ppl need to be restricted
Cindy Ridgway
09.24.2012
Gun laws only effect the law abiding. Do you all really think dealer mc dope is going unarmed to only break one law to deal dope?