(NPR) Poll: A Year After Parkland, Urgency For New Gun Restrictions Declines

One year after the school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., the urgency for new gun restrictions has declined, but roughly half the country is concerned a mass shooting could happen at a school in their community, a new NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll finds.

In the immediate aftermath of the mass shooting that killed 17 people on Valentine's Day, 71 percent of Americans said laws covering the sale of firearms should be stricter. Now, it's 51 percent.

When it comes to whether stricter gun legislation should be an immediate priority for Congress, 42 percent say it should be. In April 2018, it was 10 points higher.

Still, a solid majority - 59 percent - say their first reaction when hearing about mass shootings is that the country needs stricter gun laws. Only a quarter say their first thought is that more people need to carry a gun.

There are also big partisan, racial and age divides. Republicans are less likely than Democrats to support gun restrictions, support for which has decreased over the past three decades; nonwhites are more likely to be affected by gun violence and more likely to want gun restrictions to be an immediate priority for Congress; and two-thirds of people 18 to 29 would rather control gun violence than protect gun rights.

What also takes place usually is that once the details about what led up to last year’s tragedy in Parkland really start to come out, the immediate and emotional response for stricter laws starts to wane greatly. We learned soon enough that Nikolas Cruz was well known to school and local law enforcement authorities for his habitually very bad and violent behavior, but because of his Hispanic ancestry, these authorities generally looked the other way as part of their policy (very much supported by superintendent Robert Runcie) of minimal or no suspensions or expulsions for black and other minority students. And because of that policy, Cruz cleared the background checks already required for legal firearms purchases, thereby making the argument for increased restrictions at that level basically valueless.

We also learned that Cruz had more that enough time to achieve the death toll he exacted and could likely achieved the same results with an ordinary single shot shotgun or bolt action rifle as concealed permit holders with legal permits (such as the football coach who died in the tragedy) were not allowed to carry their guns onto school property and that the officer who first responded to the tragedy failed to enter the building and confront the shooter, apparently saying later he wanted to collect his pension. This and other things illustrating a very dismal portrait of corruption and incompetence among ones like Sheriff Scott Israel further contradicted the assumptions made by firearms prohibitionists about stricter laws being able to prevent this event and other similar ones.

***..their first reaction when hearing about mass shootings is that the country needs stricter gun laws.***

Same old swill they have been handing out since 1962 when “ONLY HANDGUNS” were considered the problem. “Rifles would not be affected.”

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.