Does the Second Amendment Provide the Right to Bear Arms? U.S. Adults Think So

BUSINESS WIRE ^ | June 03, 2008 | NA

[neverdem]

However, Public Still Favors Stricter Gun Control

ROCHESTER, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--In anticipation of the U.S. Supreme Court decision concerning the Second Amendment expected at some point this month, The Harris Poll^® finds that by a margin of over two to one, more U.S. adults believe that the Second Amendment supports an individual’s right to bear arms. Furthermore, the survey also finds that more of the U.S. public continues to favor stricter gun control. However, concerning the impact on the election, the public seems to be split on which presidential candidate would do a better job handling gun control.

These are the results of a nationwide Harris Poll of 2,602 U.S. adults surveyed online by Harris Interactive^® between May 5 and 12, 2008.

In the next few weeks the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide D.C. v. Heller, which concerns whether the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The question that the Supreme Court will be answering is whether the Second Amendment actually provides an individual with the right to own a gun or whether it provides the state the ability to form a militia.

The Harris Poll showed wording from the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution to the survey’s sample and asked whether U.S. adults think the Second Amendment supports an individual’s right to bear arms or a state’s right to form a militia, the same question the Supreme Court will be answering this month. The Poll found:

• By 41 percent to 17 percent, a two to one plurality believes that the Second Amendment supports an individual’s right to bear arms. Interestingly, almost three in ten (29%) feel the Amendment supports both and 5 percent say neither;
• Furthermore, by political party affiliation Republicans by 51 percent to 9 percent believe the Second Amendment supports individuals’ right to bear arms. Democrats also agree, though by a closer 41 percent to 22 percent margin. Independents are even more closely divided with 31 percent to 22 percent thinking that the Amendment supports and individuals’ right to bear arms.

And with regard to gun control:

• A relative majority of U.S. adults – 49 percent – favor stricter gun control, with 20 percent wanting less strict gun control and 21 percent wanting no change. Since 2004, these sentiments have changed slightly with the number favoring stricter gun control going down from 52 percent. Since 1998, however, this has dropped significantly as ten years ago, 69 percent favored stricter gun control;
• By 54 percent to 18 percent a majority favors stricter laws relating to the control of hand guns and another 18 percent want no change. These opinions have not changed much since 2004 when a similar 57 percent to 18 percent also favored stricter control of handguns. Again, a decade makes a larger difference as in 1998, a 76 percent to 19 percent majority favored stricter laws relating to the control of hand guns.

2008 Presidential Campaign

Concerning the three major candidates – John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama – the public is split on which individual would do a good job in handling the gun control issue if elected president:

• By 36 percent to 34 percent John McCain receives slightly higher positive marks than either Democrat. Conversely, Barack Obama receives a 42 percent to 30 percent negative rating as does Hillary Clinton with 40 percent to 30 percent;
• By approximately three in ten, the public is not sure about whether any of the candidates would do a good job.

So What?

Even though many U.S. adults believe the Second Amendment does support an individual’s right to bear arms, the public does not feel this right should be achieved without some gun control. Many U.S. adults still favor stricter gun control, although for the first time in 10 years, this is not a majority. The candidates have not yet made any major policy statements concerning gun control, which is one reason so many are not sure about how they would handle the issue if elected. However, once the U.S. Supreme Court rules, the candidates may be forced to give their opinion and gun control could become an issue in the general election.

Methodology

The Harris Poll^® was conducted online within the United States May 5 and 12, 2008, among 2,602 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents’ propensity to be online. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in the Harris Interactive panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated. A full methodology and data tables are available at www.harrisinteractive.com.

These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

J34157

Q806, 810, 815, 820

About Harris Interactive

Harris Interactive is a global leader in custom market research. With a long and rich history in multimodal research, powered by our science and technology, we assist clients in achieving business results. Harris Interactive serves clients globally through our North American, European and Asian offices and a network of independent market research firms. For more information, please visit www.harrisinteractive.com.

Harris Interactive Inc. 6/08

[Billthedrill]

Many U.S. adults still favor stricter gun control, although for the first time in 10 years, this is not a majority.

Oh, really? VPC and the Brady kids have been saying it's 70% in favor for, oh, how long now?

[neverdem]

Once the court makes a ruling, what could a candidate do to thwart the ruling if they disagree with it? Their personal opinion at that point has little if any value.

You have to understand that doesn't matter to the fourth estate/fifth column. If the Supreme Court rules using strict scrutiny that it is an individual right, the drive by media will go crazy with "blood in the streets" stories. The gun grabbers will try to infringe in other ways, e.g. restrictions on ammo sales, gun show "loophole", etc.

[ArmyTeach]

What part of "shall not be infringed" is confusing? Absolutamundo! The Constitution is brilliant in its clarity and simplicity, it's just that liberals overanalyze and twist words to fit their agenda (surprise, surprise!). If 'people' as used in the second amendment is construed to refer to a branch of the government, then why should it not be so construed as used in all the other amendments? Libs need to explain.

[556x45]

Was trying to make sense of the stmt
‘Even though many U.S. adults believe the Second Amendment
does support an individual’s right to bear arms, the public
does not feel this right should be achieved without some
gun control.’
and the words of my FIL came to mind. He thinks he should be allowed b/c theres no trust issue but his neighbors...well they’re all suspect and should be reined in. Yes, he of the Royal We party.

[VOR78]

Agreed. My hope is that the Supreme Court is wise enough to consider these additional attacks that may come in future years and make a strong ruling that addresses at least some of the other attacks such as ammo taxes as well. I guess they can do that? I hope?

In any event, considering what we may be facing soon, we need the strongest Pro 2nd Amendment ruling possible.

[RedRightReturn]

“I think even the most basic question was not answered. The second amendment provides nothing. The Constitution does not grant rights, it sets limitations on the government with respect to our rights.”

BINGO!!! You’ve got the right answer!

The Bill of Rights enumerates (or affirms) rights that are ENDOWED BY OUR CREATOR.

[Noumenon]

“Thwe women of my country learned long ago that those without swords may still die upon them.”

Eowyn - Lord of the Rings.

[kabar]

The majority of Americans can’t locate America on a map.

[normy]

NO. The second amendment does not provide the right of Americans to bear arms. It prohibits the government from infringing on our God given right to bear arms for defense of ourselves.

[normy]

Sorry, didn’t read down to your post.

[mnehring]

Second Amendment supports an individual’s right to bear arms or a state’s right to form a militia

It's not 'or', it's both. There is a semicolon between the two clauses indicating they are independent clauses, not either being dependent on each other.

[stylin19a]

s’ok..at least there's 2 of us.

[Condor51]

And with regard to gun control:

• A relative majority of U.S. adults – 49 percent

Okay, since when is 49% a "Majority"? Even with new math (sarc) it still take OVER 50% to have a "majority". The word they want is Plurality. Do they assume their readers are to STOO-PID to understand that word?

In any case this poll means squat. There's more to the 2nd Amendment than just what's written, to wit...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

• A well regulated Militia,
  George Mason: "Who are the militia? They consist of the whole people, except a few public officers."

• being necessary to the security of a free State,
  Patrick Henry: "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun.

• the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,
  Samuel Adams: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

• shall not be infringed.
  Thomas Jefferson: "The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."

Case closed!

oops, almost forgot... You, yeah you 'public officers' - Like Bloomie, Di-fi and Chuckie Shooooooomer, per the honorable George Mason you have NO RIGHT to own a gun, hand em in pronto 'public officers'. You have till midnight to disarm!

[Myrddin]

Fortunately, the Constitution is not subject to the whims of slanted poll questions. The 2nd Amendment forbids the government from infringing on the pre-existing right to keep and bear arms. It does not "provide the right". The lefties lack the ability to comprehend the difference between the rights of citizens and the enumerated powers of government.

[Waco]

Wearing a gun should be regarded like wearing a watch. Some do, some don’t. Gun control? Outlaw crime!

[Sacajaweau]

The right to self protection AND HUNTING supercedes the constitution.

Many soldiers were given their "militia supply" guns "as gifts" (a sort of pay) after the revolutionary war ended. I have a copy of a letter (GWashington I believe) and it is very explicit.

Had it been that only militias were to have arms...they would have been returned to the "militia supply".

[DuncanWaring]

McCain is a staunch defender of the Second Amendment.

Difficult to square with the fact that about seven or eight years ago he tried to put an end to gun shows.

[Flycatcher]

Didn’t hear of this. Do tell more.

[B4Ranch]

Having custody of a loaded weapon does not arm you. The skill to use the weapon is what arms a man.

Training and practice are critical!

[Flycatcher]

You're absolutely right. I did some research since you posted to me, and found this:

Through 1998, McCain had a strong pro-gun voting record in Congress. In May 1999, McCain voted in favor of an NRA-supported provision that encouraged, but did not force, small-scale gun collectors who sell firearms occasionally at gun shows to run background checks on customers. The next day, however, McCain led several Republican senators into Trent Lott's office and demanded that the vote be reversed.

That was unknown to me, and it doesn't speak well of McCain.

Thanks for the insight.