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

[DuncanWaring]

Do a web-search on McCain and “gun show”.

Here’s a couple of representative samples:

http://gunlaws.com/GunShows/index.htm

http://www.gunowners.org/mclott.htm

[B4Ranch]

Bookmark these maps because they show where violent homicides in the US are originating from.

_______________________________________________________________

These maps are from the article titled "Anti-gun Promo Blackfires"

I think perhaps it should have been entitled, "The African Americans are slaughtering each other in our US Cities"

Baltimore, PROPER, which is reflected on the map is 64.34% Black or African American, 31.63% White.

_______________________________________________________________

These Baltimore Sun maps show a terrible problem but do not clarify who the murderers are.

Baltimore Sun map of PEOPLE murdered, 2007:

_______________________________________________________________

Baltimore Sun map of BLACKS murdered, 2007: (264)

_______________________________________________________________

Baltimore Sun map of WHITES murdered, 2007: (12)

Of the 12, 6 were killed *downtown* while probably buying drugs. _______________________________________________________________

That's right a small percentage of people, generally gangs and drug dealers, in our large cities that cause the majority of the gun related homicides in the US. Do not allow this data to be covered up or hidden. Do not allow the gun control nutcases to take away your self defense weapons.

SOURCE: http://essentials.baltimoresun.com/micro_sun/homicides/ Baltimore, PROPER, Population 651154, Baltimore, greater metropolitan area, Population 5.1 Million

[P8riot]

No it doesn’t. It just enumerates that right. The right itself is inalienable. The government cannot grant it or take it away.

[El Gato]

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

That's nice. Wrong, but nice. Wrong in two ways. First, the second amendment protects an individual right, not provides one. Second, it's not up for a majority vote.

[El Gato]

First consider the argument for the Bill of Rights itself. The founders firmly believed that the government did not have power it wasn't expressly given by the citizens. Therefore; a large portion believed the Bill of Rights was unnecessary as the government did not have the power to take away those rights to begin with. However; there were those realists in the crowd who knew enough about human nature to predict that without certain explicit protections that politicians of the future would spin it differently and there were certain things which they needed to make sure got extra special protection

A good, belt and suspenders approach. Bet those guys would have made good engineers too, although their designs might have been a little more expensive, and a littler heavier, they would last forever, and virtually always "git 'er done", whatever 'er might be. :)

[El Gato]

I guess they can do that?

Not directly. They can only rule directly on the case before them. However in justifying that ruling, they can expand things a little or a lot, to other cases and situations. But if they rule that the right is an individual one, that "shall not be *infringed*", it's hard to see that any such ban on ammo, guns, or even such accessories as holsters and fancy sighting systems, can stand. Especially bans on "keeping", limitations on "bearing" they might get away with, since there is plenty of historical precedent for limited controls on that, but only at the state and local level. For example, no carrying hidden weapons without special permit, no carry in bars, etc. but complete bans on bearing would not be allowed either.

[El Gato]

There is a semicolon between the two clauses indicating they are independent clauses, not either being dependent on each other.

There's no semicolon in any historical copy of the Second Amendment that I've ever seen. Some have one comma, some appear to have 3. Remember they were hand copied, and sometimes the scribes got a little creative with punctuation, which was not so formally defined in those days in any event.

But they are still independent clauses, with the second one being the operative one, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (some versions have a comma between "arms" and "shall", which makes no sense grammatically, but commas need not, they can just be a place to take a breath.

[El Gato]

McCain is a staunch defender of the Second Amendment

For a Republican to get a C+ from the NRA is is not evidence of staunchness. Maybe a sometimes defender would be more correct. Better grade than Obama or Clinton though. His GOA grades were as low as low gets.

Why? Because he most certainly is not a staunch defender of the first amendment, and as we all know the first defends the second just as much as the second defends the first. If the first is no longer followed, it's harder, much harder to defend the second amendment, which then puts the first, and the rest, in even greater peril.

[Shooter 2.5]

The rating from the NRA is a more accurate rating than the GOA. If the rating from the GOA for McCain was as low as low gets, how did clinton and obama score lower?

The reason the NRA rated McCain with the C+ was because he wanted all sellers at gunshows to have a Federal License and that action would not close down gunshows. The NRA disagrees with McCain on that issue.

McCain voted AGAINST the assault weapons ban. In thar respect, he’s a better candidate than GW is.

[democratsaremyenemy]

Most of the arguements about the Second Amendment made by both sides revolve around a single assumption - that the Second Amendment grants a citizen the right to bear arms. What both sides fail to understand is that the Second
Amendment grants no such right, in fact, the Constitution grants no rights at all!

What the Constitution does do is identify what powers the people grant to the government. This is the whole purpose of the Constitution - to tell the goverment what it can and cannot do.

Read the Second Amendment closely, it doesn’t say the people have a right to bear arms but rather that the goverment can not infringe on that right. The same is true for most of the other amendments (the exception being the
Sixth Amendment with establishes a right to a speedy trial).

‘’Today, when a concerted effort is made to obliterate this point, it cannot be repeated too often that the Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals- that it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government- that it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government.’’
— Ayn Rand

[stevie_d_64]

The interesting thing to all of this is that we all will still have our guns...Dispite wherever this goes...

They can ban all they want...I still had my AR’s, and other sundry long-range heavy hitting hardware (that doesn’t officially exist)...

They’ll keep trying, and I’ll keep fighting...

[El Gato]

McCain voted AGAINST the assault weapons ban. In thar respect, he’s a better candidate than GW is.

That still doesn't make him a "staunch supporter of the second amendment", which is all I was arguing against.

GOA took his anti first amendment activities into account. I could be wrong, but I though all three were in GOA's cellar.

Certainly wanting to ban private sales at gunshows, probably as prelude to baning them altogether, since is one is OK, then the other is too, doesn't make anyone a "staunch supporter".

Yeah, Hillery and Obama are worse, but that doesn't make McCain good or desirable.

Our choices are bad, worst and Armageddon. Armageddon is looking more likely every day. McCain is much too week a candidate to stand up to the MSM, who will turn on him like snakes. they are already are, despite his being their "favorite Republican" for all these years.

Face it, by their choice of the order of primary state voting order, the Republicans have jumped the shark. The only hope is that by picking a Racist Marxist, , or if they don't pick him, by the riots that follow the selection of Her Socialistic Highness the Dems have done the same.

"Interesting Times" coming.

[joma89]

The 2nd Amendment most certainly allows individual citizens the right to bear arms. It is the citizens responsibility to keep the government in check, up to and including refreshing the tree of freedom “from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

JoMa

[El Gato]

The rating from the NRA is a more accurate rating than the GOA.

Didn't say it wasn't, just that it didn't, especially for a Republican, make him a "staunch defender" of the second amendment. Quite the contrary. And it's probably equivalent to maybe a D or D- for a Democrat.

[contemplator]

Bet those guys would have made good engineers too, although their designs might have been a little more expensive, and a littler heavier, they would last forever, and virtually always "git 'er done", whatever 'er might be. :)

You'd win that bet. If you ever get a chance, go visit Jefferson's home at Monticello. To say that he was a first rate engineer is putting it mildly. He wasn't alone, Franklin's engineering achievements set him apart as well.

All in all when it came to true well-rounded Renaisance men, that generation might very well represent the apex of what humanity has to offer. Our prediliction to specialize and not to encompass so much well-rounded knowledge in the form of a single person also leads to great achievements no doubt; but it tends to do so at the cost of creating less well-rounded men. It is rare to find an engineer, scientist, politician, statesman, philanthropist, diplomat etc.. in the body of a single person these days, that generation was blessed with an abundance of such men.

This is not to say that each successive generation shouldn't re-evaluate the wisdom of the path laid out by these men, just that they should be prepared to adequately argue why their ideas are more brilliant. It is a rare person who can live up to such a standard,and I can only think of one off the top of my head who can claim to have successfully and rightfully done so - Lincoln. But here again, the founding fathers wisdom shone through and they were prepared to recognize that they may have made mistakes and paved the way to take this into account. If the time comes when our society is willing to give away it's right to bear arms, they simply need to repeal the 2nd Amendment and replace it with a new one. I hope not to see such a change in our society in my lifetime.

[El Gato]

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

Actually it happened in no small part because of attempts at gun control. Yes, there were demonstrations and civil disobedience protesting "taxation without representation" and all that. BUT the shooting didn't start until the British marched out of Boston to confiscate the colonists' arms. Then they got the Shiite Shot out of 'em. Sort of like sticking their heads into a hornets nest. Only the arrival of a relief column containing a cannon, saved them from total annihilation. Sans that cannon the relief column likely would have met the same fate. The colonials own cannons had been dismounted and hidden from the Lobsterbacks, who found the carriages and burned them, preventing use of those cannon along the Battle Road.

Heres' one (of four) of those colonial cannon.

[Oztrich Boy]

(some versions have a comma between "arms" and "shall", which makes no sense grammatically,

But it does, it is necessary to separate the essential part for the Amendment from the window dressing

A well regulated militia, (yada, yada), shall not be infringed. thus giving the right to have a National Guard (interpretation brought to you by Brady/VPC)

[Oztrich Boy]

GOA took his anti first amendment activities into account

A lobby group worried about their bottom line: the ability to raise and spend money

[elcid1970]

FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE: Excellent list but add also:

26. When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

[El Gato]

It is rare to find an engineer, scientist, politician, statesman, philanthropist, diplomat etc.. in the body of a single person these days, that generation was blessed with an abundance of such men.

Not as rare as you might think. By necessity, folks do specialize, but just because they are master of one particular area, doesn't mean they aren't also jacks of all trades.

I'm an engineer, with a bit more leaning into math and science than many such. If I wasn't also quiet interested in politics, statecraft and military affairs, would I be here?

I'm not to interested in music, and have virtually no ability and little knowledge in the area, but I'm continually amazed at how many engineers, scientists and mathematicians are also musicians. When I worked on radar for the A-12, three or of the engineers and the mathematician, (she now has a PhD in EE) had their own musical group, and it was not just "modern music" either, although they did that too. The guy who is also now a PhD, and had been a freshman quarterback in college, (now Mountain West conference, not sure about then), played both guitar and piano, among other instruments, the math major played Clarinet and sang, well they all sang I think. She was a pretty quiet and modest lady, but when she performed she did so in a leather skirt. :)

We were all in the Systems Analysis section of systems engineering, we analyzed performance and designed algorithms of various sorts, our section chief had a Video Disc Player, an audio room, and two Porches, 'course he wasn't married. :) The lady PhD wasn't either, but now is, and is a mother, by now maybe to a teenager..can't recall when she had her baby (or babies, but I know about one for sure) to a PhD in Electro magnetics, basically an antenna specialist.

I'm now no longer so quick to pigeon hole people.

My current program manager is also a musician, they are playing for a charity event this weekend. Their lady vocalist wears digital camo to work. She's a black soldier married to a German, and has a great voice.