[SeaHawkFan]

I don’t care what people think; what does the Constitution say?

[CodeToad]

Typical stupid liberals, giving the only reason accepted next to the answer, yet, the reason for the answer may not be what they say.

[TYVets]

204,000 Votes

91% Yes

6% No, too dangerous

4% Self Defense only

Maybe, just maybe there are more people with some common sense who watch MSNBC than I thought.

[dynachrome]

Thanks to Momtothree for the ping!

FREEP THIS POLL ***PING!*** FRmail me if you want to be added or removed from the Fearless Poll-Freeping Freepers Ping list. (multiple votes using multiple internetz devices are allowed!) And be sure to ping me to any polls that need Freepin', if I miss them. (looks like a medium volume list) (gordongekko909, founder of the pinglist, stays on the list until his ghost signs up for the list)

[trisham]

Yes!

[Mister Da]

Well, they slanted the poll by splitting the yes vote between 2nd Amendment & self defense.

Do they think people that open carry for something other than self defense? Maybe the extra weight of gun & ammo helps them keep in shape?

The 2nd A simply grants that right - bearing arms means carrying arms openly or concealed.

Then they failed to openly label the results, leading some (morons) to assume it is an anti-2A result. You have to click each result which is unnecessary on a nearly empty panel. IT pros don’t bury essential info behind mouse clicks when there is plenty of room on the screen to display them.

Still, some at MSNBC vomited, got the chills, & had to take some personal time off.

YES!!!

[EXCH54FE]

YES: 189K 91%

No: 12K 6%

Only for self Defense: 7,460 4%

[metmom]

212k votes and holding at 91%.

[Artcore]

214K / 91% @ 10:30 AM MST.

[GenXteacher]

Freeped!

[Neoliberalnot]

Yes, as long as they are not politicians, illegal aliens, criminals, welfare scabs, and celebrities.

[FreeAtlanta]

91% yes with 216,000 voters. Seems pretty one sided.

[Cheerio]

Answer 1 of 3
Yes! The Second Amendment guarantees it.
199k votes

Answer 2 of 3
No, it's too dangerous.
12k votes

Answer 3 of 3
Only for self defense.
7,831 votes

[Graybeard58]

People shouldn’t carry more guns than they are physically capable of lifting. For that, they’ll need a wheel barrow, (easier on the old back muscles).

[Ditter]

Voted yes!

[SuperLuminal]

IMHO, I don't want to be "allowed" to do anything! Slaves are "allowed" to live, eat, work, and anything else their masters "allow" them to do.

I have a "right" to carry a gun in any manner I want. This right was protected by the 2nd Amendment.

So the answer to the question, as posed, is "no".

Now, if the question was: "Do you think people should carry guns in public?", we can answer (one way or the other) without the implication that the 2nd Amendment is somehow a "living" concept to be interpreted by our rulers.

Just saying...

[Leep]

If i were a criminal, and or a manipulative lying self serving liberal democrat, I would fear law abiding citizens with guns,too.

[KGeorge]

These people are too stupid to live. “Only for self defense”? What the hell else would they be carrying guns for?

Their graph sucks, too. Way to obfuscate the results.