question about the 90%

[alxone]

so who and where are these 90% of americans that support obamas new gun laws ? [pick-me]

[hghclsswhitetrsh]

People registered to the MSNBC web site.

[robertcolorado2009]

This is the exact question I wanted to have an answer for also. They always spout that 40% of gun purchases are done without BGCs so this 90% they keep spouiting brings about this same scrutiny, where does this come from? Anyone?

[Teufelhund]

Its all outright lies. If some number of gun transfers is done without record or paperwork, whether it be 10% or 99%, if there's no record, how could anyone possibly know?

[rockhound]

if you say it enough times it must be true

[cstone]

90% of all statistics are made up. I'm 88% certain this is true.

Be safe.

[Rucker61]

It came from Reuters:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/07/us-usa-guns-poll-idUSBRE9160LW20130207

Of course, new data suggests anything but. The anti's love old data, hence their sticking to the 1994 40% mantra.

http://ap-gfkpoll.com/featured/our-latest-poll-findings-22

Only 49% want stronger gun laws, and 52% disapprove of Obama's methods.

[TRnCO]

latest Gallop pole I heard says that only 4% of Americans rank gun control as being most important issue. in other words, most Americans are sick and tired of Congress wasting time and money on the issue when there are bigger more important(economy) issues to work on.

[roberth]

latest Gallop pole I heard says that only 4% of Americans rank gun control as being most important issue. in other words, most Americans are sick and tired of Congress wasting time and money on the issue when there are bigger more important(economy) issues to work on.

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/04/17/poll-americans-dont-think-gun-control-is-important/

[brokenscout]

This
if you say it enough times it must be true

[Bailey Guns]

90% of the 40% who support Obama's gun control plan are in favor of more gun control.

[muddywings]

This is the exact question I wanted to have an answer for also. They always spout that 40% of gun purchases are done without BGCs so this 90% they keep spouiting brings about this same scrutiny, where does this come from? Anyone?

Basically the 40% number came from a rounded up stat, from a bad survey in the early 90s:

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338735/40-percent-myth-john-lott

[pookawa]

so who and where are these 90% of americans that support obamas new gun laws ? [pick-me]


My understanding is that they are getting the 90% number from the poll conducted by Quinnipiac University. The polled sample was diverse in terms of geography and urban/rural (although they don't specify what the distribution was). The sample size was 1722 people.

Q38 asks if you agree with requiring background checks for all gun buyers. 92% agreed

Q35 asks if you support stricter gun control laws, and only 52% agreed.

Either way, I don't honestly know if 90% of Americans support stricter gun control or not, but suspect that such a small sample group might not translate well when the official American polulation is 313,914,040. (representing .00000549% of the population.




http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes--centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1847
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

[Rucker61]

Data to refute the 40% number for future use:

http://factcheck.org/2013/03/guns-acquired-without-background-checks/

[Goodburbon]

I can actually believe the 90% number, as every non gun person I speak to thinks that UBC is a good idea.

Until I politely explain to them what universal means, what effect it has on me, and that it is impossible to enforce/obey. Then it's "ooooh, no that's not a good idea at all."

So 90% sounds about right, but that 90% doesn't understand the repercussions because they've never thought about it.

[ChuckNorris]

I can actually believe the 90% number, as every non gun person I speak to thinks that UBC is a good idea.

Until I politely explain to them what universal means, what effect it has on me, and that it is impossible to enforce/obey. Then it's "ooooh, no that's not a good idea at all."

So 90% sounds about right, but that 90% doesn't understand the repercussions because they've never thought about it.


That is exactly right!
I have found the same thing talking with 'the uninformed'!

[KestrelBike]

Same 90% figure that clinton lied about saying guns in Mexican drug war were from private us dealers.

[mtnhack]

Puke. In addition to probably getting myself put on a gov watch-list, my angry letters to the whitehouse got me put on a list of recipients for this lovely bullshit. Enjoy.








A few hours ago, President Obama stood with parents who lost children in the Newtown tragedy and said: "All in all, today was a pretty shameful day for Washington."
That's because a minority of senators blocked legislation that would have made America safer and better protected our kids. Forty-five lawmakers stood in the way of improvements to the background check system that would keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals and the mentally unstable -- something that 90 percent of Americans support.
You're going to want to hear President Obama explain why he thinks this happened. Watch the video or read the transcript below, then share this so that everyone knows what comes next: (http://links.whitehouse.gov/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTMwNDE4LjE3ODYyMTYxJ m1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDEzMDQxOC4xNzg2MjE 2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE2Nzk1NDY2JmVtY WlsaWQ9YmFkZ2VyNzQ2OUBtc24uY29tJnVzZXJpZD1iYWRnZXI 3NDY5QG1zbi5jb20mZmw9JmV4dHJhPU11bHRpdmFyaWF0ZUlkP SYmJg==&&&100&&&http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/preventing-gun-violence/action?utm_source=email209&utm_medium=text1&utm_campaign=nowisthetime)
[/URL]
[url]http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/preventing-gun-violence/action (http://links.whitehouse.gov/track?type=click&enid=ZWFzPTEmbWFpbGluZ2lkPTIwMTMwNDE4LjE3ODYyMTYxJ m1lc3NhZ2VpZD1NREItUFJELUJVTC0yMDEzMDQxOC4xNzg2MjE 2MSZkYXRhYmFzZWlkPTEwMDEmc2VyaWFsPTE2Nzk1NDY2JmVtY WlsaWQ9YmFkZ2VyNzQ2OUBtc24uY29tJnVzZXJpZD1iYWRnZXI 3NDY5QG1zbi5jb20mZmw9JmV4dHJhPU11bHRpdmFyaWF0ZUlkP SYmJg==&&&101&&&http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/preventing-gun-violence/action?utm_source=email209&utm_medium=graphic&utm_campaign=nowisthetime)

-- The President's Remarks --A few months ago, in response to too many tragedies -- including the shootings of a United States Congresswoman, Gabby Giffords, who's here today, and the murder of 20 innocent schoolchildren and their teachers -- this country took up the cause of protecting more of our people from gun violence.
Families that know unspeakable grief summoned the courage to petition their elected leaders -- not just to honor the memory of their children, but to protect the lives of all our children. And a few minutes ago, a minority in the United States Senate decided it wasn't worth it. They blocked common-sense gun reforms even while these families looked on from the Senate gallery.
By now, it's well known that 90 percent of the American people support universal background checks that make it harder for a dangerous person to buy a gun. We're talking about convicted felons, people convicted of domestic violence, people with a severe mental illness. Ninety percent of Americans support that idea. Most Americans think that's already the law.
And a few minutes ago, 90 percent of Democrats in the Senate just voted for that idea. But it's not going to happen because 90 percent of Republicans in the Senate just voted against that idea.
A majority of senators voted "yes" to protecting more of our citizens with smarter background checks. But by this continuing distortion of Senate rules, a minority was able to block it from moving forward.
I'm going to speak plainly and honestly about what's happened here because the American people are trying to figure out how can something have 90 percent support and yet not happen. We had a Democrat and a Republican -– both gun owners, both fierce defenders of our Second Amendment, with "A" grades from the NRA -- come together and worked together to write a common-sense compromise on background checks. And I want to thank Joe Manchin and Pat Toomey for their courage in doing that. That was not easy given their traditional strong support for Second Amendment rights.
As they said, nobody could honestly claim that the package they put together infringed on our Second Amendment rights. All it did was extend the same background check rules that already apply to guns purchased from a dealer to guns purchased at gun shows or over the Internet. So 60 percent of guns are already purchased through a background check system; this would have covered a lot of the guns that are currently outside that system.
Their legislation showed respect for gun owners, and it showed respect for the victims of gun violence. And Gabby Giffords, by the way, is both -- she's a gun owner and a victim of gun violence. She is a Westerner and a moderate. And she supports these background checks.
In fact, even the NRA used to support expanded background checks. The current leader of the NRA used to support these background checks. So while this compromise didn't contain everything I wanted or everything that these families wanted, it did represent progress. It represented moderation and common sense. That's why 90 percent of the American people supported it.
But instead of supporting this compromise, the gun lobby and its allies willfully lied about the bill. They claimed that it would create some sort of "big brother" gun registry, even though the bill did the opposite. This legislation, in fact, outlawed any registry. Plain and simple, right there in the text. But that didn't matter.
And unfortunately, this pattern of spreading untruths about this legislation served a purpose, because those lies upset an intense minority of gun owners, and that in turn intimidated a lot of senators. And I talked to several of these senators over the past few weeks, and they're all good people. I know all of them were shocked by tragedies like Newtown. And I also understand that they come from states that are strongly pro-gun. And I have consistently said that there are regional differences when it comes to guns, and that both sides have to listen to each other.
But the fact is most of these senators could not offer any good reason why we wouldn't want to make it harder for criminals and those with severe mental illnesses to buy a gun. There were no coherent arguments as to why we wouldn't do this. It came down to politics -- the worry that that vocal minority of gun owners would come after them in future elections. They worried that the gun lobby would spend a lot of money and paint them as anti-Second Amendment.
And obviously, a lot of Republicans had that fear, but Democrats had that fear, too. And so they caved to the pressure, and they started looking for an excuse -- any excuse -- to vote "no."
One common argument I heard was that this legislation wouldn't prevent all future massacres. And that's true. As I said from the start, no single piece of legislation can stop every act of violence and evil. We learned that tragically just two days ago. But if action by Congress could have saved one person, one child, a few hundred, a few thousand -- if it could have prevented those people from losing their lives to gun violence in the future while preserving our Second Amendment rights, we had an obligation to try.
And this legislation met that test. And too many senators failed theirs.
I've heard some say that blocking this step would be a victory. And my question is, a victory for who? A victory for what? All that happened today was the preservation of the loophole that lets dangerous criminals buy guns without a background check. That didn't make our kids safer. Victory for not doing something that 90 percent of Americans, 80 percent of Republicans, the vast majority of your constituents wanted to get done? It begs the question, who are we here to represent?
I've heard folks say that having the families of victims lobby for this legislation was somehow misplaced. "A prop," somebody called them. "Emotional blackmail," some outlet said. Are they serious? Do we really think that thousands of families whose lives have been shattered by gun violence don't have a right to weigh in on this issue? Do we think their emotions, their loss is not relevant to this debate?
So all in all, this was a pretty shameful day for Washington.
But this effort is not over. I want to make it clear to the American people we can still bring about meaningful changes that reduce gun violence, so long as the American people don't give up on it. Even without Congress, my administration will keep doing everything it can to protect more of our communities. We're going to address the barriers that prevent states from participating in the existing background check system. We're going to give law enforcement more information about lost and stolen guns so it can do its job. We're going to help to put in place emergency plans to protect our children in their schools.
But we can do more if Congress gets its act together. And if this Congress refuses to listen to the American people and pass common-sense gun legislation, then the real impact is going to have to come from the voters.
To all the people who supported this legislation -- law enforcement and responsible gun owners, Democrats and Republicans, urban moms, rural hunters, whoever you are -- you need to let your representatives in Congress know that you are disappointed, and that if they don't act this time, you will remember come election time.
To the wide majority of NRA households who supported this legislation, you need to let your leadership and lobbyists in Washington know they didn't represent your views on this one.
The point is those who care deeply about preventing more and more gun violence will have to be as passionate, and as organized, and as vocal as those who blocked these common-sense steps to help keep our kids safe. Ultimately, you outnumber those who argued the other way. But they're better organized. They're better financed. They've been at it longer. And they make sure to stay focused on this one issue during election time. And that's the reason why you can have something that 90 percent of Americans support and you can't get it through the Senate or the House of Representatives.
So to change Washington, you, the American people, are going to have to sustain some passion about this. And when necessary, you've got to send the right people to Washington. And that requires strength, and it requires persistence.
And that's the one thing that these families should have inspired in all of us. I still don't know how they have been able to muster up the strength to do what they've doing over the last several weeks, last several months.
And I see this as just round one. When Newtown happened, I met with these families and I spoke to the community, and I said, something must be different right now. We're going to have to change. That's what the whole country said. Everybody talked about how we were going to change something to make sure this didn't happen again, just like everybody talked about how we needed to do something after Aurora. Everybody talked about we needed change something after Tucson.
And I'm assuming that the emotions that we've all felt since Newtown, the emotions that we've all felt since Tucson and Aurora and Chicago -- the pain we share with these families and families all across the country who've lost a loved one to gun violence -- I'm assuming that's not a temporary thing. I'm assuming our expressions of grief and our commitment to do something different to prevent these things from happening are not empty words.
I believe we're going to be able to get this done. Sooner or later, we are going to get this right. The memories of these children demand it. And so do the American people.
Thank you very much, everybody.

[Rabid]

My understanding is that they are getting the 90% number from the poll conducted by Quinnipiac University. The polled sample was diverse in terms of geography and urban/rural (although they don't specify what the distribution was). The sample size was 1722 people.

Q38 asks if you agree with requiring background checks for all gun buyers. 92% agreed

Q35 asks if you support stricter gun control laws, and only 52% agreed.

Either way, I don't honestly know if 90% of Americans support stricter gun control or not, but suspect that such a small sample group might not translate well when the official American polulation is 313,914,040. (representing .00000549% of the population.




http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes--centers/polling-institute/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=1847
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

You beat me to it. It also shows that that either 40% of Amaricans have no critical thinking skills or they are counting this poll funny somehow.

To the avg. joe background checks sound good. Most just hear stuff like the 40% quote and do not take the time to know all of the stats are hand picked to further an agenda. It is all rainbows and unicorn farts until you think it through and do some research.

[brianakell]

This

“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it”. Adolf Hitler quotes (German Chancellor, leader of the Nazi party, 1889-1945)

[sabot_round]

The 90% comes from a figure in his own mind!! No one has asked me for my opinion and I'm pretty damn sure that he wouldn't ask for our opinion anyways. This is just another political stunt that he is trying to skew to further his agenda. He's only tallying LIBTARDS opinions!!