Please help unfreep this poll on high capacity gun magazines

[NewJeffCT]

http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/todaysbuzz/hc-let-connecticut-gun-owners-keep-their-30round-magazines-20130401,0,7130339.story

Already the first answer is winning by a lot.

Thanks

[ananda]

1. Geezus! Only 6% rational.

..

[NYC_SKP]

2. The first answer is a good answer. Did you actually read the questions?

What do you think?
(Note: This is an unscientific poll.)

Should Connecticut gun owners be allowed to keep high-capacity magazines they already own if such magazines are banned?

Yes. It's unfair to punish responsible gun owners for a sick killer's madness by banning products that gun owners bought legally. (204 responses)

87%

No. Such magazines are common in rampage killings. They're too lethal and they pose too great a risk to human targets. (14 responses)

6%

Yes. It would be too difficult to get owners to give up magazines they already possess. This compromise is a way forward. (6 responses)

3%

No. Smaller magazines means reduced firepower, which is the worthy intent of the legislation. (10 responses)

4%

234 total responses

(Results not scientific)

You are suggesting that banning AND COLLECTING currently owned magazines is A-OK.

I do not agree.

[1-Old-Man]

9. I thought so too - so it is the one I voted for.

[Duckhunter935]

26. yep

that's why I voted for number 1

[Sharpie]

3. Check...

Voted to allow them to keep...

Vast majority of the populace has not done anything wrong and shouldn't have to pay for a loony...

[Hoyt]

6. Depends on whom you consider "loony."

Some of us consider those who acquire/covet/need such things as "loony," perhaps worse.

[Sharpie]

7. That is exactly why it is difficult/impossible to have a reasonable conversation about guns...

If the other side thinks you are mentally unstable, there really isn't anywhere to go. Plus it gives do-gooders the feeling of altruism.

On the other hand, most pro-gun folks I know don't think you're crazy, just scared.

[Hoyt]

8. I don't have to strap a gun on to venture out, how about you?

90±% of population does not need a gun in their pants - so who is really afraid?


Truthfully, I don't think there is much to discuss. The facts are obvious that guns don't improve our society.

[Sharpie]

10. My job requires it at times so... meh

As far as being afraid... If you keep a few weeks worth of water and MREs in your house, are you in constant fear of tornadoes and disasters?

Probably not, you are just prepared for the off chance that you may have to use it and if you do you'll be glad that it's there. If not, the worse that happens is that you are out a few bucks and the time you spent putting it together.

The facts are just as "obvious" to others that guns to improve society so that's a moot point as well.

[Hoyt]

15. Enjoy your guns, and gun buddies. N/t

[Sharpie]

19. I do...

... and my non gun buddies as well.

[jmg257]

17. Yep...just being 'well-prepared'. Buying MREs, having a fire extinguisher

In your kitchen, a good spare tire and jack in our car, all are JUST like carrying a gun...ya know, just in case. Might get a flat that needs changing, might get an attacker with a gun that needs blasting. Boom - you are all set!

Of course you're afraid, of tornadoes, of fires, of being a victim, &c.

Its OK. Lots of good laws stem from fear...smoke detectors in homes, air bags in cars, fences around pools.

And these days many more people are afraid that some fucker with a gun is going to enter a school, a theater, a mall, a school, and shoot and massacre a bunch of people. Can't blame them. It happens way too often. And can't blame them for wanting laws that will help prevent that, by limiting the access to those arms.

Think of it as just being prepared...preemptively.

[Kingofalldems]

13. Do-gooders you say?

[jmg257]

25. Meh..you bet your ass people are scared.

Last edited Wed Apr 3, 2013, 08:00 PM - Edit history (2)

Scared that another dumbass 'law abiding' gun owner will suddenly decide not to be so lawful, and kill other people with his gun.

Aurora, Newtown, Columbine, VT, Tucson, &c &c &c. 1000s of times a year.
Wives, husbands, children murdered and maimed.

Nope...nothing to fear here!

(Except gunfureaks using guns for massacering people individually or by the dozens, that is.)

No worries - let's just all strap one on, and head out to the movies, atleast we'll be prepared! Yee Haw!

[sharp_stick]

4. It's Pointless

those polls in the Courant are set upon by the hard working losers at The Yankee Institute the minute they appear.

CEA (chief executive asshole) Andrew Cowin has been known to run webinars and the like to teach the computer illiterate morons that he fronts for how to clear cookies and vote multiple times in Hartford Courant polls simply because he thinks that the pie charts that appear in the Sunday Opinion section might sway opinion for some reason. Most people just think he's an obsessive asshole.

For three weeks last year I got a bunch of friends together to do the same thing but in reverse just for kicks. Whenever we had a free couple of minutes we'd vote just the opposite of the way the Cowin would want. We didn't even care what the issue was, we just took the opposite position. The number of votes went through the roof after the second week. Unfortunately we got bored and decided we had better things to do.

[Gothmog]

5. Done

I strongly disagree with the first answer

[Fla_Democrat]

11. Done, thanks for the heads up

[Peter cotton]

12. Done!

Voted: Yes. It's unfair to punish responsible gun owners for a sick killer's madness by banning products that gun owners bought legally.

[derby378]

14. They're only doing it because Nancy and Adam Lanza are dead

There's a lot of people out there looking for a scapegoat.

[Hoyt]

16. And a lot more looking for comfort in their guns and lethal accessories. N/t

[Logical]

18. Jury Results!

At Tue Apr 2, 2013, 09:33 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

They're only doing it because Nancy and Adam Lanza are dead
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2605184

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Complete and utter gun trollery. "They" are doing it to try and minimize the chances of another massacre happening, not "because Nancy and Adam Lanza are dead".

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Apr 2, 2013, 09:36 PM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Not that bad. I vote to leave it. You are welcome to attack the post.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Sharpie]

20. Ha..

[aikoaiko]

28. Lol. Well done jury.

That's gotta hurt.

[ellisonz]

24. Do you really believe this?

[derby378]

29. I know it's painful, but the way I see it...

It may have been Adam Lanza who shot up Sandy Hook, but his mother shares in the responsibility for knowing that her son was a walking powder keg, yet did nothing to curtail his destructive appetites.

America needed the Lanzas to stand before the court and be held accountable for what they did. We all needed that. And if Adam was truly mentally ill, he could have gotten the help he needed while behind bars.

Better yet, what America needed was for Sandy Hook to have never happened at all. But that also rested on Nancy's shoulders.

[ellisonz]

30. I didn't know Nancy Lanza smithed her own assault rifles with high-capacity magazines. n/t

[jmg257]

22. Didn't Nancy buy hers legally? Guess she just wasn't all that responsible, is all.

And now she's dead. Along with 26 innocent people.

Poor gun freak will never knew how big she fucked up.

[Rhiannon12866]

21. Done!

What do you think?
(Note: This is an unscientific poll.)

Should Connecticut gun owners be allowed to keep high-capacity magazines they already own if such magazines are banned?

Yes. It's unfair to punish responsible gun owners for a sick killer's madness by banning products that gun owners bought legally. (378 responses)
81%


No. Such magazines are common in rampage killings. They're too lethal and they pose too great a risk to human targets. (44 responses)
9%


Yes. It would be too difficult to get owners to give up magazines they already possess. This compromise is a way forward. (23 responses)
5%


No. Smaller magazines means reduced firepower, which is the worthy intent of the legislation. (19 responses)
4%


464 total responses

(Results not scientific)

[ellisonz]

23. Done.

[SoCalDem]

27. Total waste of time & energy

Right wing trolls have special programs to tweak meaningless online polls