Quinnipiac Poll: Americans Want Boots on the Ground against ISIS, Background Checks for Gun Buyers

[cigaretteman]

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-...y-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2300

* EVEN REPUBLICANS SUPPORT BACKGROUND CHECKS: The new Quinnipiac Poll finds overwhelming support for requiring background checks on all gun purchases: 93 percent of Americans back this, including 88 percent of Republicans.

Meanwhile, Americans support “stricter gun laws” by 52-45. But 77 percent of Republicans oppose it. Perhaps that means that even Republicans don’t think a sensible reform like background checks constitutes “stricter gun laws”?

* AMERICANS WANT BOOTS ON GROUND AGAINST ISIS: Also from the new Quinnipiac poll: Americans support sending in ground troops to fight ISIS by 54-38. Republicans support it by 68-23. Only Democrats oppose it, by 51-41, but even among Democrats, the support is surprisingly high.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-bernie-sanders-goes-hard-at-hillary-clinton/

 

[The Tradition]

All purchases? So, if I want to buy a shotgun from my neighbor, I have to ride into town and get a background check first?

 

[86Hawkeye]

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-...y-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2300

* EVEN REPUBLICANS SUPPORT BACKGROUND CHECKS: The new Quinnipiac Poll finds overwhelming support for requiring background checks on all gun purchases: 93 percent of Americans back this, including 88 percent of Republicans.

Meanwhile, Americans support “stricter gun laws” by 52-45. But 77 percent of Republicans oppose it. Perhaps that means that even Republicans don’t think a sensible reform like background checks constitutes “stricter gun laws”?

* AMERICANS WANT BOOTS ON GROUND AGAINST ISIS: Also from the new Quinnipiac poll: Americans support sending in ground troops to fight ISIS by 54-38. Republicans support it by 68-23. Only Democrats oppose it, by 51-41, but even among Democrats, the support is surprisingly high.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-bernie-sanders-goes-hard-at-hillary-clinton/

I'm not surprised by either result.

I'm a republican and I agree with the majorities on both questions.

 

[86Hawkeye]

All purchases? So, if I want to buy a shotgun from my neighbor, I have to ride into town and get a background check first?

Theoretically, yes.

How such a requirement can practically be enforced in the private transaction is the question.

 

[tarheelbybirth]

* AMERICANS WANT BOOTS ON GROUND AGAINST ISIS: Also from the new Quinnipiac poll: Americans support sending in ground troops to fight ISIS by 54-38. Republicans support it by 68-23. Only Democrats oppose it, by 51-41, but even among Democrats, the support is surprisingly high.
/

Ask them if they support higher taxes to pay for it or if they are ready to put the boots on themselves. Watch support nose-dive.

 

[Vroom_C14]

Theoretically, yes.

How such a requirement can practically be enforced in the private transaction is the question.

This is an opportunity to grow the government - the ATF will expand and have offices throughout the US to where these transactions and checks take place.

I'm okay with a background check for handguns and high capacity weapons.

I am not okay with BotG if we have as flaccid a plan as what Obama has laid out. Either we are in and do this with coalition forces (including Russia if needed) or we stay the f^ck home and take care of home. The latter is my choice.

 

[Titanhawk2]

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-...y-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2300

* EVEN REPUBLICANS SUPPORT BACKGROUND CHECKS: The new Quinnipiac Poll finds overwhelming support for requiring background checks on all gun purchases: 93 percent of Americans back this, including 88 percent of Republicans.

Meanwhile, Americans support “stricter gun laws” by 52-45. But 77 percent of Republicans oppose it. Perhaps that means that even Republicans don’t think a sensible reform like background checks constitutes “stricter gun laws”?

* AMERICANS WANT BOOTS ON GROUND AGAINST ISIS: Also from the new Quinnipiac poll: Americans support sending in ground troops to fight ISIS by 54-38. Republicans support it by 68-23. Only Democrats oppose it, by 51-41, but even among Democrats, the support is surprisingly high.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...-bernie-sanders-goes-hard-at-hillary-clinton/

So does that mean that 93% don't know that there are requirements for background checks in most instances already? Gunshows are an obvious loophole, but this is just another example of a "poll" trying to make news than report on it.

 

[naturalmwa]

I would rather have gun vending machines than go fight ISIS. STFO!

 

[moral_victory]

* AMERICANS WANT BOOTS ON GROUND AGAINST ISIS: Also from the new Quinnipiac poll: Americans support sending in ground troops to fight ISIS by 54-38. Republicans support it by 68-23. Only Democrats oppose it, by 51-41, but even among Democrats, the support is surprisingly high.

Disturbing and disgusting.

 

[Gimmered]

All purchases? So, if I want to buy a shotgun from my neighbor, I have to ride into town and get a background check first?

Not really, there is absolutely no way to track it. If a person wanted to do a face to face sale no one would ever know it.

 

[HawksR1]

Not really, there is absolutely no way to track it. If a person wanted to do a face to face sale no one would ever know it.

Only way would be to criminalize such a sale. Would then have to be willing to enforce if such a transaction is discovered.

 

[Hoosierhawkeye]

Surprised that Americans want boots on the ground against ISIS.

I'm not sure if I do or not. There are a lot of problems with sending our military into the middle east again that we are well aware of. But I feel like the longer ISIS goes while winning or at the very least not losing then the more powerful and popular they become.

So I'm thinking there is a chance we may have to do it anyways and the longer we wait the more it's going to cost us, our allies, and the people that ISIS is oppressing and killing. So we simply can not wait until they over run all of Iraq and Syria forcing hundreds of thousands if not millions to flee and killing everyone in their wake that holds any disagreement with their version of Islam.

I'm not the president so I don't have all the information he does, but if I'm him I'm meeting with the joint chiefs, the secretary of defense, the CIA chief, the national security adviser, the secretary of state, and pretty much anyone else who might have some information to give me, laying it out and coming up with plans for a full scale attack. Then I'm contacting our allies and finding out at what point they might militarily support us.

 

[Joes Place]

So does that mean that 93% don't know that there are requirements for background checks in most instances already? Gunshows are an obvious loophole, but this is just another example of a "poll" trying to make news than report on it.

I have no problems with closing up the loopholes, but the arguments made for 'more background checks' are based on all the past and recent mass shootings. And, from what I am aware, ALL of the weapons used in those instances were legally purchased, and by people who either did, or would have, passed 'background checks'.

Thus, we should not be discounting that background checks/controls are still a good thing, but let's not disillusion ourselves that they would have stopped any of those crimes, nor will they serve to prevent future ones....

 

[Joes Place]

I would rather have gun vending machines than go fight ISIS. STFO!

LOL.....the 'user interface' for those vending machines is already 95% finished!!! Just pull the 'choose weapons' menu from any Call of Duty or HALO game, change the options to actual offerings from gun manfacturers, and 'poof!', your done!!!