Good numbers

[Monkeyman]

Here's a recent Zogby poll:

"Zogby/O'Leary asked voters:

"Currently, 39 states have laws that allow residents to carry firearms to protect themselves, only if they pass a background check and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Most of those states also require applicants to have firearms safety training. Do you support or oppose this law?"

An overwhelming majority of Americans (83 percent) support concealed-carry laws, while only 11 percent oppose them. A majority of Independent voters (86 percent), Democrats (80 percent), young voters age 18-29 (83 percent), Hispanic voters (80 percent), and those who voted for President Obama (80 percent) support the right to carry a firearm. "

I call that good news! And perhaps a tad surprising. . .

Read More

 

[fingolfen]

Here's a recent Zogby poll:

"Zogby/O'Leary asked voters:

"Currently, 39 states have laws that allow residents to carry firearms to protect themselves, only if they pass a background check and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Most of those states also require applicants to have firearms safety training. Do you support or oppose this law?"

An overwhelming majority of Americans (83 percent) support concealed-carry laws, while only 11 percent oppose them. A majority of Independent voters (86 percent), Democrats (80 percent), young voters age 18-29 (83 percent), Hispanic voters (80 percent), and those who voted for President Obama (80 percent) support the right to carry a firearm. "

I call that good news! And perhaps a tad surprising. . .

Blogged that one this morning - great stuff...

 

[CEF1959]

Here's a recent Zogby poll:

"Zogby/O'Leary asked voters:

"Currently, 39 states have laws that allow residents to carry firearms to protect themselves, only if they pass a background check and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Most of those states also require applicants to have firearms safety training. Do you support or oppose this law?"

An overwhelming majority of Americans (83 percent) support concealed-carry laws, while only 11 percent oppose them. A majority of Independent voters (86 percent), Democrats (80 percent), young voters age 18-29 (83 percent), Hispanic voters (80 percent), and those who voted for President Obama (80 percent) support the right to carry a firearm. "

I call that good news! And perhaps a tad surprising. . .

Well, I hope people support concealed carry. But that poll has me scratching my head. The question that was supposedly asked didn't mention concealed carry, and the actual responses of those polled aren't shown. Instead, we're only told that the question that didn't mention concealed carry resulted in 83% support for concealed carry. Huh? That 83% number seems kind of high anyway. And look at the question. Were people in support of the "law" being described supporting the right to carry? Or were they supportinjg the requirement of firearm safety training before being allowed to carry? Or maybe the requirement of a background check? Polling is a science, and framing the question right is critically important to the validity of results.

O'Leary also ran a poll asking people if they would support a judge who opposes the Second Amendment. Most said no. His conclusion: Most people oppose Sotomajor. See the problem?

I'm always a little suspicious of how people can manipulate polls. And given that this one was conducted by a guy who wrote "The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama's War on American Values," I'm kind of sceptical about bias, especially given the above.

 

[fingolfen]

Well, I hope people support concealed carry. But that poll has me scratching my head. The question that was supposedly asked didn't mention concealed carry, and the actual responses of those polled aren't shown. Instead, we're only told that the question that didn't mention concealed carry resulted in 83% support for concealed carry. Huh? That 83% number seems kind of high anyway. And look at the question. Were people in support of the "law" being described supporting the right to carry? Or were they supportinjg the requirement of firearm safety training before being allowed to carry? Or maybe the requirement of a background check? Polling is a science, and framing the question right is critically important to the validity of results.

O'Leary also ran a poll asking people if they would support a judge who opposes the Second Amendment. Most said no. His conclusion: Most people oppose Sotomajor. See the problem?

I'm always a little suspicious of how people can manipulate polls. And given that this one was conducted by a guy who wrote "The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama's War on American Values," I'm kind of sceptical about bias, especially given the above.

Actually the question asked was:

"Would you support or oppose a U.S. Senator who voted to confirm a Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court who does not believe in the right to keep and bear arms and the right to self-defense?"

and on carrying firearms the question was:

"Currently, 39 states have laws that allow residents to carry firearms to protect themselves, only if they pass a background check and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Most of those states also require applicants to have firearms safety training. Do you support or oppose this law?"

It doesn't mention concealed... which is a potential flaw, but the other question is pretty straightforward.

 

[Jamie6.5]

I'm always a little suspicious of how people can manipulate polls. And given that this one was conducted by a guy who wrote "The Audacity of Deceit: Barack Obama's War on American Values," I'm kind of sceptical about bias, especially given the above.

Did you read The Audacity of Deceit? Or are you judging the book by it's cover?

 

[swoop]

2010 could turn out to be a very interesting year.

 

[CEF1959]

Did you read The Audacity of Deceit? Or are you judging the book by it's cover?

Probably a great book. I'd like to read it. I wasn't disparaging the book. Just making the point that if you write books like that, it's tough to claim objectivity in your polling.

 

[fingolfen]

Probably a great book. I'd like to read it. I wasn't disparaging the book. Just making the point that if you write books like that, it's tough to claim objectivity in your polling.

Playing Devil's Advocate here - using that logic the Tribune broadcasting network can't ask an objective poll on the subject of firearms as they've outright called for the repeal of the Second Amendment in their editorial pages...

The problem we have today isn't that people have biases or opinions, but rather that they're not cultivating a sense of professional detachment and separation in many cases. It's a sad state when individuals can't take the two steps back to be objective even when they have a strongly felt opinion.

I don't deny that it is an issue, but the core of any professional work in polling or statistics requires individuals to be objective and neutral in the creation of polls, models, and analysis. A strong opinion shouldn't be an automatic pass for the opposite side, though it has come to be...