CBS News/ October 28, 2011, 8:01 AM

Poll: Most oppose assault weapon ban

A new poll indicates that more and more people now have guns in their homes, and that America's attitude towards gun-control may be shifting.

According to a new Gallup poll, 47 percent of Americans report having a gun on their property, up from 41 percent a year ago.

It's the highest number Gallup has recorded since 1993.

The poll also found that 53 percent of Americans oppose a ban on assault rifles and semiautomatic guns - the first time more have opposed than supported a ban.

It's difficult to monitor gun ownership in this country, and the latest increase in self-reported gun ownership could reflect more of a change in Americans' comfort with stating publicly that they have a gun, than in a real increase in gun ownership.

Self-Reported Gun Ownership in U.S. Is Highest Since 1993

Even after Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was seriously wounded earlier this year in an Tucson shooting rampage, the cries for tougher gun laws have quieted on Capitol Hill.

CBS News special section: Tragedy in Tucson

The 10-year assault weapons ban signed by President Clinton expired in 2004. Polls like this one only reinforce the growing sense of reluctance among Democrats to, once again, take the issue on.

More recent legislation proposed on Capitol Hill focused mostly on loosening already existing gun laws.

President Obama has said little about the subject publicly, frustrating gun violence prevention advocates like Colin Goddard, who was shot four times during the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre.

"That morning changed my whole perspective on this country, my community," Goddard told CBS News correspondent Whit Johnson.

He said the words "gun control" have become a political taboo, and a distraction from much-needed reforms.

"It took me nearly losing my life to realize that we don't register guns, we don't license gun owners, we don't even do background checks on everybody," Goddard said.

But the number of firearm-related homicides in the U.S. has dropped dramatically, from more than 18,000 in 1993, to fewer than 9,000 in 2010 - numbers the NRA is quick to point out.

"Those rates are the lowest record in 43 years while gun ownership is at an all time high," Chris Cox, chief lobbyist and principal political strategist for the National Rifle Association, told CBS News. "It really destroys the arguments from the gun control community that more guns means more crime."

FBI: Violent crimes fall for 4th year in row

But what remains to be seen is how the debate will be shaped going forward by new gun owners like Katie Barbour

At a shooting range in Virginia, Barbour fired a gun for just the second time.

"I was never around guns my whole entire life," she told Johnson.

Katie went to the range with her boyfriend two weeks ago. Now they're handgun owners.

"I don't really think I am comfortable with carrying a gun around 24/7 strapped to my side yet, but I feel comfortable in a place like this," Barbour said.

218 Comments Add a Comment

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
JosephCampbell21 says:: Dagnumit, by the time I finish registering, I forgot what was so important to say.; reply

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
impactors says:: I'd like to remind the Chief Justices of the Supreme Court. They are not there to re-interpet the Constitution. In order to move forward their own idealogical beliefs. Or, the beliefs of the seated administration. They are there, to enforce the Constitution, as it is written. Their personal beliefs should have no bearing what so ever, on the explicit meaning of the Document. As the years have passed. The Supreme Court has become more and more, the political lackies of Washington administrations. Time and time again. The Supreme Court has handed down decisions totally contrary to the written intent of the Constitution.; reply

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
impactors says:: Every day, legislation is being passed into law. Laws that are now more than ever. Rapidly moving government farther and farther away from our Constitution. Taking with it, our individual rights, and freedom. Both of which used to be guaranteed under that all important Founding Document. I'd like to remind everyone out there. That the Second Amendment was not included in our Constitution. So every American who wished. Could go hunting on a bright, sunny, Saturday morning. Our Founding Fathers, knowing full well the habits and desires of man. Realized that there would come a day. When Americans would have to confront their tryanical government. This would never have to occur. If the people we elect to represent the best interests of the voting majority. Had not turned their backs on our Constitution. Unfortunate, they have. The words of our current President, Barak Obama. I believe tell exactly the beliefs of the majority of those we've elected for years now. His words, not mine. "The Constitution is only words." The reason our Second Amendment rights are being attacked, is quite simple. One of the first orders of business to be carried out by all Socialist dictators. Is the confiscation of "ALL" privately owned firearms. Mussolini, Hitler, Castro. These are but a small number of those who have showed us what lay ahead for us under Socialism. America has been headed toward Socialistic rule for decades now. But in order to guarantee the future of any dictatorship. Whether we're referring to communism, socialism, or marxism. The people must be disarmed, and those who resist must be either re-educated, or killed. Key individuals in the American Socialist movement. Stated that somewhere in the neighborhood of twenty five million Americans would have to be eliminated. In order for Socialism to be successful. THINK ABOUT IT!! And remember, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.; reply

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
747CPTN says:: Re: The IGNORANUS claiming there's no "Need" for assault weapons a civilized nation.

Hellloooo earth to IGNORANUS: The last time I checked the Constitution, I found no mention of a Bill of "Needs". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's still called The Bill of "RIGHTS". But that aside, & again addressing the above ignorant comment: Do I "Need" an "assault rifle"? Note: I own several Real Assault weapons, having the required Fed Class 3 permits. Hopefully, that answer, (in my lifetime), will be NO. But like any other form of "insurance policy", better have it & not need it than need it & not have it. In the mean time, they're LOTS of fun to shoot & a much better investment than the stock market. Cant say that about my other insurance policies.; reply

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
Woodpiggie1 says:: Now if the urban centered, liberal Democrat biased "lame stream" media would only start reporting gun issues in a fair and balanced way, we would see gun owners getting the appreciation and respect they deserve.; reply

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
Woodpiggie1 says:: Now if the urban centered, liberal Democrat biased "lame stream" media would only start reporting gun issues in a fair and balanced way, we would see gun owners getting the appreciation and respect they deserve.; reply

linkicon reporticon emailicon

samXXkiley says:

coucou,
""""A new poll indicates that more and more people now have guns in their homes""""
================
this explains the crime rate constantly increasing,
possession of weapons at home is a danger to the family (adults and especially children) is dangerous
for the whole society, the tragedies associated with possession weapons, have increased
"au revoir"


ogoodwin replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; Please check the FBI reports on crime rates. Overall and violent crime has been dropping for years.


mohillbilly1965 replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; Didn't you read the FBI stats,firearm related homicides are down from 18,000 to 9,000 in the last 7 yrs.,get your fact's straight!

: linkicon reporticon emailicon
Foctris says:: finkfurst4 better to leave us wondering than prove yourself to be a fool by opening your mouth to show us graphic evidence of your foolishness; reply

linkicon reporticon emailicon

fedup12 says:

I think these weapons may become real handy in the near future.

Let us keep them. We are being invaded from the south. Crime is going up because more and more people are poor and hungry.

We will need them to protect ourselves.


americalvet replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; People like you are exactly what we don't need to get through our problems. We can't be a great country with small minded, fearful people like you. Take the couch down from in front of the door, forget about guns, try using your head, it really won't explode!

linkicon reporticon emailicon

p_syrus says:

Ban them. There is no justifiable reasons for citizens in a civil society to possess high tech weaponry with the extended firepower available from modern technology. One might as well seek to justify an individual right to possess Weapons of Mass Destruction as constitutionally guaranteed under the 2nd amendment. It is not in the best interest of civil society to have a society so armed.


LarryEArnold replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; "There is no justifiable reasons for citizens in a civil society to possess high tech weaponry with the extended firepower available from modern technology."

The semiauto and full-auto actions were invented in the 1890s. Your "modern technology" argument is so 19th century.

Given the falling crime rate there's no ustifiable reason to ban them.


SteeleFan52 replies:: linkicon reporticon emailicon; Hmm with DNA testing, there's no justifiable reason for a trial by jury.. by that logic. And in a democracy, we don't really need the right to assemble either, right?

Here's the news flash, my "I know what's best for you!" friend, the 2nd Amendment exists so that I DON'T HAVE TO JUSTIFY JACK SQUAT to you. And quite frankly, that "in the best interest of civil society" was exactly the sort of goal that that Austrian fellow sought in the 1930's. Perhaps you aught to justify why YOUR opinion of the "best" interest of society is somehow "more equal" than mine? I'd love another good laugh.