Less Support from Urban Areas for Gun Control?

These polling results would seem to go against conventional wisdom that support for gun control in urban areas is a fore drawn conclusion. They’ve been losing ground even there since Newtown:

“Demographically speaking, the drop in support for stricter gun laws is mostly based on where people live, with a 10-point decline in the Midwest and a 15-point drop in urban areas having a lot to do with the overall decline nationally,” CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said.

“Two-thirds of people who live in big cities supported stricter gun control laws in the weeks following Newtown; now that figure is down to a bare majority. And while support for new gun laws is down in all regions of the country, it has fallen further in the Midwest,” Holland added.

The poll indicates that majorities in the Northeast and the West still favor stricter gun control, but majorities in the South and Midwest now oppose it.

That’s very interesting that support has fallen even for urban dwellers, but it’s also not surprising that urban dwellers are fluctuating more than non-urban dwellers, since most of them probably don’t have a dog in the fight from their point of view. It’s also interesting that the places with the most strict gun laws have the largest amount of people who want them to be more strict.

I attribute the majorities in the Northeast and West (let’s not mince words here, that’s California and the few other urban centers Californians have moved to and ruined) who still support gun control to be a result of those areas having largely succeeded in destroying civilian gun ownership, and destroying the gun culture. What makes people go back and forth is knowing people who shoot, talking to people who shoot, and generally having some exposure to the culture. That’s why I keep stressing the idea that we can’t just write off other states because it’s not our state. For approximately 1/3rd of America, population wise, we’ve lost. We can never regain it without the assistance of the federal courts. Once that number hits 1/2, and probably sooner, the game will be over for us.

14 thoughts on “Less Support from Urban Areas for Gun Control?”

  1. Pretty much everybody on the waitstaff at my local trendy urban hipster pub is a shooter.

    1. Shift in shooter demographics like that probably give the antis fits.

      Which is why a big thing of gun control is to raise the barriers for new shooters.

      I used to live in Buffalo and there was maybe one shooter at my old local trendy urban hipster pub. And that’s because you had to go though a painful permit process, which included morality references, to even *own* a handgun.

      NY is also special in that they don’t accept any other state’s carry permit, and you need an accepted carry permit to even posses a handgun. So no out of stater’s coming in to show off their Blastomatics at the range.

      Though interestingly, Buffalo has been getting much more willing to issue permits and is getting some growth in carry culture. Which is butting up against SAFE.

  2. I still think the biggest deal is legalized CCW, and that’s what we need to focus on. I know back when I was an apathetic gun owner who didn’t watch gun politics and accepted the AWB as inevitable a big part of my apathy was that I didn’t see a personal value to gun ownership for self defense.

    When I saw bumper stickers that said “when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns” I just shrugged because outside my house — where I felt the most vulnerable — only criminals had guns anyway. Because if you had a gun readily available you were automatically a criminal.

    But shall-issue CCW was big deal to me as suddenly owning a gun was a major advantage that I could take with me. And with the numbers of civilian CCW holders already in place I think we’ve pretty much ended the debate on outlawing handguns or ending carry in shall-issue states because politicians are loathe to take something away from somebody they’ve become used to. 10 million voters is too many people to get fired up over a single issue.

    I still think that one reason the Dems suddenly got into gun control is that we were getting close to a tipping point on the CCW issue and getting nationwide reciprocity in some fashion, and they know that will pretty much end the debate. Can you imagine any of the Eastern and California Democratic leadership, Schumer and company, being forced to accept legal CCW for all the unprivileged peons they consider themselves the intellectual rulers of?

    Our success is what brought this new anti-gun surge down upon us, and we’ll either beat it or lose a lot of ground. Although we’ve still got status-quo at the Federal level, we’ve lost here in Colorado and if the Dem party stays committed to anti-gun laws as a party without getting punished … well … that’s really bad for the future. As you’ve said many times we can’t rely on one party that will quickly take us for granted because we have no one else to turn to.

    1. Shall Issue CCW also allows for the Gun Culture 2.0 idea of “I have this gun for self defense.”

      That cuts to the whick of ideas like “Guns are designed to kill!” by going “Yeah… that’s why I carry it.”

      As for the effects of Shall Issue on Anti-Gun bastions just look at Illinois. Which also ties into Sebasian’s point about Federal courts.

      Shall Issue also brings up big ways to refute the idea of “We can’t have any commoner being armed! They’ll be shootouts in parking lots.” Heck there were movies made in the 80’s (I think) about towns going Shall Issue and the resulting bloodbath.

      And as pointed out, Shall Issue forms a block of voters. It’s interesting that in the US handguns and the carrying of handguns are less of a target than rifles.

  3. If Urban Area’s are mostly Democrat, and there is a tread of lowered support for gun control in said area’s, question is, will they be there when it’s required for the rubber to meet the road? My money says no.

    1. That is one of the barriers I allude to below. The urban voter is reliably Democrat. They are generally not going to GOP.

      Let’s dismiss fantasy talk of third parties. The only real challenge is a primary challenge. That is the one I think they (pols) are afraid of.

      Problem is getting (generally) reliably GOP gun voters to talk to reliably Dem voters and get them to vote for a Dem who just so happens to be cool with guns. On one side the GOP wonk generally won’t talk anyone into voting for higher taxes and liberal causes, even if there are no other choices. It’s distasteful to them. On the other hand, the reliable Dem won’t believe anything said by the (generally reliable) GOP activist.

      The reason this is taking so long is we need to build the ranks of urban Dem gun activists. They are there, they are devoted and they are dedicated. We just have not made an effort in growing their ranks nationally. Which is why everyone here needs to support smart state groups who are doing this work now.

  4. I had inner city (Baltimore) Dems tell me last state session that they would have no choice but to vote with the governor on gun control but that, “you need to get into my district and start taking names, because my people really want the guns.”

    But until we ‘collect’ the members, they don’t exist.

    Harder than it sounds, I will tell you. The barriers are real but falling.

  5. This is why I and some others are pushing hard in the urban areas for Appleseed programs. That’s where the people are and opportunities are beginning to present themselves.

    1. Could we have some more detail about Appleseed? I hear about the program and see signs for it at my LGS but wonder what they do. It sounds like a good program. Who funds it and who typically runs it?

      1. We do fundamentals of rifle marksmanship plus Revolutionary war history. That’s it in a nutshell. We’re a non-profit run by volunteers.

    2. I’ve never really been a huge fan of the Appleseed regimen for new shooters. Maybe that’s just because it doesn’t look very fun to me, and I’m already someone who likes shooting. I’d much rather learn my way around a pistol than learn how to use a sling if I’m an urban dweller. I tend to think practical shooting with a pistol is a better way to bring in Urban newbs.

      1. We get a wide range of experience levels, certainly. I learned pistol first, myself.

        Obviously I’m for anything that brings new shooters into the fold. Appleseed isn’t competing with the pistol programs – in fact, we tend to work fairly well together.

  6. Not all, but some, Appleseed proponents put off a “true believer”/Founding Fathers/uber-patriot vibe that either immediately resonates with the listener or it doesn’t.

    I liken it in some ways to Crossfit, nothing wrong with it per se but, like Sebastian, I don’t see it as necessarily the best intro for the newbie.

    Particularly the new urban shooter, given the lack of rifle ranges or other use for a .22 rifle in three-position dress for urban dwellers.

Comments are closed.