"75% of NRA members support universal background checks!"

[OF&U]

We keep hearing BS like this in the national propaganda ...er, media... outlets but they never say where those alleged facts come from. I wanted to track this one down just for my own information so a bit of investigation leads to

https://www.americanprogress.org/pre...ew-poll-finds/

with a very telling tidbit right here:

The Public Policy Polling poll, conducted on behalf of MoveOn.org Civic Action and the Center for American Progress, surveyed 816 gun owners on November 11 and November 12 with a margin of error of +/- 3.4 percent.

The poll only lists 816 responses, with 24% claiming NRA membership and 72% of those supporting background checks. So the real truth is they found about 140 people to give them the answer they wanted. The survey itself (https://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-...s-11.17.15.pdf) is very suspect. The questions were obviously crafted as a hit piece on the NRA. It claims to be a "National Survey" but they never say where or how the participants were chosen. It also says that 100% of the respondents own guns, which tells me they cherry-picked the results, their 816 was out of how many total that they contacted? And how many gun owners had to be weeded out before they could cook up their >70% number? Did they even actually talk to anybody, or did they just make up the whole thing?

When the NRA actually polled their members, it came out to more like 5% supporting universal background checks, more details here: https://www.gunowners.org/04052013congress.htm so, as I'm sure we all already knew, the media will publish anything Bloomturd/Soros are willing to pay for. ACCEPT NOTHING -- VERIFY EVERYTHING!

[dkf]

Considering the NRA members I have talked with I am sure the number in support of universal background checks is pretty high if an accurate poll is taken. So many people seem to join the NRA just so they can say they are members (doing their part even though NRA member is all they do) but are in reality what we would call Fudds.

[littlefitz]

Nobody asked me.

[Didnotcomply89]

I'm a member of the National Rifle Association for the next 5 years, been a member since 2011 and I vehemently oppose the checks because I have been educated in what they are- AND done my own critical thinking on them.

[c45man]

Polled 800 and some gun owners that happened to be registered Democrats that just bought their first gun a week ago. By the way, how many of the respondents had any idea as to the definition of "universal" background checks? I am certain that those anti gun zealots with their false narrative revealed exactly what the aforementioned actually entailed.

[Berks_Iraq_Vet]

Fuck them and their Poll.

[JAKIII]

Polled 800 and some gun owners that happened to be registered Democrats that just bought their first gun a week ago.

There's moderate dems who are closet 2a supporters... we need to let them into our tent and not malign them.

[c45man]

There's moderate dems who are closet 2a supporters... we need to let them into our tent and not malign them.

They are already in our tent as 2a supporters, but when the general election comes about they will be there to vote for, in all probability, the skank that declared war on firearm owners even before her announcement to run as president. And there lies the problem, with over 90 million firearm owners in this country, it is obvious that many or most are not one issue voters, otherwise, political hacks like hildey would not be so brazen as to openly "malign" the many gun owners in this country that could potentially vote against her and create a landslide victory for whatever opponent. With all due respect for you JAK, those who own firearms and would vote for a Hillary Clinton should be maligned.

[phillyd2]

Background checks on all gun purchases to keep them out of the hands of criminals makes for a great tv Commerical so I'm not at all surprised. Once again our side defaults to FU retorts so any reasonable alternatives will never even be considered.

[JAKIII]

Once again our side defaults to FU retorts so any reasonable alternatives will never even be considered.

...they don't see the forest for the black and white trees.