This Is Where Catholics, Protestants & the Religious Stand on Gun Control (You Might Be Surprised!)

Hit Counter

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:05am by Billy HallowellBilly Hallowell

This Is Where Religious People Stand on Gun Control Laws

In the days and weeks following the horrific “Batman” movie theatre shooting in Aurora, Colorado, and the Sikh temple tragedy in Wisconsin, gun control has been an issue up for debate and discussion. As the dispute intensifies over how politicians and law enforcement officials should handle firearms regulations, there’s an interesting new poll out that explores what people of faith think about the issue.

The study, conducted by Public Religion Research Institute and Religion News Service (RNS), came up with some fascinating findings. While the nation is divided (and views on firearms are somewhat tough to gauge overall), religious groups have very clear opinions on the matter.

First, let’s look at Americans on the whole. In the wake of these tragedies, 52 percent of the nation is content with the notion of stricter gun laws, compared to 44 percent that is not. But when you start diving into the subgroups, results turn down-right interesting. For example, while 51 percent of whites own guns, only 23 percent of non-whites have them in their possession.

This Is Where Religious People Stand on Gun Control Laws

Photo Credit: Public Religion Research Institute/RNS

But the intrigue doesn’t end there. On the faith front, only 35 percent of white evangelicals support stricter gun laws. That’s starkly different when compared to 62 percent of Catholics and 60 percent of individuals who count themselves unaffiliated to a particular faith.

Black Protestants are even more ardent about strengthening gun control laws. As RNS notes, a 2011 ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 71 percent of this cohort wants to tighten up the laws that are currently on the books. RNS continues, with some of the reasons why these proportions may be playing out:

The Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit priest who called for tighter gun control after the movie theater massacre last month, offered several reasons why U.S. Catholics may be more likely to support it.

“Catholics may congregate more in urban centers and may be more exposed to violent crimes than people in other parts of he country,” said Martin, the author of “The Jesuit Guide to (Almost) Everything.”

“And Catholics might be more sympathetic to government regulation, because the church has always seen legitimate government as one way of expressing the will of the people,” Martin continued. What’s more, he said, “there might be a slightly greater appreciation for the notion of the common good, which is enshrined in Catholic social teaching, in addition to individual rights.”

Certainly, one can argue for gun control as a primary factor in crime reduction, but when asked to select the single most important “thing” that could end mass shootings, there was no consensus. On the whole, 27 percent of Americans (no specific cohort, but the nation as a whole) said that gun control is the most important, 22 percent said that it is increased mental heath screening and 20 percent claimed that placing more emphasis on God and morality is the answer.

This Is Where Religious People Stand on Gun Control Laws

Photo Credit: Public Religion Research Institute/RNS

We’ll allow the Public Religion Research Institute to tell you some of the more fascinating findings among specific subgroups in this portion of the study:

The study was conducted between August 8 and August 12, 2012 among a random sample of 1,006 adults aged 18 and older. The margin of error is +/- 3.5 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence.

You can read the rest of the results here.

·         DogsofWar

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:33am

Here we go again with the same old propaganda, how about if you libs don’t agree with the Constitution of the United States LEAVE the country and LEAVE us gun owners alone. Burgular comes into my house they will meet their maker very soon after walking through the door.

Log in to Reply  

o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:45am

Perhaps you should leave if you don’t want to be part of a “well regulated militia.”


o        Popp40

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:01am

@ Puliuspencilman…perhaps you should read what Thomas Jefferson and our founding fathers said about owning guns.


o        DimmuBorgir

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:30am

Publius, i see you’re back. And still being a douchebag



Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:36am

@ PUBLIUS…you obviously have not studied the context of the amendment you mentioned. If we are going to understand the intent of what was meant by the authors we should consider their own interpretations of what they wrote to arrive at an accurate understanding. The Second Amendment preserves and guarantees an individual right for a collective purpose. That does not transform the right into a “collective right.” The militia clause was a declaration of purpose, and preserving the people’s right to keep and bear arms was the method the framers chose to, in-part, ensure the continuation of a well-regulated militia. Secondly, the bill of rights was to protect individual rights.

Thomas Jefferson said, “No free man shall be debarred the use of arms.”

Patrick Henry said, “The great object is, that every man be armed.”

Richard Henry Lee wrote that, “to preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms.”

Thomas Paine noted, “[A]rms . . . discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property.”

Samuel Adams warned that: “The said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.”

You are just simply in error regarding their intention of the 2nd amendment. Thank you…


o        Toltepeceno

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:36am

PubliusPencilman Failed english did you? Have an english teacher explain to you what that comma means in the 2a.


o        dscheerer

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:44am

After seeing first-hand what the transplanted liberals did to the state of Vermont and the rural areas of NY and Maine, I agree wholeheartedly with DOGSOFWAR. The Constitution is clear. Love it or go away.

What part of “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” do libs not understand? Do the nannies want to ban knives and ice picks, too? How about cars? We all know that cars, with an inexperienced, drunk, and/or angry person behind the wheel, could kill many people.

Nannies just go away!


o        GhostOfJefferson

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:46am

Regulated meant “practiced” back at the time the 2nd Amendment was written, Publius. It makes no sense at all if you use the modern definition of “regulated” in the wording of the 2nd Amendment.

Please, try harder in future posts.


o        hidden_lion

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:50am

“23 percent of non-whites have them in their possession”
Should have said only 23% of non-whites admitted to having them. Allot of non-white purchase their firearms from non FFL holders (aka on the street). I would bet in the coming house to house raid by the government, they will find a much higher percentage of guns owned by non-white.


o        GhostOfJefferson

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:51am

What’s particularly frustrating is how illogical the “masses” can be regarding liberty restriction. If you look at it objectively, the people in the Aurora theatre were there under fully legal disarmament conditions. They simply could not, legally, be armed and be in the theatre. This is the same condition that “gun control” ultimately strives to place us in, as a nation. So how did that legal disarmament work out in Colorado precisely? Did the killer obey the signs? At what point does one‘s mind fracture and start to think that criminal killers give a rat’s petoot about any laws? How does disarming law abiding people help in any situation at all?

And while we’re at it, where in the name of holy Hanna Barbera did he get CS gas grenades anyway, I’ve not seen those for sale in the civilian market (side note question, to be certain)?


o        hidden_lion

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:54am

the militia is every able bodied man in the country. it is the duty over every citizen to have and carry firearms. There were less murders committed in the “wild” west days than today. The more gun control breeds more victims.


o        saranda

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:55am

Here we go with the same old “leave our country” crap. How about we recognize that more than half the country thinks differently about gun ownership than you do? I don’t have an answer but making it harder for those with criminal or emotional issues to get a gun is a good start.

Unfortunately, the founding fathers left room for interpretation and unless that interpretation gap is narrowed, we will have disagreement.


o        samurai2112

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:02am

Militia, those able bodied men willing and able to come to the defense of their town, state and country. Sign me up and pass the full auto M4 just like Switzerland.


o        cessna152

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:09am

Sad as these shootings are, this is what’s so disturbing:
1) Shootings like this average 20-30 deaths per year. sad, but consider the following.
2) Stricter gun laws do NOTHING to stop a criminal and restrict the honest citizen from protecting themselves.
3) The most tragic, when firearms are restricted and regulated (eventually outlawed), an average of 2.5 MILLION people per year die through genocide. Compare that to 30… I think the answer is obvious. Guns SAVE lives.

Look at Mexico and India… guns are illegal, yet they have the HIGHEST murder via firearms in the world.


o        Judeo_Christian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:17am

Pencilneck….The founding fathers defined the “Militia” as being ALL able bodied men. They also needed to supply their own firearms.

How about reading some history moron. Start with “The Founders Second Amendment by Stephen P. Halbrook”. Its not some leftist’s historians version of what the history should be, the author uses direct sources quotes from letters and writings of the founders and people of their time. He lets the founders speak for themselves.

Try doing a little scholarship on your own before opening your yap! Your ignorance is a bother to the rest of us. Try to keep up!


o        apbt55

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:37am

Hey PUBs, militia being any able bodied man, can have the equivolant of any military, so you either are a moron, IQ below a three year old, or have a political agenda to push and want to control every aspect of others lives.



Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:47am

@ SARANDA….It really doesn’t matter what the majority thinks, it’s about what the constitution guarantees. Was the majority for Obamacare? Majority scarcely means anything anymore as we are becoming a “majority” of dumbed down, non-thinking, indoctrinated, sheeple who wouldn’t know how to stand and fight for liberty and morality if their lives depended on it. Too often the downfall of natons can be traced to the error of the majority of the populace, sadly America is walking down the same road of nations before her. History shows us that all of the great nations of the world have never lived much more than 200 years (save Rome), and there has been sequential stages in every case.
The first stage moves from bondage to spiritual faith. The second from spiritual faith to great courage. The third stage moves from great courage to liberty. The fourth stage moves from liberty to abundance. The fifth stage moves from abundance to selfishness. The sixth stage moves from selfishness to complacency. The seventh stage moves from complacency to apathy. The eighth stage moves from apathy to moral decay. The ninth stage moves from moral decay to dependence. And the tenth and last stage moves from dependence to bondage. Where’s America on this progression? We must stand and defend the rights that we possess for those who would trade security for liberty deserve neither. Thank you….


o        Popp40

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:54am

@ Saranda….do you know how easy it is to get a gun illegally? It is quite easy, however, the only thing that more gun laws will do is restrict those who legally purchase them.


o        its_time_to_arrest_our_government

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 11:02am

i dont care about their b/s numbers say i will never give up my guns


o        randy

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 12:04pm

Let’s see…… What I got from this study?

63% of the Tea Party own a gun…. and have yet to see a story of a tea party member going on a shooting spree.

I see all groups are identified except CRIMINALS at 100%


o        EruditeMan

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 12:12pm

Too bad Marxist, Socialist, DummyCrats who’d be best served following your suggestion: “…how about if you libs don’t agree with the Constitution of the United States LEAVE the country and LEAVE us gun owners alone. …” probably can’t read/understand what they read or may not have two or more oxygenated brain cells with which to think We The People’s right to bear arms must protect ourselves FROM the United States Federal and individual State Governments.


o        TH30PH1LUS

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 12:41pm

I’m dissapointed in the Catholic trend AWAY from freedom and towards encroachment on 2nd Ammendment God-given rights on this issue.

STOP with the “victim” mentality already! Arm yourself, get training, carry your weapon, and you won’t feel like a helpless sheep that needs to be penned in.

“The king’s edict granted the Jews in every city the right to assemble and protect themselves; to destroy, kill and annihilate the armed men of any nationality or province who might attack them…” Book of Esther chapter 8


o        black9897

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:09pm

So, 27% are that ignorant. Amazing. If only we could go back to the days where people minded their own business. It’s too bad some people let fear of “guns” consume them. Instead of buying, knowing how to use one and carrying it with you, they choose to cry in fear “more laws!”


o        lawrench

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:55pm

When the Declaration of Independence states “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”, and the Constitution states the 2nd Amendment as “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”. The Founders of this Nation realized that you could not remove oppressive governments unless you allowed the people to keep and bear arms. Imagine for a moment that the gun control supporters are correct and that we can only have firearms from the time period that the Constitution was written. Does that mean that when this country is invaded by a foreign nation that they can use AK-47′s while we are stuck with flint lock rifles? How would we as citizens of the United States of America be able to “throw off such government”? What if the existing government became oppressive to its citizens? We cannot fight back with 18th century weapons against the modern government forces. It is required that the weapons available to the citizens should be equal to the forces that can be used against us. Many Gun Control supporters also will argue that the 2nd Amendment speaks of Militia, not of regular citizens. Keep in mind that Militia as used at the beginning of this Nation was the r


o        lawrench

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:57pm

I have a question for all to think about. Why were we a less dangerous nation before gun control? Look back a 100 years ago, when everyone had a firearm there was less “violence”. Look at the places in this country that has strict gun laws like New York, Chicago, California, and Washington D.C.. Why does those places have high levels of violence with weapons? Criminals will always be able to acquire weapons while law abiding citizens will always be restricted from acquiring firearms. Look at the places that do not restrict firearms as much as the previously stated examples. Violent crime is not as high. Why? Criminals usually are bullies and like bullies they fear people who can stand up to them.



Posted on August 16, 2012 at 2:21pm

Publious, AKA encinom


o        MemphisViking

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 2:22pm

Saranda, where’s the room for interpretation in “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”?


o        lukerw

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 2:45pm

Luke 22:36… now that is Gospel!


o        Judeo_Christian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 2:47pm

TH30PH1LUS I am a Catholic. I am also the former NE Director of the Kansas Rifle Association. Not all of us see things the way the liberally schooled Catholic clergy and religious (Nuns). I too am saddened to see these same people who defend Life every day of the week appear to have so little concern or responsibility for maintaining their own personal safety and that of their families. I’ve said it before but bares saying again…God’s most precious gift to us as physical/spiritual beings is our very existence. If God gives us the Right to self defense, then implicit is the responsibility to protect ourselves and our families. If we do not then we are as sinful as those who abort babies in the womb. It shows a complete lack of gratitude for the gift of our physical life.

I am willing and able to protect myself and my family up to and including the use of deadly force. The leap should not be made however that I seek the opportunity. I would die a happy man should I never need to use my firearm in the defense of myself or my family. I pray for this every day.


o        Edohiguma

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 3:05pm

You realize that the same also applies in Europe?

The Green party in Austria has tried to ban all private guns twice, and luckily has failed. The socialists have tried similar, and also failed. Same all across the EU, leading to utterly retarded anti-gun laws like in the UK, which make zero sense and have done absolutely nothing to lower violence. Or in Germany. Berlin has the murder rate of NY these days.

Globally most violent crime per 100,000 inhabitants is in EU countries with strict anti-gun laws. UK leads there. France is very high, too.

Meanwhile in Austria the number of permits for guns has doubled in the past roughly 20 years, while the number of crimes with guns has dropped by 40%.

And criminals can always get guns. Meanwhile German police tells people: if you get robbed, cooperate with the robber. Don’t defend yourself. It would be something to laugh at if people wouldn’t get killed.


o        phishing4men

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 3:35pm

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:55am
Here we go with the same old “leave our country” crap. I don’t have an answer…….
Then you should just shut up and leave our country!!!


o        old white guy

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 3:46pm

dogs, i agree and pubman, p-ss off.


·         sallyredneck

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:33am

Question: How many of the non-white process illegal non registered firearms!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Log in to Reply  

o        Bum thrower

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:49am

There was a recent incident in Houston, TX., where an illegal alein, shot and killed an individual that was attempting to break into his auto. Where do illegals sign up for their pistols, and CC Permits?

If more ‘lawbiding’ citizens in the minority community would arm themselves, I think a LOT of crime would ‘leave town’ for ‘safer places’ like Chicago.

My daddy said, WAY before the days of conceiled carry, that ‘you’d be a darn sight more civil to someone if you thot he was packing a .45 under his coat.’


o        Topcat

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:58am

@ Sallyredneck
Here are some interesting facts using the 2010 census …
1) 25% of the US population is non white
2) that 25% of the population is responsible for 60% of gun related crime
3) This story says only 23% of those own guns , thats 5.75% of the non white population owns guns
4) So I guess 5.75% of the population is responsible for 60% of the gun related crime in this country.
Something is wrong with the numbers …


o        kryptonite

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:33am

My post was sent to the back, but here are the current stats:
-Blacks are seven times more likely than people of other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit robbery.
-When blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.
-Hispanics commit violent crimes at roughly three times the white rate, and Asians commit violent crimes at about one quarter the white rate.
-The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is black and Hispanic.

“Households” are irrelevant.


·         ICanComment

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:31am

Anyone else cringe when observing the stock photo above the link to this story? He’s about to shoot his foot off.

Log in to Reply  

·         louise

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:28am

Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit says the Lord of hosts.

louiseLog in to Reply  

·         txbigfoot

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:26am

seriously 1,000 people. This is not wroht the tree it was killed for.
Junk science.

txbigfootLog in to Reply  

o        oldduffer

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:07am

900 were from the last Obama rally. 100 were sane and loved their families and country enough to defend it. Those 100 were from the Republican rally and the guy ran out of poll sheets or he wouldv’e had another 9900 more.


·         togjr9

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:19am

Catholic, Conservative & Armed! The only worthy “Gun-Control” is hitting your target. On a serious note, you can get any poll results you want by asking the right people in a room. As for the child molesting remark, really? My friend was shot and killed by a black man, is it justified for me to listen to Biden and “Chain” all them n****** up or judge people on individual merit. Love All, Accept Everyone & Live Well.

togjr9Log in to Reply  

o        2conservative

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:28am

Right on….I don’t really trust any polls because as you say, you can skew results by ‘picking’ respondents or ‘picking’ questions….like when was the last time you beat your wife Harry??’


o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:46am

Out of curiosity TOGGJR9, do you also consider yourself “pro-life”?


o        Gr8ful1jim

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:46am

Ditto for me…Catholic, conservative, and armed. And yes, I am Pro-life.


o        Judeo_Christian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:03am

Pencilneck…I am Catholic, Pro life and obviously very conservative. There is no conflict here. God’s greatest gift to us is our life. It is our responsibility to protect His gift with zeal. Whether the innocent life of the person is in the womb or outside of the womb, we are to protect it. Once that a person attempts to harm me or my family, they are no longer innocent and I have the God given right to protect myself, up to and including taking of the assailant’s life if that is necessary.

I feel for your family. You’d rather watch them die or be raped. How sad for you.


o        GhostOfJefferson

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 11:17am


You’re making a false analogy. Being pro life doesn’t mean that you believe that you do not have a right to protect yourself against aggressive sociopaths. Where do you people even conceive of such an absurdity?


o        togjr9

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:09pm

Pro-Life of course. Unborn children have never done anything that I would have to protect myself from them. Being a Conservative and Catholic I feel all life is sacred, but also feel our government has no say in any of these matters. Don’t get excited yet, I also feel my tax & charity dollars shouldn’t goto any organization that engages in this practice. I can control where my charitable contributions go ,I shouldn’t have to pay taxes to a government that makes these moral decisions for me (Go build a bridge or a road). If someone chooses to KILL an unborn child for no other reason than it’s an unwanted pregnancy then it is not for me to judge, GOD will handle that one. On the other hand, if someone chooses to harm my loved ones for any reason, I will be judge, jury and executioner. Never mistake Pro-Life for Pro-Lamb, the strong should always protect those who can’t protect themselves.


o        bluegrandma52

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:26pm

@Conservative2. the quote is “Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer yes or no.” Groucho Marx. Wickedly funny guy.


o        Balrog28

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:52pm

Amen brother – Amen!
Do you actually use your brain – or do you just see two or three words and try to connect them in some way that only makes sense in your head? It seems interesting that you respond to most all topics on this site, but yet most of your posts are simply one-liners and/or are pretty much always inflammatory remarks. But maybe you’re just a troll…


·         Displacedsoutherner

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:12am

So if you’re a burglar head into a white liberal neighborhood, a suburb with lots of Toyota Prius’s in driveways would do nicely; there you don‘t need to worry about getting shot while practicing your trade and you’ll have at least 20 minutes to work before the police arrive. No need to be armed because your victims won’t be.

Find a fence who likes to move Apple products and you’re all set.

Log in to Reply  

o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:47am

And yet, it’s funny how exactly these liberal neighborhoods and even liberal cities have seen the greatest decrease in crime over the last decade.


o        Popp40

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:04am

Like those liberal cities Chicago, New York, and Detroit…yea they have seen a decrease in crimes and murders…


o        objectivetruth

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:15am

Actually you are wrong.Most cities that have seen a decrease in crime were conservative or independant.There has also been a reduction of people in this country.In some cases certain individuals have been jailed.That alone in some medium and small towns is enough to drop the gun related crime to a minimum or even halt it totally[small town].
Last but not least by a longshot.Cities finally stopped prosecuting the non crime of self defense.Remember those stastics were previously incorporated even though self defense isn’t a crime.
Please stop cherry picking stats in order to make your argument.


o        Judeo_Christian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:36am

Pencilneck….In every state where Concealed Carry Laws went into effect, violent crimes went down dramatically. These are the results from the FBI…If you have a problem with the results, you can talk to them. At least I supply the source for the facts that I post. How about you.

That violent crimes went down in your neighborhood….you can thank me. Come on… I know you want to do it. Say thank you!!!


o        ThatsJustCrazyTalk

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 11:21am

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:47am

“And yet, it’s funny how exactly these liberal neighborhoods and even liberal cities have seen the greatest decrease in crime over the last decade.”

Actual FACTS which godless Leftists are so allergic to (source

The 10 most liberal cities in the US:

- Detroit, Michigan – 24 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Gary, Indiana – 15 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Washington, DC – 13 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Oakland, California – 16 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Newark, New Jersey – 11 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Flint, Michigan – 24 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Cleveland, Ohio – 14 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Hartford, Connecticut – 13 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Baltimore, Maryland – 15 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- New Haven, Connecticut – 15 violent crimes/1,000 residents

The 10 most conservative cities in the US:

- Orange, California – 1 violent crime/1,000 residents
- Provo, Utah – 2 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Plano, Texas – 2 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Mesa, Arizona – 4 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Arlington, Texas – 5 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Peoria, Arizona – 2 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Escondido, California – 4 violent crimes/1,000 residents
- Gilbert, Arizona – 1 violent crime/1,000 residents
- Abilene, Texas – 5 vi


·         watashbuddyfriend

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:09am

Fo SURE, I do not agree with the information presented in the chart! Very much misleading???????????

Log in to Reply  

·         Larryjr

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:02am

3 things regarding this story – I didn’t see any mention of education. If we actually educated people (in the media, in schools, etc) regarding gun crimes this poll would be a mute point because criminals use guns illegally. Therefore, stricter gun laws will never stop CRIMINALS from committing crimes. Secondly, our morals have and our declining. Therefore, absolutely putting an emphasis on God and morality will help, not only lower gun crime, but all crime in general. Thirdly, when law abiding citizens anywhere are armed, it will always lower crime. Armed law abiding citizens is a huge determent to criminals. If you were a criminal planning a crime and you had a choice of 2 spots to commit the crime; 1 was full of armed citizens and 1 was full of unarmed citizens, which location would you choose? Well I don’t need to explain anymore.

Log in to Reply  

o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:51am

Haha. I love how you folks always drone on and on about “law abiding citizens,” as if this was something tattooed on certain people’s foreheads.

For quite a few of the recent massacres, the perpetrator was “law abiding” up to when they started shooting. Everybody starts out law abiding.


o        jcldwl

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:56am

You are right on point. I hate when I can‘t avoid entering a location that advertises they don’t want you bringing your concealed carry in. Needless to say I pay no heed to their signs because I know those are very unsafe places to be and I stay in them for as little time as possible. I don’t eat at any restaurants that post those signs. I don’t leave my house unarmed. I also always assume the businesses that post the signs are owned by whacko liberals anyway so I don’t really care to give them my business as it is.


o        Judeo_Christian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:31am

Pencilneck…I guess I need to get my guns worked on. If all they do is kill people, mine must be broke. They haven’t shot or killed anyone since I bought them. Some of them I bought 30 years ago. How could I have let this go so long without letting my guns fulfill their full potential?

Silly me, I guess I thought it was my respect for God’s law, other people, and for the laws of the land that I haven’t shot or killed anyone.



Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:37am

@ PUBLIUS….Your false assertion that “shooters” start out law abiding is a fallacious statement because you assume that their criminal behavior would be averted if they were not able to legally obtain friearms. That is quite an illogical assumption since the person obviously demonstrates the will and volition to break more serious laws then logically it would be assumed they would have no problem breaking a more minor law regarding gun ownership. That would be like stating the bank robber was law abiding right up until the time he decided to rob the bank, therefore if we just had strictor gun control laws the bank robbery would have never happened. I hardly think if he was intent on robbing a bank that he would have trouble getting a gun illegal because he would be breaking gun ownership laws. Not logical at all my friend. Thank you….


o        bluegrandma52

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 1:33pm

Publius, you are a master at pointing out the obvious….and then drawing the wrong conclusions. There hasn‘t been an infant yet who’s been arrested for anything. But when seemingly “law abiding” persons decide to cross the line, it is better for the ones who have decided to continue being law abiding to be able to protect themselves from the wolves who have “come out” about their lawlessness. Most evil is under the radar, until it isn’t.


·         bikerdogred1

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:01am

Some one please ask Biden how many blacks live near his home.

Log in to Reply  

·         lel2007

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:00am

Ever since Cain bashed Abel’s head in with a rock man has never failed to find tools of death and destruction. Timothy McVeigh chose fuel oil and fertilizer, Bill Ayers (obama’s BFF) and his Weathermen gang preferred to stuff pipes with explosives, airplanes were the preferred tool some years back, bottles filled with flammable liquid are ever popular, mixing chlorine and bleach makes poison gas, stones are still thrown today though knives are more personal, and beating people with bare fists and shoe is becoming popular again. People intent on death and destruction will find an available tool for the task. ( I think I’d prefer to be shot rather than have my throat slit with a knife, but that’s a personal choice).

lel2007Log in to Reply  

o        Larryjr

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:06am

Right on, right on, right on. But keep in mind you‘re making sense so a lot of people won’t understand…


o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:53am

Yes, but an assault rifle kills a lot more people a lot faster. Are you suggesting that there is no difference between someone with a gun and someone throwing a rock?


o        Judeo_Christian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:02am

Pencilneck…drunks kill people with their cars. Using your logic, when are you going to give up your car? Fast cars are capable of killing people people faster… Let’s go after them first!



o        objectivetruth

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:26am

Yes there is a big difference.Being stoned to death is slow torturous and barbaric,In the hands of someone well trained, a bullet is swift and effecient.Guns don’t kill people. People kill People.Guns knives and a whole assortment of tools don’t by themselves do one damn thing.Ironically or not all those who have ever wished to disarm the American public [and most definitely me personally]have an evil intent and wish to commit very barbaric crimes against them.They didn’t want the american public to be able to defend themselves.In this is included liberals criminals and EOS.So tell me which camp are you in?


o        lel2007

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:10am

The Colorado murderer could have planted explosive and set fires at the exists. I suspect he got more gratification pulling the trigger on individuals. I think his act was one of rage, not a mission to efficiently kill as many as possible. Regardless, were there no guns available he would have found a way to raise hell.


o        lel2007

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:24am

Pretend for a moment firearms are non-existent. Does anyone suppose everything would be sunshine and bluebirds?
The New Black Panthers : “We give them 24 hours in South Africa to get out of town by sundown. I say, if they don’t get out of town, we kill the men, we kill the women, we kill the children, we kill the babies, we kill the blind, we kill the cripple, we kill the crazy, we kill the fa**ots, we kill the lesbians, I say god dammit we kill them all. If they are white kill ‘em all.”
Lucky for us Americans we have the kinder gentler Black Panthers.


o        GhostOfJefferson

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:56am


Oh my, you really are uneducated on firearms aren’t you?

Did you know, for example, that the Colorado madman’s “assault weapon” (which he did not have, assault weapons are select fire) jammed after 2 shots. That’s right, 2 shots. He murdered those folks with a shotgun. A good old fashioned “grandpa owned one” shotgun.

Just a quick note, when you spew laughable terms such as “assault weapon” when you actually mean “semi-automatic firearm”, to a group of ardent gun owners, you make yourself out immediately to be both a fool and a tool.


·         cloudsofwar

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:55am

another BS poll. of course the TEA party is the most armed and pro gun.

Log in to Reply  


Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:10am

Catholics helped elect Obama, of course they will support gun control, even though he has thrown them under the bus.
These are not the same Catholics I grew up with, they are more like sheep.


o        objectivetruth

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:31am

It doesn’t surprise me.They were sheep in ww2 and right afterward too.The catholic shurch gave santuary to fleeing nazis.They aided and abbeted.Most american catholics didn’t know that at the time.For that matter most european catholics didn’t either.I’d like to think if they had of they would have raised he!!.That they would have found a way to stop it, rather than participate in it.


o        daveycrokett

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:10am

Catholic conservative and armed, when I went to catholic school we were taught the crusades were right and just..onward Christian soldiers.. Most of todays catholics vote demoncrat and are sheep..
You can not be catholic and pro-abortion


·         Truth4SureNuff

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:52am

I think we should ban soccer moms from driving SUVs I am sure they have injured or killed many more than guns

Log in to Reply  

·         NurseHatchetRN

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:51am

That’s funny about Catholics… everyone is CC carry in my Parish, including the Priest.

NurseHatchetRNLog in to Reply  

o        ICanComment

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:24am

Ditto. Although I’m not Catholic, I know a bunch of Catholics who are packing regularly. Many of them served in one of the Branches.


o        Git-R-Done

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 3:14pm

I’m Catholic and the regulars who attend my church are Christian conservative. It’s those who attend church regularly who tend to be conservatives.


·         Truth4SureNuff

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:48am

those darn WHITE people again owning guns, wanting to protect their families from other whites and all those other colors whom we know NEVER carry guns without permits.LOL

Log in to Reply  

o        ICanComment

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:30am


…and of course they’ll freely tell you if they are in possession of said “legal” and “officially registered” firearms.

[squealing tape sound] “Statistics don’t lie, but liars use statistics.”


o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:57am

And where do you think those guns come from in the first place? They don’t grow in trees my friend.


o        Popp40

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:09am

Publiuspencilman….you do realize that over 400,000 guns are smuggled into the USA illegally each year. So if you ban them in America….they will still get in here. Have you ever heard of the Black Market?


·         Lee_in_PA

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:45am

Not all Catholics.. they didn’t ask my opinion.

Lee_in_PALog in to Reply  

o        kryptonite

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:53am

Jesuits should change their name. They follow Marx, not Jesus.


o        cloudsofwar

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:57am

same here.


o        mficentral

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:11am

They didn’t ask me either.


o        Dismayed Veteran

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:42am

My ancestors immigrated from Irleand to escape the tyranny of John Bull and the Church of England. America promised freedom of religion and the means to protect that freedom. I will never vote for gun control because it is the road to subjugation.

Dismayed Veteran 

·         FlagWavingPatriot

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:45am

The idea of gun control is an irrational response to something unsavory in the environment.

Pools kill more kids than do guns. So do falls (like falling down the stairs). And cars kill WAY more than all those put together.

You’re much more likely to be killed in a car crash on your way to a movie than to be shot while at the movie. That’s reality.

Liberalism is a mental disease. They operate on emotion, not rational thought.

Log in to Reply  

o        exblackbird

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:50am

in 2010, almost 33,000 people were KILLED in automobile accidents. what draconian measures are going to be instituted to stop that………….nationwide speedlimits of 20 MPH ??


o        PubliusPencilman

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:56am

The difference is that when a car kills someone, it’s an accident. When a gun kills someone, it’s what the weapon was designed for.

Now, if they made a car that was designed specifically for running people down and killing them, they would justifiably outlaw it. That just makes sense.


o        objectivetruth

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:39am

No pencilman you are wrong.The only accident is one of manufacturs defect.The rest are crashes for various reasons.Cars can most definitely be used as weapons ,even though they usually aren’t.While a gun is designed to kill, its purpose was for hunting self defense and warfare.All three of which are about survival, not cold blooded murder as you and your delusion would have us believe.



Posted on August 16, 2012 at 11:00am

@ PUBLIUS….Of courseguns are designed for the purpose of killing, what’s worng with that? If I were a woman and some big dude wanted to harm me what’s wrong with wanting a gun to protect myself? Or if someone threatened my family with a knife and ball bat, why wouldn’t I want a gun designed to kill? Of course you can feed yourself with guns by hunting or simply enjoy target practice or skeet shooting. Policement sure appreciate the fact that there gun was designed to harm or kill. What you fail to realize or acknowledge is that there are some very evil people out there who would like to rob, kill, and harm whenever, however they could. Guns are often our only defense against such evil. Designed purpose does not imply evil or undesirous product, in fact it can be used in a very good and right manner to ensure survival and protection. Both probably the most basic of all human rights. Just like anything guns are in themselves neither evil or good, designed for evil or good, but are either used for good or evil just like cars, computers, drugs, etc……Thank you….


o        goahead.makemyday

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 3:17pm

A fork is designed to stab food but if your a cannibal you are are using it for it’s intended purpose. Bows and arrows and swords are also designed to kill, but you never hear of people crying out to ban those do you? It’s because bows arrows and swords are up to a point impractical to use for defense. As long as you hold a gun you could care less if the guy is standing 30 feet away with a sword. This is the point of dictators taking guns away from it’s general populace, show me a lifetime dictator that did not try to prevent people from owning guns. Show me where a dictatorship allowed it’s people guns when they started massacring people and cutting off food and water supplies. SHOW ME where a military took over a country that had a well armed populace without a war. Show me where the German Jews shot at the Nazi’s to prevent them from being killed. Show me where Russians had guns and stopped Stalin from killing millions. Show me all of those and I will show you how I keep my family from being killed.


·         SquidVetOhio

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:38am

On any given Sunday there are about 3 CCW people in our church plus at least 2 off-duty cops that are packing. Our pastor has his CCW though, I don’t think he carries it. There is nothing wrong with protecting your church and your family. It is God ordained. Jesus told his diciples that they will need a sword. I realize he rebuked Peter for cutting of the Temple guards ear but, Peter was interfering with God’s plan of salvation. Jesus would have told Peter not to have the sword in the first place if He were against it.

SquidVetOhioLog in to Reply  

o        bayoucastine

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:16am

Please consider this: During the time of Jesus all of that area of the world was under Roman control. It was ILLEGAL for anyone who was not a Roman citizen to carry or own weapons of any kind. All the Disciples carried swords – concealed. Some are believed to have carried two swords – concealed. I cannot find where Jesus told the Disciples they should NOT be armed. In fact He said that if you have no sword sell your garments and buy one. It is NOT against God’s teachings/law to defend yourself, your loved ones and innocent by-standers.


o        SquidVetOhio

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:00am

Well said.



Posted on August 16, 2012 at 12:38pm

Leviticus endorses self defense against home invasion…..I agree many try to use scripture to get rid of guns when in fact it supports self defense with arms. I would go so far as to claim if a man did not protect his family aginst the evil men might otherwise do that that would be wrong and sinful before God. Thank you….


·         commonsenseguy

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:35am

i am tired of polls,they are mostly done by some liberal group who has a agenda, the first thing i noticed is that whites are the one’s with the guns, and then the tea party is gun lovers,but no where is it that most young blacks and mexican gangs have guns and are killing people everyday,but when a tragedy like aurora is committed by a crazy white person, the groups want to put all whites in to a box and call for stricter gun laws, what is wrong is the system is not working on screening out the nut jobs,but if we say stricter laws are needed then we all will be put in that nut job box,you can bet that with only 1006 people polled, not one of the was a a true gun loving american who respect the law and obey them,who just want to hunt for food and protect his family, and of the 1006 pollsters none where of the young gang member type or true law abiding gun owners,just liberal lairs with a agenda.

Log in to Reply  

o        Popp40

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:23am

@ Commonsenseguy….I do my best to be open minded and accepting of everyone. However, the more I see about liberals/progressives and even democrats they are the criminals.

They support criminals, just look at how they push for easier punishments on criminals, they support illegal immigration, and how they turn a blind eye when it comes to all the death rates in Chicago, Detriot, New York and any liberal/progessive/democratic city. They have the highest death rates yet they have the most strict gun laws.


·         momrules

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:35am

Polls do not interest me a whole lot as they can be skewed to get the outcome the pollster wants. I will just say to the interested parties………..keep your hands off Americans right to buy and own guns and the ammunition needed to fire them.

Log in to Reply  

·         biffo

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:31am

Democrats who call themselves Catholic are ,as usual, liars. Catholics believe in the sanctity of life, honour thy FATHER and MOTHER, and the Ten Commandments. Democrats do not. They are not Catholics. Public school teachers, Police(people), etc. have the same molestation rate as any group. Only they have union supplied lawyers, privacy, counselling, paid time off. All courtesy of you, the taxpayer. You Catholic haters are only that. Paedophiles are everywhere, they ALL should be dealt with.

Log in to Reply  

o        cloudsofwar

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:09am

@ biffo, well said. Paedophiles go where the children are. they infiltrated the catholic church an easy target. but the Catholic church is cleaning them out.


·         americansfightingforcommonsense

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:28am

I will continue to “Cling to my guns and my Bible!” It is not a popularity thing! It IS a 2nd amendment thing! A right given to us by GOD not our government. Look at other countries, or even cities here, that have passed more restrictive gun regulations or even taken away the people’s guns completely. It’s CLEAR that when the people can not arm themselves legally that gun violence and other types of violence go way up, because the criminals don’t care what the law says and they will arm themselves. We must not let OUR government take away our guns. It WILL be the end of America as we know it.
God Bless America!

americansfightingforcommonsenseLog in to Reply  

o        goahead.makemyday

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 2:58pm

You just gave me an epiphany. What were the laws on gun control before Syria went crazy?


·         infidelsaplenty

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:19am

Who even answers questions in these polls? If someone call our house claiming to be a pollster, they hear a quick hang-up. I question the mental stability of someone who would have the time or the inclination to wade through one of those calls.

Log in to Reply  

o        BeeAlert

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 8:01am

No, I NEVER let a pollster get away without an earful of my conservative opinion! And I always talk to them in the most cheerful, engaging way that I can, probably taking up 3 times the time they usually spend on one call. Who knows, maybe we get one more convert that way?!


·         FightingBear

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:19am

Of course the article that now begs to be researched and written is: ….of the crimes committed with guns, which sub-groups are the most represented groups on that list and the least represented groups?

In other words, which groups of people are most likely to commit these gun crimes? Which sub-groups are least likely?

Log in to Reply  

o        Welcome Black Carter

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 9:45am

In other words,
If you could disarm democrats you would virtually eliminate crime.

Welcome Black Carter 

·         teddrunk

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:15am

I think we’ve heard enough from Catholic priests for a while. Just go back to molesting little boys. As for the Communist nuns in America, we’ve heard enough from you too.

Log in to Reply  

o        commonsenseguy

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:38am

totally agree,and i have had enough of lying two faced commie loving idiots who want to that everyone the same way but not themselves they want their cake and eat it to i would like to shove it down their commie throats


o        ergo

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:43am

That”s just ignorant! This is the kind of statement that comes from someone who reads poll numbers and believes it.


o        cloudsofwar

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 7:59am

hey ted, you sure do hate catholics. go back to Huff Po.


o        teddrunk

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:11am

Hey Clouds, considering what the Catholic Church has done to children over the last 50 years, we should hear not one peep from a priest or nun for about a century. Let them clean out their full “cat box” of deviants before another priest or nun decides to lecture us on some moral point.


o        Centurian

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 10:53am


Excellent post. I couldn’t have asked for you to show your ignorance any better than what you just did.

The Catholic Church consists of 1.5 billion followers, and you are willing to slander all of them because of what a handful of corrupt Priests did.

Please understand that I am not giving the Catholic Church a pass on this; what they did was inconceivable; what I am saying is that it needs to be placed into context.

You cannot make comments like the ones you did and get away with it.


o        teddrunk

Posted on August 16, 2012 at 11:09am

Centurian, go ahead, and give excuses for the Catholic Church hierarchy, both in America and Rome, for covering up and creating more abuse victims. Hearing a Commie priest, or some baby killing pro-abortion nuns spout their “morals & ethical ideals” would amount to having the administration of Penn State lecture America on moral leadership.


1 2 3 4 Next »


Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

« Back to The Blaze

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!


Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now