Posted: 5/9/2011 10:22:40 AM EDT
|
JSonline Constitutional Carry Poll
http://www.jsonline.com/polls/121491889.html Hit this poll! |
|
Voted.
However, I still think that the constitutional option is just a hammer to drive the shall-issue bill home with less resistance and no poison amendments. I suspect the constitutional option isn't "serious" because it's missing provisions for optional shall-issue permits for reciprocity, something every other state (save the special case of VT) has in it's constitutional carry system, or has been proposed in other state's bills. It seems like a relatively large and simple oversight to have missed that part. 
|
|
Nice. Not "arf influenced" with 8000+ votes. Not what I expected. Yes - I should be able to carry a concealed gun without a permit or training (64%) I'm OK with concealed carry, but I think it should only be allowed with a permit and training (22%) I'm opposed to concealed carry - period (14%) Total Responses: 8068 |
|
Quoted:
Nice. Not "arf influenced" with 8000+ votes. Not what I expected. It tracks with previous JSonline polls, with roughly an 80/20 split in favor of CCW. I am also surprised and delighted that 60% of the poll responders think permitless carry is a good thing. |
|
Yes - I should be able to carry a concealed gun without a permit or training (64%)
I'm OK with concealed carry, but I think it should only be allowed with a permit and training (22%) I'm opposed to concealed carry - period (14%) Total Responses: 8152 just hit it |
|
Yes, it's a different poll. The first one was simply a "do you support concealed carry?" which was ahead for us 88% to 12% last time I saw.
This one (3 options) that is current, still has 86% in favor of concealed carry, with constitutional carry leading at 64%. Good stuff, esp on a liberal newspaper website. Handing the anti's their rears in the comments is a plus. It's the kind of crapola you'll be hearing at the hearings. All emotion and statements with no facts to back them up. |
|
Quoted:
Please do not hotlink to polls. Any webmaster worth their salt can instantly see where a visitor came from if you clicked on a link to get there. Copy-pasta is the name of the game  What difference does it make where the link comes from? It's not like it's a scientific poll nor are it's results going to affect anything. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Please do not hotlink to polls. Any webmaster worth their salt can instantly see where a visitor came from if you clicked on a link to get there. Copy-pasta is the name of the game What difference does it make where the link comes from? It's not like it's a scientific poll nor are it's results going to affect anything. Because some sites will stop the poll claiming it was tainted by an outside group, especially when it doesn't go the way they want the poll to go. It's basically to keep the appearance of legitimacy. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Please do not hotlink to polls. Any webmaster worth their salt can instantly see where a visitor came from if you clicked on a link to get there. Copy-pasta is the name of the game What difference does it make where the link comes from? It's not like it's a scientific poll nor are it's results going to affect anything. There is some value to slamming newspaper/website polls. You're correct, it means nothing "official", but it does serve a purpose. 1. If the poll "goes their way" they'll use it in an article or editorial. This takes that away from them. 2. Anti's clicking on the poll and seeing the results will be demoralized. |