Do you support the confiscation of all currently legal firearms?

[ZombieHorde]

Private ownership of firearms would be made illegal, and then the firearms that were once legal would be confiscated through whatever means the government deemed best.

If you feel this poll is poorly made, I will try to be open to critiques, but I may not change it if many people have already voted.

eta: On duty police, military, etc., are exempt from this confiscation.

34 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes, I support confiscation of all currently legally owned firearms.
	1 (3%)
	I support confiscation of some currently legally owned firearms, but not all firearms.
	2 (6%)
	I do not support confinscation of currently legally owned firearms.
	31 (91%)
	Some people are named \"Roger\" by their parents. (other)
	0 (0%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[NYC_SKP]

1. Some have said as much right here on the DU. I wonder, though....

...are military and police, who legally possess firearms in the course of duty, exempt from this poll?

[ZombieHorde]

2. Are the firearms they use on the job privately owned?

I thought they were owned by the government, but I don't really know.

[NYC_SKP]

3. The poll question is a bit vague in any event.

I understand that some law enforcement buy their own weapons and uniforms other gear.

I presume all federal employees are provided weapons.

In any event, all are "legal" and could fall within the scope of your questions absent some additional qualifier(s).

[ZombieHorde]

5. I mentioned "privately owned" in the text, but I will add your imput. nt

[ZombieHorde]

6. Is the edit more clear? nt

[NYC_SKP]

9. Oh yes much better, thanks.

My votes the same.

What a bunch of potential problems tho.

Never minding for now the near impossibility that they can all be collected even over decades, and that garage use of machine tools won't result in a black market source, and that the borders will have to be very very tightly managed....

I can imagine how dangerous it would be for police who would become targets for theft.

I just, of course, will never happen. We'll be climate change victims before that can be accomplished.

Good poll, interesting to see.

You should post in the gun control forum, too. I don't see how it would violate the SOP of that group.

[ZombieHorde]

15. Thanks for the imput. Making fair political polls can be challanging.

When I make polls in the gaming group, I don't put much thought into them at all, because no one is really going to feel like their position is being ignored or misunderstood.

[gejohnston]

4. depends on the PD

some are issue, some are expected to buy their own.

[ZombieHorde]

7. Ah. I edited the poll OP text to clearly exempt on duty police, etc. nt

[slackmaster]

10. I asked graham4anything in GD, and now I'll ask you the same question.

Why should government employees be exempt?

Police carry firearms mainly for personal protection. Are non-police not entitled to equal protection?

[ZombieHorde]

13. I don't support gun confiscation, but I felt that police officers, etc., should be exempt

from my poll because I currently believe the few who do support confiscation do not support taking away the guns of on duty government employees. I felt it would make the poll "bad."

My motivation was to be sensitive to the beliefs of those who feel differently than me on this subject.

[oneshooter]

11. In Texas most law enforcement supples their own sidearm

and whatever longarm they carry n the vehicle. SWAT officers generally supply their own sidearm, but their longarms are supplied by the department.

[ZombieHorde]

14. Interesting. I just assumed they were all State issued. nt

[slackmaster]

8. No. Only flaming kooks support confiscation of legally owned firearms, or of anything else.

[armueller2001]

12. Problem is,

"legally owned firearms" can become "illegally owned firearms" instantly with the stroke of a pen.

[slackmaster]

17. There's a word that accurately describes that situation.

"Confiscation."

[CreekDog]

34. "flaming"

classy as never.

[krispos42]

16. Confiscation with compensation?

Just to clarify.

[ZombieHorde]

18. I didn't think of that.

Would it change your vote?

[krispos42]

23. No, but that is what they did in Australia.

At least . I think that's what they did..sort of a mandatory gun buyback program.

[Flashmann]

19. I do not support confiscation of currently legally owned firearms

Though if it were demonstrated,beyond doubt,that the nutzoids were,in whatever fashion,rendered "gun-less",I would happily turn mine in.

[Logical]

20. Where are all the DUers who were wanting all guns banned and collected? n-t

[rdharma]

21. Strange...... I think I only saw one such comment. nt

[slackmaster]

22. They're cowering in their "safe haven," unwilling or unable to make convincing arguments in favor...

...of confiscation.

[hack89]

29. There are only a handful when it comes to handguns. A lot more when it comes to assault weapons. n

[Logical]

33. Which is odd because handguns kill many more people. n-t

[hack89]

35. Logic and gun control don't always go together. nt

[kudzu22]

32. Here's one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2643102

[Comrade_McKenzie]

24. Only if they're caught with them outside their house after the ban is passed... nt

[jimmy the one]

25. High moe, but serendipity to the rescue

zombieH: you feel this poll is poorly made, I will try to be open to critiques,..

The poll was well made, no spelling errors, proper grammar, the choices clear (albeit limited), well done on the technical side (I am unfamiliar with eta tho, to me is est'd time of arrival!).

However, the poll proves next to nothing. Are you bursting with pride that 93% don't want any legal guns to be confiscated? Does this surprise you on a gunboard where gun enthusiasts are far more zealous & apt to reply to a gun poll such as this? But were you to poll only gun control advocates the result wouldn't be all that much lower, maybe 80-85%.
It's a non-scientific internet poll, has no relationship to accuracy outside of serendipitous fluke, tho you aren't far off with your results;
.. compare your unscientific poll with a properly run one, by cnn:

CNN/ORC Poll. March 15-17, 2013. N=1,021 adults nationwide MOE ± 3.
"Which of the following statements comes closest to your view? There should be no restrictions on owning guns. There should be some restrictions on owning guns. All guns should be illegal for everyone except police and authorized personnel."
...... No restrictions ..Some restrictions.. Illegal ..Unsure
3/15-17/13...... 17 .............70 ..................12 .........-
12/17-18/12 .....13 .............71 ..................15 .........-
8/7-8/12 ........13 .............76 ..................10 .........-
1/14-16/11 ......14 .............71 ..................14 .........1
6/26-28/09 ......14 .............71 ..................15
http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

So consistently the past 4 years, only about 12% on avg have wanted all guns illegal, somewhat consistent with your results (of about 4% when excluding your 'some'), & note cnn doesn't qualify with 'confiscation' (conversely then about 85-90% could NOT want confiscation, compared with your 96% - you are the rasmussen of the DU set).
.. I won't participate but I would've gone with 'confiscate some', in line with the 1994 assault rifle ban, which made about 2% of national gunstock illegal & subject to confiscation. 'Some' has such wide variance that it's misleading; actually on 2nd thought your poll could have been better put with 'less than 10% of all guns confiscated' and 'about half or more confiscated', or 'handgun ban & confiscation'.
But, this still would've proved next to nothing, from what we already know. And such a small sample size so far, ~60, the margin of error is perhaps 20% or more.

Cnn's poll could use improvement as well, 'a modicum of restrictions' and 'minor restrictions' and 'major restrictions' would provide better insight, after defining what each category would entail in a separate headlining paragraph.

Well, unscientifically & serendipitously for you, you've corroborated loosely what was already known. That most all americans don't want to confiscate firearms.
Did you not notice the 'sarcasm' tag hanging from biden's neck?

[upaloopa]

26. No group of DUers will take your guns stop the meme

After 3 months of gun debate it's getting clear the gunner talking points are mostly hipe to obfuscate any new gun legislation.

[hack89]

30. Including assault weapons? The present number in circulation is OK?

a lot of poster distinguish between assault weapons and all other guns.

[ZombieHorde]

31. I don't have guns to take, so I know no group of DUers will take my guns,

since doing so is not possible.

[tularetom]

27. I don't support the confiscation of anything

That is the kind of heavy handed government action that gets dictators in trouble in places like Syria. We've started wars on countries that did stuff like that.

And it ain't what anybody wants to see here, even the anti gun fanatics. Even if they don't realize it.

[bowens43]

28. Not all but certainly the vast majority.

[bubbayugga]

36. don't think of it as confiscation-think of it as mandatory voluntary surrender

of formerly legal firearms.

[spin]

37. Of course criminals will not voluntarily surrender their firearms. ...

So it will be necessary to have a policeman on every block.

Firearms are used everyday for self defense against criminal attack. Often no shots are fired. They also serve as a significant deterrent to violent crime. The last thing that a home intruder wishes to encounter is an armed home owner, so the wise robber waits until the home is unoccupied. A street thug does not wish to run into an armed victim as he has no desire to get shot. A guy who robs a store fears an armed clerk.

We concentrate on the tragedies caused by criminals and those with severe mental issues and ignore the fact that firearms can be used to stop crime.

News stories where firearms are used for legitimate self defense usually only get local attention. Stories where firearms are misused often make national news. It's not surprising that many people believe that all guns are bad and should be confiscated or voluntarily turned in.

Man uses licensed concealed gun to stop attack
By Jon Byman
CREATED MAR. 13, 2013

WEST ALLIS - It's a case where it appears concealed carry worked.

West Allis Police confirm that early this Tuesday a man used a gun to stop an attack on a woman. That man had a concealed carry permit for the weapon.

A man who knew that victim was attacking her near 102nd and Lincoln. The good samaritan happened on the attack. He jumped into action, pulling out his gun. He never fired, but he used the gun to hold the suspect until police arrived.

"It appears to have worked well where nobody was injured as a result of the use of the weapon," West Allis Police Chief Charles Padget told us.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/197804431.html

Man Shot, Killed After Kicking In Door Of Bryan County Home
Posted: Mar 14, 2013 12:03 PM EDT
Updated: Mar 14, 2013 3:47 PM EDT
By LaShauna Sewell, News9.com - email

BRYAN COUNTY, Oklahoma - The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation says a resident shot and killed a gunman who broke into a Bryan County home early Thursday morning.
OSBI agents say 27-year-old Parker Allen Tyson kicked in the door of a home at 14 Main Street around 12:30 a.m. He was armed with a handgun at the time.

When Tyson entered the house, the resident fired his own handgun at Tyson, striking him several times. An ambulance rushed Tyson to a hospital in Durant. Tyson died about two hours later.
http://www.news9.com/story/21641853/man-shot-killed-after-kicking-in-door-of-bryan-county-home