Our rights aren’t up for determination based on a popularity vote. That’s why they’re protected in the Constitution. The right to keep and bear arms was specifically protected, likely because our Founding Fathers knew they’d come up for special attention by those who would institute tyranny in this country if given half a chance.
Tyranny doesn’t necessarily come from a power-tripping despot who seized control all at once.
It comes, as often as not, from the popular vote of a country. Hitler was elected to office, after all.
But anti-gunners ignore that. Instead, they try to tell lawmakers that the people want gun control, and they seem to produce a lot of polling that says as much, though that never seems to turn into votes for their preferred candidates for some whacky reason.
Over at Ammoland, David Codrea takes issue with the latest example of this.
“The results are in! Our new National Survey of Gun Policy reveals that Americans broadly agree on many gun violence prevention policies,” Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions exclaims on X.com. “Check out the 2025 survey findings.”
They present those over at their website, where we find the Center is part of the “Bloomberg School of Public Health,” as in anti-gun (except for the government and his law-skirting security team) billionaire Michael Bloomberg. The use of the pejorative term “gun violence” to stigmatize the inanimate object instead of the willful human aggressor is our first clue as to what they mean by “solutions” and “prevention.”
We’re told it’s a “nationally representative survey” which “found wide support for gun violence prevention policies across political lines and among both gun owners and non-owners.” We’re told they’ve been doing this since 2013.  What we’re not told is any meaningful metric to prove any of their “solutions” have prevented anything except citizens being able to exercise a supposedly unalienable right with a government mandate that it “shall not be infringed.”
The questions, asked of “2,977 respondents, 1,001 gun owners and 1,976 non-gun owners and 959 Republicans and 1,419 Democrats” need to be viewed with two further caveats: The Bloombergians make no attempt on this page to share how the questions were worded (because doing so differently could produce different results), or to establish actual knowledge the respondents had – as opposed to what they’ve been told by the overwhelmingly prohibition-supporting media, and by the Democrat Party.
Why, if it’s “representative,” does the survey include significantly more Democrats than Republicans, especially after the popular and electoral victories Second Amendment-proclaiming Donald Trump attained over gun prohibitionist Kamala Harris? And don’t overlook that just because someone is a gun owner doesn’t automatically put them in the pro-Second Amendment camp, as the Fudds comprising Giffords’ “Gun Owners for Safety” amply demonstrate.
There’s a lot more to read over there, and you absolutely should, but I want to focus on this bit for my own purposes.
See, I’m with Codrea on these questions. Why is it that there are 50 percent more Democrats surveyed than Republicans? How is that “representative” when, as he noted, there doesn’t seem to be any electoral basis for assuming there’s any such breakdown? He also makes a fair point about “gun owners” here, too.
Any survey or poll that does not publish its questions is one that should be dismissed out of hand.
As Codrea notes, different wording can present different results. There’s a specific reason that pollsters spend so much time crafting the questions they ask. Some are standard for just that reason. It allows different pollsters to track public opinion in a way that actually tells us something useful.
Yet on other questions, how you ask matters.
“Do you believe that all gun sales, including those between close family members, should require a background check?” is going to get different results than “Do you believe a background check should be required for gun sales?”
Why? Because many will assume the second one applies to retail sales only and isn’t about universal background checks.
That’s just one example out of potentially thousands.
The fact that they didn’t tell us what questions were asked specifically means that their results should be ignored entirely because we can’t trust that the questions weren’t leading people toward a particular result.
Yet even when they do publish the questions, many media outlets see nothing wrong with them. Most of them are filled with journalists who don’t know the topics they’re talking about well enough to sniff through the BS. Even if they did, I doubt they’d have a problem with it anyway.
What that means is that we have to call them out. We have to raise the alarm, to tell the world that the poll or survey or whatever term they want to use is absolute nonsense, and why it’s absolute nonsense.
Codrea and I, along with many others, can do it on our respective platforms, but we need you to do it, too, via social media, so that everyone can see what’s happening.
Editor’s Note: Radical gun control organizations, including those who pretend to be unbiased research outlets, are doing everything they can to push gun control down people’s throats.
Help us continue to report on and expose the gun control zealots’ policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here
