Pew Research published earlier this month the results of a survey question it has asked since 1993 — weighing in that for the first time in more than two decades, more Americans favour gun rights over gun control.
When Pew published its results, the NRA and other (mostly conservative) groups pointed to the change in attitudes the question appears to detail: that people feel guns do more to promote safety than increase risk (and the implication that gun control laws are thus inherently bad).
Academics have noted the question is flawed. The director of John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research Daniel Webster told Media Matters, "I could not think of a worse way to ask questions about public opinions about gun policies." Others and their objections also appear in the article.
The essential problem with the question is that it commits the formal fallacy of Some Are, Some Are Not (also known as black-and-white thinking, or the fallacy of the excluded middle).
Jumping below the orange tangle of logic. . . .
The points here are obvious, though Mr. Webster explains it at length at the Media Matters article:
1) Almost every gun control law on the books does in fact help prevent criminals or the mentally ill from obtaining firearms
2) One does not have to abolish gun laws to protect gun rights (the fallacy being either-or). One can have both. The only question is whether a law is considered an undue burden on a right (such as poll taxes on voting).
Registering a firearm (or perhaps even requiring a title, like a car or house) does not prevent someone from owning a firearm.
From the Media Matters article, Mr. Webster explains:
"Pew's question presents one side emphasizing the protection of individual rights versus restricting gun ownership. The question's implicit and incorrect assumption is that regulations of gun sales infringe on gun owners' rights and control their ability to own guns," Webster explained. "The reality is that the vast majority of gun laws restrict the ability of criminals and other dangerous people to get guns and place minimal burdens on potential gun purchasers such as undergoing a background check. Such policies enjoy overwhelming public support."
According to Webster, "Far better and more accurate surveys ask about support for laws that prohibit dangerous people from having guns and basic accountability measures such as universal background checks, penalties for gun trafficking, and regulatory oversight of gun dealers."
Organisations like the NRA advance the argument that registering weapons or requiring documentation of their transfer by sale or gift are undue burdens, and would allow the government to round up everyone's guns . (Curiously, the NRA doesn't note that if the government really wanted to do that, it could seize the membership list of the NRA. That would catch the unregistered guns too.)
In the article, Media Matters notes:
Indeed, media coverage of Pew's question creates a misleading perception that a choice must be made between protecting gun rights and supporting broadly popular gun safety regulations.
The Pew poll linked above shows a graph of persons favouring "gun rights" over "gun control." The
Media Matters article shows the fallacy of the choice presented (as does the Fallacy Files link to the Some Are, Some Are Not fallacy).
Of note, the NRA will frequently argue that a mass-shooter is "mentally ill." (I would argue the NRA be charged with practising medicine without a license.) The same sorts of conservatives that support the NRA's political narrative (we must do more to identify and keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill) are also the ones who oppose the background checks that would accomplish that, and the funding to improve care for the mentally ill.
There is plenty of RNWJ commentary on the article, such as "What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand?" (These would likely be the same RNWJ's that are all for infringing on voting rights for some people, or property rights for those of us living along the Keystone XL route.)
5:05 PM PT: Ban Nock and Alice Olsen below note that Pew doesn't seem to have said admission on its Website.
The admission is in a Mother Jones article.