@ISIDEWITHQuestionsDomestic PolicyStarted 13yrs agoActive 3hrs ago

Should there be more restrictions on the current process of purchasing a gun?

The 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings caused several states and cities to pass strict gun control measures. In response, state lawmakers in gun friendly states in the South and West passed bills that would strengthen Stand Your Ground laws and allow weapons in most public places. In 2014, 21 states passed laws that expanded the rights of gun owners allowing them to possess firearms in churches, bars, schools and college campuses. The federal government has not passed any gun control measures since the 1994 Brady Bill and 42 states now allow the possession of assault rifles. In the U.S. two-thirds of all gun deaths are suicides and in 2010 there were 19,000 firearm suicides and 11,000 firearm homicides.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  State Senate District 22 (Florida)

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Expert Pundits

These active users have achieved advanced knowledge of the terminology, history, and legal implications regarding the topic of Gun Control

@9TYJFHK
#1 Expert Pundit

Informed Voters

These active users have achieved an understanding of common concepts and the history regarding the topic of Gun Control

@7YS3KJP
#1 Informed Voter
@9T5VWSZ
#2 Informed Voter
@9VSD2QX
#3 Informed Voter

Engaged Voters

These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of Gun Control

@9TRZPBD
#1 Engaged Voter
@9WV4R2H
#2 Engaged Voter
@558YLXV
#3 Engaged Voter
@9TTQ47B
#4 Engaged Voter
@charlroycefle
#5 Engaged Voter
@9TYZ5BK
#6 Engaged Voter
Test Your Knowledge

Answer Overview

Response rates from 56.2k State Senate District 22 voters.

56%
Yes
44%
No
47%
Yes
34%
No
7%
Yes, require strict background checks, psychological testing, and training
5%
No, only for criminals and the mentally ill
1%
Yes, but only by closing the gun show loophole
2%
No, only for assault weapons
0%
Yes, and ban all guns from public use
2%
No, but increase penalties for gun-related crimes
1%
No, and the government should pass a national “stand your ground” law

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 56.2k State Senate District 22 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 56.2k State Senate District 22 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from State Senate District 22 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @5KGHPZJfrom Michigan  answered…4yrs4Y

Chicago has very strict gun laws and yet the highest gun related crimes...criminals do not care about laws...you cannot pass a law that will stop a criminal from obtaining a weapon if he really wants one

 @4WV9Q2Cfrom Oregon  answered…4yrs4Y

Guns don't kill people it's the crazy unstable people, the uneducated people.

 @4SH7565from Utah  answered…4yrs4Y

I believe there are over 2000 gun laws already on the books. Maybe we could enforce those before passing new ones. Come on, people! Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

 @53KWBGYfrom Ohio  answered…4yrs4Y

Stay out of this. Guns are only a method to kill. People are messed up. Start at home with good role models.

 @5H37QM5from Colorado  answered…4yrs4Y

You know what we should totally do? Let's say you take the class, clear a background check, then go to a gun dealer. The gun dealer can check your background check again, then help you choose the right gun for you. Here's the clincher: You have guns that will only work for you. Like using your fingerprint. (This is my husband's idea and I LOVE it! They have safes that work this way, why not find a way to apply it to firearms?!). Anyways, if someone steals your gun, they cannot use it because their fingerprints are different. Then it's just a glorified paper weight.

 @54W37HGfrom Texas  answered…4yrs4Y

Repeal all firearms restrictions back to 1791.

 @4Q7RG6Lfrom Texas  answered…4yrs4Y

Do whatever Australia did after their first and only mass shooting.

 @583P2FKfrom North Carolina  answered…4yrs4Y

Democrats should not be allowed to own firearms

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Gun Control” news articles, updated frequently.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2wks2W

Pete Hegseth Slams Gay Troops Policy

Pete Hegseth, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for secretary of defense, has repeatedly criticized policies allowing gay people to serve openly in the US military, calling them part of a “Marxist” agenda to prioritize social justice over combat readiness.In his 2024 book “The War on Warriors” and in subsequent media promotions this year, Hegseth described both the original “don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) policy and its repeal in 2011 as a “gateway” and a “camouflage” for broader cultural changes that he claims have undermined military cohesion and effectiveness.In a 2015 appearance on Fox News, Hegseth also argued these policies like repealing DADT “erode standards” in favor of political goals like social engineering.DADT was implemented under President Bill Clinton in the 1990s and allowed gay people and lesbians to serve in the military — provided they did not disclose their sexuality. Military officials were also barred from asking military members their sexual orientation. If a troop’s orientation came to light, it could lead to their discharge.The policy was repealed during the Obama administration, allowing openly gay service members.Hegseth writes in his book that he was initially ambivalent to the change but came to regret his passive stance, describing the repeal as a “breach in the wire” that opened the door for broader cultural and ideological changes in the military.On Thursday, Hegseth appeared to walk back his earlier remarks about DADT, telling CNN, “Oppose the repeal? No, I don’t,” and calling this report on his previous comments “more false reporting.”

▲  1811 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1mo1MO

Vetting Fiasco: Trump's Defense Pick Caught in Sexual Assault Allegation Storm

CNN commentator and New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman said President-elect Donald Trump’s team missed Pete Hegseth’s payoff to a sexual assault accuser when they vetted him to be secretary of defense.Hegseth is among a raft of cabinet picks facing tough confirmations, and who aren’t being subjected to the customary FBI checks, instead being vetted by private firms. Over the weekend, Hegseth’s attorney dropped the bomb that there was a confidential settlement with a woman who accused the former Fox News host of sexual assault. On Monday night’s edition of CNN’s The Source with Kaitlan Collins, Haberman revealed that her sources in Trump world did not know about the payoff, which was missed in the vetting “because it was a private settlement”HABERMAN: There’s more concern from some people around Trump than there is from Trump himself, about this whole issue. Trump has really dug in, and has told advisers that he is going to stick with Hegseth. Now, we’ll see if anything else emerges.They did do a vet, we are told. This did not show up, this issue, because it was a private settlement, according to the people, who were briefed on what took place. Trump really likes Pete Hegseth. But this did introduce the thing Trump doesn’t like, which is an element of surprise and a negative headline. And so, we will see where this goes.

▲  59 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2mos2MO

Inside the Podcast Revolution: Trump’s Unfiltered Strategy and Harris’s ‘Meltdown’ Risk

Tech billionaire Elon Musk attributed President-elect Trump’s election victory, at least in part, to the lengthy podcast interviews he did during the campaign.In an interview late Tuesday with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Musk said Trump’s podcast appearances showed the American public that he was a normal person.“I think it made a big difference that President Trump and soon-to-be Vice President Vance went on lengthy podcasts,” Musk said in the interview.“I think this really makes a difference because people look at, like, Joe Rogan’s podcast, which is great, and Lex Fridman’s and the All-In podcast, and, you know, to a reasonable-minded, smart person — who’s not, like, hardcore one way or the other — they just listen to someone talk for a few hours and that’s how they decide whether, you know, you’re a good person, whether they like you,” he added, according to a clip highlighted by Mediaite.Trump conducted many interviews with new media during his campaign, as well as with legacy news organizations such as Fox News.Last month, he joined Joe Rogan’s podcast for a 3-hour long interview. The celebrity host later endorsed his candidacy.His opponent, Vice President Harris, did not appear on Rogan’s podcast because, according to “The Joe Rogan Experience” host, the Harris campaign only had an hour and required him to travel to her. Rogan said he felt “strongly” that the “best way to do” an interview with the vice president would have been in his studio in Austin, Texas.Musk recalled posting on his social platform X account that “nothing would do more damage” to Harris’s campaign than going on Rogan’s podcast, “because she would run out of non-sequiturs after about 45 minutes.”“You can’t hide for three hours,” Carlson replied.Musk added, “Yeah, like, hour two and three would be a complete melted puddle of nonsense. So it would just be absolute game over. That’s why she didn’t go on.”“But on the other hand, Trump, he’s there, and there’s no, there’s no talking points,” the Tesla CEO continued. “He’s just being a normal person who’s having a conversation, and doing three hours of Rogan, no problem.”

▲  349 replies

Active 19hrs ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1wk1W

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  1914 replies3 agree