The non-Bloomberg NRA Poll AKA: The Real NRA Poll

[raydog1]

Gun control advocates including New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, as well as various media outlets, have released data claiming to represent the views of NRA members, despite the fact that none of those surveys had access to the NRA’s membership list. The NRA survey of 1,000 randomly-selected NRA members across the country is the only legitimate survey of NRA members in existence.

 

The data from this survey indicates that NRA members are united in their desire for Washington to focus on keeping firearms from the mentally ill and to reject unconstitutional gun control measures that infringe on Second Amendment rights.

 

“Mayor Bloomberg’s claims that gun owners are divided are totally false. It is nothing more than an attempt by anti-gun activists to further their long-standing political agenda,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox. “American gun owners and Second Amendment supporters are ready for Washington to put politics aside and come together to fix our broken mental health system.”

Key Findings:

• 91% of NRA members support laws keeping firearms away from the mentally ill.
• 92% of NRA members oppose gun confiscation via mandatory buy-back laws.
• 89% oppose banning semi-automatic firearms, often mistakenly called “assault rifles”.
• 93% oppose a law requiring gun owners to register with the federal government.
• 92% oppose a new federal law banning the sale of firearms between private citizens.

 

Methodology – The national survey was conducted by OnMessage Inc. Telephone interviews were conducted January 13-14, 2013. This survey consists of 1,000 NRA members and was stratified by state to reflect voter distribution in the 2012 presidential election. The margin of error for this survey is +/- 3.09%.

 

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/news-from-nra-ila/2013/1/survey-finds-nra-members-united.aspx?s&st&ps

 

http://www.nraila.org/media/10850041/113topline.pdf

[Pat]

I'm a bit surprised those numbers aren't higher, to be truthful. Huh. The more you know.

[Oh Shoot]

• 92% oppose a new federal law banning the sale of firearms between private citizens.

 

Well, there's spin and there's spin, and I don't know how they really selected the whopping 1,000 members out of 4.5 million, but I just don't believe that particular finding is accurate.

 

- OS

[RED333]

Here is a poll for ya

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/23/is-it-time-to-make-constitutional-changes-to-gun-rights/

[Sam1]

lol red!

 

95 to 3

Edited January 25, 2013 by Sam1

[Spiffy]

1000 outta 4 million. I think they should have gotten a larger pool for better numbers.

[TripleDigitRide]

The NRA doesn't appear to have an issue sending out emails for anything else, so I'm not sure why they didn't email this pole to all its members.

[m16ty]

The NRA sends me "polls" all the time. I think they are just fundraisers that are made to look like polls. They ask a series of questions about your stance on gun regs and then at the end they ask for money.

 

That's ok because right now they need all the money they can get but I've always had the feeling that they take the check out of the envelope and throw the rest of it in the trash when they get it.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I don't know why you guys are being so critical of the NRA. A poll costs money and reflective of the moment and the questions.

That poll they did is in comparison to every presidential collected during the last election cycle. The methodology might have

even been more open. Not sure, though. Why would you expect them or anyone else to send out for a sample of a million or

so when it isn't needed? If you say for validation, maybe, but a poll that size would take time and wouldn't necessarily show

any different results. Anyway, it's just a damned poll. Means absolutely nothing when the Constitution is what is to be guarded.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Some polls only strive to prove a pre-conceived point, but much of the meat-and-potatoes polling really, really wants the straight scoop. Ferinstance, if a private corp, say Coke or Comcast wants to hire a poll, they don't want it sugar-coated or tilted, because they are only spending the money for intelligence to maximize profit, not prove a point.

 

Statistically speaking, if a pollster is very scientific in designing the poll and designing the sample selection, a sample as small as 1000 really can be pretty dern accurate. I'm not saying that the aforementioned polls are well-done or accurate, but with care, the sample size is "in the ballpark" for an accurate result, if done well, with intention of finding truth rather than proving a pre-conceived point.

[Oh Shoot]

Statistically speaking, if a pollster is very scientific in designing the poll and designing the sample selection, a sample as small as 1000 really can be pretty dern accurate..

Yup.

 

"Should all gun buyers undergo a background check to prevent purchases by felons and others denied ownership under existing federal law?"

 

"Should private firearm sales between individuals be banned?"

 

Likely big diff in results there.

 

- OS

 

 

[strickj]

I'm a bit surprised those numbers aren't higher, to be truthful. Huh. The more you know.

Not surprised at all.

 

There's a crap-ton of gun grabbers that are Lifetime NRA card carrying members so they'll appear to be "pro-gun".

Look at Jimmy Naifeh (anyone remember that fiasco?) and Mitt Romney.