CNN poll on expanded background checks

[JALLEN]

You know what to do......

http://www.cnn.com/partners/ios/pages/poll/

[powerboatr]

wish they would define "expanded"
to ambigous of a word

i get a background check to buy a firearm, so should everyone else right? or none at all. no more "same but different" policies

[parabelum]

56.3% voted no as of right now.


Interested to see this, as CNN crowd is not exactly pro 2A to say the least.

[tlt]

I imagine it gets buried if they outcome is not what they hoped for. I agree, they need to be more specific.

[treadlightly]

Terrible question, I assume intentionally loaded.

If you ask someone if a task is too tough, you trigger a puffed-up chest reaction. Of course not, I'm tougher than any challenge.

Besides, how do you answer? The task isn't too tough, it's too evil. If we can elect Obama twice, enacting further gun sales restrictions isn't too tough.

Still wrong, just not too tough to do.

[Pawpaw]

Apparently they changed the question.

Now it's, "Is tightening gun-sale requirements too tough a change?"

Yes = 73.2%
No = 26.8%

8115 Total Votes

[ttownsig]

14,786 votes now and the poll is showing 73.4 for yes. Curious to see what they do with these numbers.

[Richbirdhunter]

What does a background check cover now? What would they like to expand it to?

[TexasGal]

The way they worded that seems for the intent to create an impulse to vote no. I have never seen these "polls" put out there by the anti's publicly revealed when the polls went in favor of guns.

[Middle Age Russ]

No real context to the question. Too tough in what manner? To what end? Given the pith that passes as news these days and the plethora of polls, I guess it is too much to ask to have questions that are really specific. All this poll activity does is generate data points about how effective someone's "messaging" is to the respondents. All in all, I am glad that to date we are still a Republic rather than a simple democracy -- therein surely lies a path to ruin.