Hey y’all! I’m a student in Wisconsin and I hope to get results from you guys on a survey I am sending out to people in the US, Germany, Japan and Venezuela to understand how people across various continents interpret the right to bear arms in the United States. I would love for many of you guys to take 2 minutes or less to fill out my anonymous survey, I would really appreciate all the responses I can get. Also, if anyone has contacts in any of the aforementioned countries, please feel free to share!
1 Like
Hey @Alex80 , welcome to the Community. 
I hope you didn’t join us for this survey only. 
I really would like you to do some introduction first so we know you better before we start discussions.
Here is the link for a good start:
7 Likes
Germany, Japan, Venezuela… Hmmmm, nope, can’t imagine a single reason why anyone should care what they think, considering their governments are religiously anti-firearm due to leftist, pacifist, and who-knows-what reasons, respectively. To be painfully honest, most Americans can quote the 2nd Amendment in their sleep, but can’t remember the preamble to the Constitution, let alone the rest. And as an aside, please don’t ask folks to fill out a survey in Google Docs and say it’s anonymous. 
9 Likes
Good stuff lol. I am interviewing a person who fled Venezuela and will add valuable information to this project as this semester comes to a close. It also was not my decision to study internationally, it is simply part of my class that is an International Freedom Seminar. I am a progun high schooler and am in a minority of patriotic students at my school. Google Forms is the only way I was able to create a free survey, and it is true that I am not collecting data outside of the responses to my simple multiple choice questions none of which ask for name or contact information, so as far as I’m concerned it’s anonymous, and yes I do understand that google may collect this data as they are an obviously corrupt business, I would love to see you respond to my survey as I am trying to combat the “skewdness” of my survey with all of the liberal teachers who will be taking this survey at my school. Thanks for your enthusiasm.
1 Like
As in?
Post the questions of the survey, you’ll get more answers
6 Likes
I don’t believe that many here would be willing to take a survey on this, but you will find we are quite willing to state our beliefs and opinions, sprinkled with facts to support our opinions.
There are numerous threads on this site that discuss our right to keep and bear arms and related “gun control” laws. You will find most here believe in our RKBA as written in the 2A - “shall not be infringed” - and some that believe in some infringements on our inalienable rights. Our discussions are typically respectful, but at times can get a bit heated.
You may also want to go to the websites for GOA (Gun Owners of America) and SAF (Second Amendment Foundation) to see what these groups are doing to fight for our RKBA. Another good resource is JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership).
5 Likes
@Alex80 Welcome to the community! Quite a survey. Alot is going through my head right now, and answering every question “PLUS MORE” I may as well come over to your University and TEACH ALL the TEACHERS/PROFFESSORS to TRUELY TEACH the STUDENTS “The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of The United States, and The Bill of Rights. So, it seems like the main agenda is “the Second Amendment” which is being brutally attacked, and to strip away the 2A from law abiding American citizens who do not commit crimes, do not commit mass shootings, do not rob banks/or people, do not carjack people, do not break into homes/home invasion. These are the crimes that FELONY CRIMINALS are doing across the Country with WHATEVER WEAPONS OF CHOICE THEY USE!!! Guns, Knifes, Hammers, Cars, Baseball Bats, Rocks, Brick, Hands/Feet, etc. BUT, 
ANTI 2A Groups are going after the GUNS. “ASSAULT WEAPONS, WEAPONS OF WAR, GUN VIOLENCE”. LISTEN, NO ONE has been able to ANSWER a QUESTION,” What is an Assault Weapon"? “What is the meaning of Gun Violence”? These are JUST TITLES put on GUNS to make them sound more profound like they are scary, and dangerous. Look Guns don’t kill, and they don’t commit violence. It’s an object like anything else. GUNS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM It’s EVIL PEOPLE that have no respect for human life who are the problem. Criminals that should not be in possession of any firearms are committing crimes. CRIME CONTROL ARE THE LAWS THAT SHOULD BE SOUGHT. GUN CONTROL LAWS ONLY AFFECT Law Abiding American Citizens AND DOES NOTHING TO CONTROL NOR STOP CRIME!!! Criminals DON’T OBEY THE LAW!!! To keep our schools and communities safe, we must remove these dangerous, threatening people before they inflict harm on themselves and others. It’s common sense, YET Gun Control Advocacy Groups continue to BLAME INANIMATE OBJECTS (guns) for the CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR OF EVIL HUMAN BEINGS!!! Get rid of Soft on Crime Laws, and LOCK UP THE CRIMINALS!!! Law abiding citizens have a right to bear arms, and depriving law abiding citizens of their Constitutional Rights for the criminal acts of a depraved individual doesn’t make our communities safer. Every American Citizen has the right to EXERCISE ALL THEIR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, and that’s everyone’s choice, BUT, NOBODY HAS A RIGHT TO DEPRIVE AN AMERICAN CITIZEN FROM EXERCISING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! Certainly, if the law is broken, surely one loses certain rights, BUT for the most part, “GUN CONTROL IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL”!
7 Likes
Ouch…
That’s a quite a lesson… how to not approach gun community with questions about their rights. 
3 Likes
I just reviewed your survey. Your questions and choices for answers are skewed to provide an anti-rights bias. The questions are actually asking about how much freedom is one willing to relinquish, not questions on our belief in our inalienable right to keep and bear arms. For example:
How safe do you think your family could be, because of the following?
Extremely Safe || Somewhat Safe || Unsure || Somewhat Unsafe || Extremely UnsafeNeighborhood Watch
Home Security System
Security Agency or Police
Possession of Firearm
Having a Dog
The items listed appear to be mocking those that believe in our inalienable rights, as these do not provide actual safety. None of the items listed can ensure safety, they can only provide layers of potential safety or security, which is different. A firearm does not provide safety, it is only a tool to aid in one’s defense. Police also do not provide safety, they only respond to an event that has already occurred, and likely will not arrive until after the incident has ended. That is why owning a firearm is an important layer in security - we are our own first responders. Alarms, dogs, firearms, and neighborhood watch are different layers of security, which can never ensure one is “Extremely Safe”.
In your prior question on gun control, your range of answers are from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree, which includes “Neutral”, not “Unsure”, as the above quoted question indicates. Being neutral is far different than unsure. Additionally, the “Gun control” question has the negative response first.
In your question, “Should any of the following firearms be banned?”, you have “Yes”, then “No”, and “No Opinion”. Tasers are not firearms, neither are grenades. Grenades are banned from general ownership under the 1934 NFA (National Firearms Act). “Assault rifles” while being a proper term, are also banned from general ownership under the 1986 FOPA (Firearm Owners Protection Act), with the exception of automatic weapons manufactured prior to its enactment on May 19, 1986, as they are automatic/select fire rifles. I am unsure if you actually mean automatic/select fire rifles or if you are improperly assigning that term to reference the “gun control” agenda’s usage of firearms they are always seeking to ban, such as the AR-15, which is not an assault rifle, but is just semi-auto as are most other firearms that are “allowed” to be owned by the general public. I put the word allowed in quotes as our government does not have the Constitutional authority under the Second Amendment to grant us the RKBA as that is an inalienable right, meaning government cannot take it from us.
Do you think it is more important to protect gun rights rather than control gun violence?
That is an incongruent statement, geared to elicit an anti-rights response. “Gun rights” do not exist. The RKBA exists. “Gun violence” is an insincere term and wrong. Firearms do not commit violence, people do. Anything used to assault another is an “assault” weapon, be it a firearm, knife, bat, rock, etc.
8 Likes
I submitted responses.
Agree on the difference between unsure and neutral.
“Assault rifle” is a poor term to use as it is misused and abused. As Dave indicated, the best most correct definition of “assault rifle” means machine guns, which are extremely tightly regulated and while generally legal federally, are illegal in many stats and cost 5 figures often $20k+ with lots of paperwork to own, so very few people, relatively speaking, legally own an “assault rifle”
Dave mentioned things that don’t keep you safe, like a home alarm, but I understand the question because a lot of people think something like an alarm on your home is “safety”. People also call surveillance cameras “security cameras” even when all they do is record what happened to potentially be viewed later. It’s fair to ask questions, IMO, that include the potential for people to think an alarm, or cameras, provide actual security (they don’t, but, some people act like they do). I get that.
And yes I think hand grenades should be legal. It’s the Right of The People to keep and bear arms. Not guns, not firearms, arms. IMO grenades are not so powerful and posing such an indiscriminate risk to large numbers of people as to justify that infringement. I would like to see them regulated like NFA regulates silencers now, though. Yeah that’s still an infringement on the arms of grenades…I could see the argument for no regulation beyond a minimum age of 18 but am not ready to go there just yet for what is usable as indiscriminately as a grenade kind of is bey design
8 Likes
I can see some strong arguments for regulating grenades through the NFA. What I can’t see is any legitimate argument for suppressors/silencers being regulated.
People shouldn’t have to wait a year and spend a bunch of extra money in order to protect their hearing.
6 Likes
I took the survey. They we general questions that are very subjective and can be interpreted as the reader see fit. I don’t see how the answer can do much good. I can see how a discussion about the questions can do some good here.
3 Likes
Here is the survey
The Right to Bear Arms and Gun Violence
This survey is part of an international research project that studies how different countries interpret the American right and freedom to bear arms. This survey is kept anonymous. Please Respond to each of the following questions.
Sign in to Google to save your progress. Learn more
- Indicates required question
Gender*
Male
Female
Other:
Age*
0-20 years old
20-40 years old
40-60 years old
60+ years old
In which country are you currently living?*
Ethnicity (e.g., Hispanic, White, Black, Asian, etc.)*
Highest Level of Education*
Less Than Highschool Diploma
Highschool Diploma or Equivalent
Bachelor’s Degree
Masters Degree or Higher
Do you or family members own a firearm?*
Yes
No
Unsure
Prefer not to Say
Considering your knowledge about possession of a firearm and its possible uses and consequences, how likely are you to recommend a friend/colleague to own at least one gun? (for self defense or sport, etc)
*
0 (Very Unlikely)
1
2
3
4
5 (Extremely Likely)
Please state your level of agreement for the following statements*
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Strongly Agree
Federal Law Which requires background checks is a good thing.
Laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict.
Stricter gun laws will reduce violence and deaths.
There should be a limit on the number of guns a person can own.
Possession of guns should only be allowed if there is a viable safety concern.
Restrictions on guns will reduce suicide rates.
Everyone should own a firearm.
Federal Law Which requires background checks is a good thing.
Laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict.
Stricter gun laws will reduce violence and deaths.
There should be a limit on the number of guns a person can own.
Possession of guns should only be allowed if there is a viable safety concern.
Restrictions on guns will reduce suicide rates.
Everyone should own a firearm.
How safe do you think your family could be, because of the following?
*
Extremely Safe
Somewhat Safe
Unsure
Somewhat Unsafe
Extremely Unsafe
Neighborhood Watch
Home Security System
Security Agency or Police
Possession of Firearm
Having a Dog
Neighborhood Watch
Home Security System
Security Agency or Police
Possession of Firearm
Having a Dog
Should any of the following firearms be banned?*
Yes
No
No Opinion
Assault Rifles
Shotguns
Handguns
Taser Guns
Grenades
Assault Rifles
Shotguns
Handguns
Taser Guns
Grenades
(Optional) If you said yes to any of the firearms above being banned, feel free to explain your choice below:
What do you think the second amendment to the US constitution, i.e “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” means?
*
It guarantees people’s right to possess and carry any sort of firearm
It is meant to allow states to maintain equivalent of today’s national guard units
Don’t know what it means
Other:
Do you think it is more important to protect gun rights rather than control gun violence?
*
Yes
No
Don’t Know
(Optional) In your opinion, what is the best solution to gun violence? Or any other comments?
1 Like
I hope the biggest lesson you learn is to question “why” you are being given the assignments you are given. As Dave 17 said, “Your questions and choices for answers are skewed to provide an anti-rights bias”. He picked it right out, as did I. It is well known that the left have been waging a decades long war to control the curriculums that are being “taught” in our schools. Moreover, they want you to be compliant with their ways of thinking. School should be about learning to read, write, and think logically. (Science/technology/engineering/math) Anything else should be suspect. Even history is being rewritten. (Just Google “Trump” as an example. Despite being one the most successful of the news services, you will be hard pressed to find an article from FOXNEWS in the search results. You will instead be directed to information from almost exclusively left leaning services, including CNN, ABC, NBC,CBS, NPR, Politico, Washington Post, Associated Press, Wikipedia,The Guardian,New York Times, FactCheck.org, et cetera. Your searches them selves are being FILTERED.)
What I am saying is to work hard on educating yourself as opposed to being indoctrinated. People will always be trying to manipulate you for their own devices. Rational thought is your best defense.
5 Likes
Robert, thanks very much for posting that. I didn’t want to click the link.
To the OP, your survey is not written in a neutral way. Nearly all the questions direct the survey taker to an anti-2A, pro-gun control response. This may or may not be intentional, but if you want true, unbiased responses, I’d suggest enlisting the help of someone trained in survey development. They way you word questions, and the order in which you ask them can dramatically skew your results one way or another. As written your results will not be useful, if your intention is to collect a true view of a complete cross section of Americans and foreigners. If your intent is to show that most people want more gun control, and to promote an anti 2A bias, your survey is well done.
5 Likes
[quote=“Robert1246, post:14, topic:100362”]
Federal Law Which requires background checks is a good thing.
Laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict.
Stricter gun laws will reduce violence and deaths.
There should be a limit on the number of guns a person can own.
Possession of guns should only be allowed if there is a viable safety concern.
Restrictions on guns will reduce suicide rates.
Everyone should own a firearm.
Federal Law Which requires background checks is a good thing.
Laws covering the sale of guns should be made more strict.
Stricter gun laws will reduce violence and deaths.
There should be a limit on the number of guns a person can own.
Possession of guns should only be allowed if there is a viable safety concern.
Restrictions on guns will reduce suicide rates.
[/quote]
Looks more like a mantra to me. (With the exception of “Everyone should own a firearm”)
The fact that a choice of “Other” for gender is included should alert this young man to the fact that he has already become a victim of indoctrination.
5 Likes
I think I went with “strongly disagree” on most of those
6 Likes
Or The awareness not to be A victim of indoctrination
Mantras can be good.
1 Like
i “strongly disagree” with most as well i think most gun owner would as to what the world thinks about it i don’t care they have no say here.
1 Like