Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,578 posts)
Sun Nov 22, 2015, 09:30 PM Nov 2015

PoliceOne's Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers' perspectives

Last edited Mon Nov 23, 2015, 07:17 PM - Edit history (1)

ETA:
Thanks JTO for pointing out that this was posted before by virginia mountainman:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1172123507


I wasn't surprised by anything I read here.

From 13 April 2013: http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-lessons-from-officers-perspectives/

1.) Virtually all respondents (95 percent) say that a federal ban on manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

2.) The majority of respondents — 71 percent — say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of some semi-automatics would have no effect on reducing violent crime.

3.) About 85 percent of officers say the passage of the White House’s currently proposed legislation would have a zero or negative effect on their safety, with just over 10 percent saying it would have a moderate or significantly positive effect.

4.) Seventy percent of respondents say they have a favorable or very favorable opinion of some law enforcement leaders’ public statements that they would not enforce more restrictive gun laws in their jurisdictions.

5.) More than 28 percent of officers say having more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public, followed by more aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons (about 19 percent) and more armed guards/paid security personnel (about 15 percent).

6.) The overwhelming majority (almost 90 percent) of officers believe that casualties would be decreased if armed citizens were present at the onset of an active-shooter incident.

7.) More than 80 percent of respondents support arming school teachers and administrators who willingly volunteer to train with firearms and carry one in the course of the job.

8.) More than four in five respondents (81 percent) say that gun-buyback programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence.

9.) More than half of respondents feel that increased punishment for obviously illegal gun sales could have a positive impact on reducing gun violence.

10.) When asked whether citizens should be required to complete a safety training class before being allowed to buy a gun, about 43 percent of officers say it should not be required.

11.) While some officers say gun violence in the United States stems from violent movies and video games (14 percent), early release and short sentencing for violent offenders (14 percent) and poor identification/treatments of mentally-ill individuals (10 percent), the majority (38 percent) blame a decline in parenting and family values.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
PoliceOne's Gun Control Survey: 11 key lessons from officers' perspectives (Original Post) discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 OP
police one survey 'by invitation only' to members of police one jimmy the one Nov 2015 #1
regarding a response akin to junk science discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #2
I'm not slumbering jimmy the one Nov 2015 #4
apology accepted discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #5
Oh and BTW..... discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #6
No. 2: Curiously, the far higher homicide rates in the 50s & 60s (guns) must... Eleanors38 Nov 2015 #3
IIRC in the '50s and '60s... discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #7

jimmy the one

(2,717 posts)
1. police one survey 'by invitation only' to members of police one
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 12:23 PM
Nov 2015

discontnt: I wasn't surprised by anything I read here.

Only a gullible sap would say such a thing in light of the skewed results; factcheck debunks your 'police one' study as unscientific, since it was an internet poll as well as by invitation apparently to members only:

The ad includes an image of a police badge with a reference to a March {2013} survey by a group called PoliceOne. com, a news and resource site for law enforcement officers. The survey wasn’t a scientific poll that aimed to gather responses from a random sample of the nation’s police officers.
Rather, it was a self-selected Internet poll, in which more than 15,000 of PoliceOne.com’s 400,000 registered members chose to respond, either because of email solicitation or a link to the survey on the PoliceOne.com website.
And there was no question asking whether “background checks” would have an “effect on violent crime.”

In fact, the survey methodology says that a question on criminal background checks was removed “due to flaws with the question details, highlighted by a handful of users.” We spoke with Jon Hughes, vice president of content for the Praetorian Group, which owns PoliceOne. com, about the NRA ads’ claim. He told us he was “unclear where that came from specifically.” He said that the question that was dropped — because of “an error in how it was phrased” — couldn’t be the source either, as the data didn’t match the claim. Hughes said fact-check articles by the Washington Post and Slate.com on the ad “did a pretty good job of analyzing the data to try to determine where that claim came from.”
http://www.factcheck.org/2013/04/nra-misrepresents-police-survey-legislation/

And what's up with the flim flamming, discontent irony sarcasm? since you posted re police one survey on this same may 2013 thread which I did with the same factcheck link; you like to continue to post disinformation every year or so?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=123586

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,578 posts)
2. regarding a response akin to junk science
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 01:38 PM
Nov 2015

"The ad..."

I posted no ad nor did I link to one. Your citing of factcheck's response to something which the NRA apparently published definitely reveals that factcheck had, as its motivation in writing the article to which you linked, discrediting that which the NRA published. I have no clue what the NRA published and I don't care.



The survey wasn’t a scientific poll...

I didn't purport that it was a scientific poll. It's obviously skewed because the self-selected aspect of the included respondents would exclude the opinions of those readers not inclined to answer internet polls.



"...there was no question asking whether “background checks” would have an “effect on violent crime.”

Quite true; I didn't make any claims about background checks.
The article to which I linked and posted in part did not make any claims about background checks.
Why you're addressing background checks I'm not sure. (Maybe you just want to distract from the topic by changing the subject. You should start you're own thread for that.) I happen to like background checks.



"In fact, the survey methodology says that a question on criminal background checks was removed..."

Again, I don't care, I didn't mention BGCs in my OP. So, again, start your own thread on BGCs and stop peeing the pool here in this thread.



"...flim flamming..."

This term means to swindle as in 'use deception to deprive (someone) of money or possessions.'
You assert that I posted "disinformation" but offer no proof of that. Proof would be a "scientific" survey of police officers which shows a preponderance of respondents actually hold opinions counter to the those I posted.



Your factcheck link: < http://www.factcheck.org/2013/04/nra-misrepresents-police-survey-legislation/ >
...makes a bit of fuss about:
Online ads from the NRA wrongly claimed that “80% of police say background checks will have no effect” on violent crime. The survey cited in the ads by the NRA says nothing of the sort.


I made no reference to nor representation of a position on BGCs. GO argue on the NRA site (which neither you nor factcheck seems to have linked to.)
You can return to your slumber now.

jimmy the one

(2,717 posts)
4. I'm not slumbering
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 02:00 PM
Nov 2015

dscntnt: I didn't purport that it was a scientific poll. It's obviously skewed because the self-selected aspect of the included respondents would exclude the opinions of those readers not inclined to answer internet polls.

As a pro gun advocate you were obviously touting the pro gun results of the police one survey. Now you backpedal & claim its skewed.
Which angle 'didn't surprise' you? that the question results were so pro gun? or that they were skewed? use that escape hatch NOW.
Ooops, too late for the escape hatch, you're caught trying to wiggle out:

dscntnt: You assert that I posted "disinformation" but offer no proof of that. Proof would be a "scientific" survey of police officers which shows a preponderance of respondents actually hold opinions counter to the those I posted.

So there you have it readers, dscntnt is standing behind the unscientific results of a 'members only' poll which was not randomly conducted.

dscntnt: This term {flim flamming} means to swindle as in 'use deception to deprive (someone) of money or possessions.'

Not the way I intended it: 1. deceive somebody; - Example: "We tricked the teacher into thinking that class would be cancelled next week" syn: flim-flam, http://www.freedictionary.org/?Query=flim-flam

dscntnt: I made no reference to nor representation of a position on BGCs.

So? That mention of background checks was within the text I posted, & the catalyst for the factcheck, was to keep my quotes in context, & obviously not the crux of my argument, excepting that the one question was deemed ambiguous by police one.
That you harp on this excessively in your rebuttal is simply you playing dodge ball with red herring balls.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,578 posts)
5. apology accepted
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 04:12 PM
Nov 2015
"Not the way I intended it..."

a crappy one but whatever.

So there you have it...

Yes I do have it as you've still offered nothing other than some disconnected thoughts countering something said about the NRA by someone else. Nothing to say to counter what I actually quoted in the OP.

Feel free to expound on a brain-fart in some other thread or even better, start your own. As far as I've seen you've yet to actually write an OP here... ever.

You're dismissed.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,578 posts)
6. Oh and BTW.....
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 07:37 PM
Nov 2015
As a pro gun advocate you were obviously touting the pro gun results of the police one survey. Now you backpedal & claim its skewed.


Yes, I was "touting" the pro-RKBA results which the survey unscientifically concluded. I did not backpedal. I agreed the methodology used to choose the respondents was unscientific. I didn't say that those results were not representative nor did I say they were not correct.

I did say that you failed to address any of the 11 points I quoted in my OP with anything approaching a rebuttal such as contrary evidence.
 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
3. No. 2: Curiously, the far higher homicide rates in the 50s & 60s (guns) must...
Mon Nov 23, 2015, 01:50 PM
Nov 2015

...have been accomplished with revolvers more than with semi-autos as the latter form was less popular. Even now, according to data I've seen here, the most popular gun in homicides is still the .38/.357 family of firearms. I suspect that with the huge shift from revolvers for SD (both police and civilian) to semi-autos for SD has resulted in a surfeit of the less popular wheelguns on the market.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,578 posts)
7. IIRC in the '50s and '60s...
Sun Nov 29, 2015, 10:57 PM
Nov 2015

...the most popular semi-auto was the .45. Only 7 rounds but just about as reliable as a revolver.

IMHO the semi-auto is now more popular because of 10-15 round mags. Rule #3: "Anything worth shooting is worth shooting twice. Ammo is cheap. Life is expensive."

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»PoliceOne's Gun Control S...