Saturday, December 12, 2015

N.Y. Times Poll Finds Americans Don't Read Self-Important N.Y. Times Front Page Editorials

by JASmius

This story gives the dimwitted, chowder-headed headline in the Washington Post a run for its money:

In the days after the New York Times published a front-page editorial calling for the ban of assault rifles....

A functionally meaningless term in the actual gun industry with meaning only inside the Left's pants-wetting anti-gun bubble.

....half of the Americans polled by the newspaper said they oppose the prohibition.

Whoops!  And I'll guarantee you every last member of the Times' op-ed board and editorial staff are absolutely gob-smackingly jaw-on-the-floor astonished.

The poll, announced this week....

Itself astonishing.

....was conducted among 1,275 adults on December 4th-8th, starting on the day the Times posted online an editorial that was published on the following day's front page — the first time the paper took an editorial stand on Page One since 1920. In it, the Times' editorial board wrote that "certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition, must be outlawed for civilian ownership."

Which is flatly unconstitutional at the federal level.  Or, "What part of 'shall not be infringed' are you having difficulty understanding?"

However, the poll found that 50% of respondents oppose such a ban, while 44% favor it, marking the first majority opposition since the newspaper started asking the question in 1995, reports the Washington Free Beacon.

Not only did the poll's respondents oppose such a ban, but 33% said they do not believe it would prevent gun violence at all, compared to 26% who think a ban would help a lot; 24% some; and 15%, not much. [emphasis added]

They really thought that shoving their gun-grabbing editorial onto their front page would magically turn the tide of public gun opinion in their favor.  Instead, to the degree that anybody paid attention to it, it reinforced and enhanced Second Amendment support.  As always happens whenever libs are foolish enough to, er, "go off" on another of their anti-gun benders.  It's simply one of the few issues where the Left has never succeeded in gaining any traction and quite clearly never will, just as they will never stop trying.

And the more they try, the more strident they get, and the more they expose how nonsensical their avowed position really is - and therefore the tyrannical impulse underneath it.

Another ten front-page anti-gun op-eds and the Times should make Second Amendment support unanimous.

No comments: