* This poll was embargoed until after midnight today, so I refused to post yesterday’s Sun-Times story until I got the actual results…

A new poll shows widespread support among Illinois voters across the political spectrum for the gun-control proposals being debated in Washington and Springfield.

By a 4-1 ratio, voters said they were more likely to elect legislative candidates who backed strong gun-control measures, according to the poll by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.

Those voters included gun owners, the poll found.

“It’s clear voters in Illinois are ready to reward candidates who support these limits — and punish candidates who don’t,” said pollster Al Quinlan, whose Washington-based firm does work for Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

OK, first of all, the poll was conducted for the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. So you gotta take the results with at least one grain of salt.

Secondly, these “more likely to vote” for or against a candidate results are often misconstrued by the media. The results are a gauge of how intense support or opposition really is. You need some pretty high numbers to indicate real electoral trouble or benefit, depending.

And, finally, the pollster surveyed 600 registered voters, not likely voters. That means we’re probably seeing a more liberal skew.

* From the actual poll…

Thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014, are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a strong conceal and carry law with many of the proposals you just heard, or are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a weaker law with fewer restrictions, or would it make no difference?

Kind of a loaded question if you ask me. “Stronger” vs. “weaker”? C’mon.

* Results…

Many of the provisions tested in the poll are actually in Rep. Brandon Phelps’ concealed carry bill, including bans on concealed carry in schools, stadiums, bars, and requiring training, permits and background checks.

The big difference between the two sides is one seeks a far broader ban, even near schools, for instance, while one would only ban it in school buildings.

But the poll did find that by 65-32, Illinoisans want concealed carry banned on buses and trains. That’s a very large margin. Rep. Phelps opposes that idea.

* When asked whether they favored or opposed allowing people to carry “concealed loaded guns” in public, we get this…

That’s a strong majority against, but not spectacularly so.

* Obviously, though, the public is opposed to most of the NRA’s agenda. By a 67-29 margin, they support a “ban on military style assault weapons.” 68 percent support and 28 percent oppose “limit ammunition magazines so only 10 rounds can be fired without
reloading.”

And some of these results are just off the charts.

For instance, by a whopping 93-6 they want “mandatory reporting to law enforcement when guns are lost or stolen.” And also by a huge 82-17 respondents say “All gun owners must register their guns and must notify the authorities when they sell or transfer their gun.”

After all those (and more) proposals are listed, half (300) of the respondents were asked…

Again, thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014, are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a strong gun law with many of the additional proposals you just heard, or are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a weaker law with fewer restrictions, or would it make no difference?

Again, kinda loaded there.

Results…

* The other half (300) were asked this question…

Again, thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014, are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a strong gun law that included background checks on all gun sales, or are you more likely to vote for a candidate who supported a gun law that did not include background checks on all gun sales, or would it make no difference?

The results…

Read the whole poll here.

       

27 Comments - Logic not emotion - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:15 pm: “at least a grain of salt”… Well noted; but I’d suggest at least a bucket instead of a grain. - Formerly Known As... - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:26 pm: The poll might not tell us anything but it’s cheaper than buying ad space for their cause. Got to love these. - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:30 pm: Meh, seems over the top in some areas. 600 seems awfully small for such a diverse state. It won’t impact the NRA or it’s hard-core supporters. It might mean something to a statewide candidate for a general election, but probably next-to-nothing to a GA candidate scared about a primary challenge from the right. - Kevin Highland - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:34 pm: Here is an interestesting poll results of law enforcement officers that seems to be worded a bit more clearly. http://ddq74coujkv1i.cloudfront.net/p1_gunsurveysummary_2013.pdf - Mason born - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:43 pm: Formerly I think you have hit the nail on the head. Don’t know what a poll costs but has to be cheap in comparison to 2-3 days of coverage in Sun-times and TV as well as HuffPO. - Amalia - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:45 pm: now if those of the 600 who favor stronger regulations would just pick up the phone and call their legislators, that would be more people than usually weigh in for this cause her in Illinois. the only poll that counts is those who show up via mail, e and snail, phone, and on the doorstep of politicians. get busy! - Kerfuffle - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:49 pm: Were those polled from across the state or was it skewed more towards Chicago? I think you would see vastly different results one way versus the other. - Mason born - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 12:54 pm: Rich Just curious is there a way to see the Area codes called for the Poll? I would bet the majority of the people polled have representatives that agree with them. For example Macoupin Co. Had a ballot issue for CCW passed with 75+% and 10,000+ voters. Seems a little odd to say 600 is more representative at least of that county. - Ray del Camino - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 1:28 pm: A statewide poll will be heavily skewed toward Chicago **because most of the people in the state live in metropolitan Chicago!** And 600 is a big enough sample size get you a four-point margin for error. - Julia - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 1:44 pm: Mr. Highland gave a link that is impressive. The police officers from around the country seem to have strong leaning toward the citizen’s having training and weapon access along with mandatory sentences for criminal use of firearms.As one local officer advised me,”home invasion takes 2 minutes,we’ll be there in 5 minutes if we’re not backed up with calls” - Formerly Known As... - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 1:45 pm: Thanks, @Mason born Now we can wait for a counter-poll from the gun lobby in 3…2…1… Another few days of “free” coverage for them and fresh headlines and content filler for the Sun Times, etc. - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 1:56 pm: Julia, I’m not sure that Kevin’s poll is much better. Do 43% of police officers really think that there should be no weapons training. Seems out there to me. Although, only 15% of those polled said gun crime was “significant” in their jurisdiction. I imagine their views are quite different from the other 85%. It’s a big state, a big country, and I don’t think there are many, if any, one-size-fits-all answers. You would think universal background checks and straw buyers would fit the bill, but that ain’t easy, either. Mason, I’m quite certain any polls in Illinois would skew sharply depending on where you’re standing. That’s the problem with the status quo and any proposed legislation that doesn’t include home rule. - Todd - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 2:21 pm: Word, straw purchasing is illegal under current state and federl law. - Mason born - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 2:33 pm: Word I agree completely i am sure the polls have outcomes predisposed by who pays for them. Notice the questions asked didn’t inform those being asked that they already have universal background checks in IL. As for the Universal Background checks the problem always comes down to the stupidity of the people who write the bill. Take Schumers bill if the two of us go hunting i limit out and your shotgun breaks i cannot loan my shotgun to you for the rest of the hunt without a fee and background check which can take up to 3 days doesn’t matter if we were friends our entire life. The easiest solution is to simply allow Citizens to access the NCIS system to do their own checks give a confirmation number after the check. However no one will propose that. As for the Straw Buyers the first question should be why of the 15,000 Felons and Fugitives who attempted to buy a firearm last year why were only 43 prosecuted?? For that matter why is the Chicago office one of the worst at prosecuting? As for home rule it’s that whole Constitutional right that is the problem. Would you accept homerule on any other constitutional right? Would you allow Chicago to ban Mosques or Synagogues or limit the times they could be utilized? The truly ironic thing is Chicago could have easily gotten a home rule NY style bill anytime prior to Heller. In 1995 27 states were already May-Issue and 1 was unrestricted the writing has been on the wall for a while. Had Chicago area legislators proposed it they would have passed overwhelmingly. - RonOglesby - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 2:36 pm: I wonder why the PoliceOne poll of 15,000 police officers on what they think of different proposed laws like this will do… http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-findings-on-officers-thoughts/ http://www.policeone.com/news/6188462-PoliceOnes-2013-Gun-Policy-Law-Enforcement-Survey-Results-Executive-Summary/ - Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 2:39 pm: That’s not a poll. It’s an Internet survey. - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 2:49 pm: –The truly ironic thing is Chicago could have easily gotten a home rule NY style bill anytime prior to Heller.– I don’t read Heller as precluding a home-rule option for conceal carry, but I do think most of the state could have had conceal-carry years ago. Todd, sorry, I meant stricter laws and enforcement tools regarding straw purchasing. - Mason born - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 3:45 pm: Word Perhaps i could have worded it better. My point was prior to the Heller decision there was no jurisprudence saying the 2nd was an individual right. Therefore had Chicago area politicians offered a CCW May-Issue like NY most would have considered it a valid compromise. Once there was jurisprudence for an Individual Right then the idea that firearms were a privilege which could be restricted by a municipality or a state ceased to be a valid arguement. Add McDonald which incorporated the 2nd through the 14th and the idea of Home Rule kind of doesn’t make sense anymore. I am trying to refer more to the Mindset. Speaking only for myself a carry bill exempting Chicago and permits issued by county sheriffs back in ‘07 would have been a very welcome compromise. Now that we aren’t talking about a privilege but a right the idea of depriving a significant portion of the population of that right makes no sense as a compromise. Does that make more sense?? - wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 4:36 pm: Mason, we’re in a brand new world after Heller and McDonald, with the federales stepping in, on narrow 5-4 decisions, trumping the states and locals. I suspect it will continue for many years like Roe, with pokes and prods from the states as we’ve seen on abortion. Probably more so now, as some of the legal-beagles hope to lock in the current 5-4 majority on something, whether it’s gay marriage, abortion, or guns. I’m not so sure you guys didn’t have a better deal just leaving it with the states. I know it was a contentious decision within the NRA to challenge on a national level. The composition of the court always changes. The death penalty was cool, then it wasn’t, then it was again, but we all know there’s no way it will last another 10 years. It would be best if we could recognize the differences within our communities and compromise, rather than booting it to the Washington lawyers, but I think that ship has sailed. Careful what you wish for, you might get it. - ggirl - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 4:56 pm: Hi! Appreciate your helpful analysis. . . . However. . . . Quick clarification. . . . The poll is of 900 voters. . . . It surveyed 600 voter and then an oversample of an additional 300 voters from Will and DuPage Counties. . . . That is important because the collar county elected officials tend to either be undecided or opposed to gun safety bills, yet their constituents are far more supportive of issues such as background checks. . . . It’s also pretty significant that the results were high for all party lines — Democrats, Republicans, Independents all in support — including gun owners. . . . Let’s vote already!!!! - Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 5:02 pm: ===The poll is of 900 voters=== No, the results above are from 600 voters. - Plutocrat03 - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 6:00 pm: A survey should also ask what an assault weapon is. If you read the media and have no additional knowledge, then that is one conclusion. Seems like the survey has been designed to give a desired result. - Just The Way It Is One - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 7:10 pm: The poll actually pretty much reflects the status quo overall on these issues and I’m not shocked–the bigger question is if a good number of Legislators in Springfield, entrusted with these upcoming critical votes on all of these matters, will actually give a hoot… - downstater - Thursday, Apr 11, 13 @ 10:21 pm: Until we know where the voters that were polled are mainly from, 600 is nowhere near a representative sample of the state. I could ask 600 people in my county and probably come up with a poll that shows an 80% rate in opposition to further gun control laws. The answer isn’t in the guns. It is in the mental health system and enforcing the existing laws. Until that happens, people that shouldn’t have guns will continue to get them and won’t be punished properly for breaking the law. If you could legislate something into not being a problem this country would be drug free. It’s not and any amount of new laws won’t make it so. - Anonymous - Friday, Apr 12, 13 @ 3:41 am: Sorry, but lost me at “Thinking about the elections for Illinois general assembly in 2014,…” Is this because the objective for the poll is to recruit candidates based on what the results show, or is it to try to emphasize that those who don’t vote a certain way will not get re-elected? The wording seems extremely…odd. - Mason born - Friday, Apr 12, 13 @ 7:17 am: word I don’t know if you will check this but i force myself to unplug around 5. My family is too important to spend more time then that. I disagree with a few things on your analysis. while i agree i felt great trepidation myself prior to Heller. However the 2nd is not Roe. Roe was an infferment of some sort of right where there was no clear wording to find it. Heller was simply looking at the text of the 2a and the arguements from its ratification and ruling accordingly. As for careful what you wish for absolutely all of us on both sides should remember that. I agree we are heading for a 10th amendment showdown of some varying degree. I think however unless someone is ready to appeal the 14th incorporating the Bill of Rights to the states the first 10 amendments should be set in stone. It is frankly amazing that it took so long to incorporate the 2nd. - Mason born - Friday, Apr 12, 13 @ 7:27 am: Ggirl I am assuming from your comment that you are tied into ICAHV or at least a supporter if not i am sorry for the assumption. However you comments point out what many of us were asking. You are basically saying 600 people were called in cook county who didn’t like guns. Then to get a diverse sample you called 300 more in Will and DuPage. So you say let’s vote already? However what you forget is those 600 already have legislators that agree with them and are pushing for their ideas. Meanwhile Tuesday 10,000 people voted in one county and %75+ voted for CCW should their legislators yield to your 600 person poll?? There are apparently two reasons to conduct polls 1. to measure public opinion (what we all thought they were supposed to do) 2. To attempt to influence public opinion. I think we know what this one was for. Well done crafting a survey and sample group to ensure the answers you wish. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.