Results of TheBlaze gun poll

January 14, 2013

Writer

Last week TheBlaze invited you to participate in an online survey about guns and gun ownership, and the current debate about limiting or adjusting what is currently allowed within the 2nd Amendment.

The survey ended up with 106 questions and TheBlaze received nearly 5 million responses to the survey. Given the media narrative that would have most believe that Americans are in strong support of new gun regulations, Glenn went through the results of the survey on radio this morning.

Before getting into the results, TheBlaze gives a good breakdown of who a typical Blaze reader is:

• 100% believe in the right to bear arms

• 85% are at least 35-years

• 80% are homeowners

• 78% have children

• 76% are married

• 73% served in the U.S. military or have an immediate family member serving

• 71% of the respondents are male

• 66% own dogs (36% have cats)

• 63% have more than one gun

• 54% read more than 12 books a year

• 52% have taken a firearms safety class

"If you take all of that data into account, the typical Blaze reader is a married man, a reader, over 35, who has a house, kids, dogs, and at least one gun. However, it should be noted that readership has expanded significantly since last year."

Glenn explained that TheBlaze poll started with 20 questions, and then asked Blaze readers to submit their own.

The most agreed upon question generated unanimous consensus. TheBlaze asked, "Do you believe in the 2nd Amendment."

100% responded yes — that's 4,876,394 people.

There was 99% agreement around the overall feeling about 'why' the 2nd Amendment was written by the Founding Fathers. That feeling was, "I believe the 2nd Amendment protects the people from a tyrannical government."

"So this isn't about hunting, at least for our crowd," Glenn commented.

99% of the individuals who took this poll responded 'no' to these questions:

• Will an assault rifle ban prevent violent crime?

• Would you surrender your Second Amendment rights in exchange for a promise from the government to protect you from all harm?

• Should the UN or any other foreign entity have any say about American gun rights or the Second Amendment?

• Should a gun owners address be published?

• Did you vote President Obama?

"Before you think that the majority of those responding are card‑carrying NRA members or concealed carry permit holders, look at these two questions," Glenn said, "Are you a member of the National Rifle Association and do you carry a concealed weapon?"

Just under half of those taking the poll said 'yes'.

"Now, Gallup has been surveying America on guns and the 2nd Amendment for decades now, and it's interesting to point out that a majority of Americans agree with The Blaze readers on the average citizen's right to own a firearm," Glenn pointed out.

Here are Gallup's poll results:

In 2003 67% believed there should not be a law to ban the possession of handguns except by police and other authorized persons. Interestingly enough, the poll taken the week after Sandy Hook showed a 2% drop in those who called for a handgun ban. The overall support for a handgun ban has dropped 8% over a decade.

"That's amazing," Stu noted of the surprising drop following the incident that really sparked the discussion on gun legislation.

Looking deeper into TheBlaze gun poll:

• 88% own a gun

• 75% have owned a gun for more than a decade and they have more than two guns in their home.

• 74% think that every home in America should have a gun.

• 72% of respondents have taken a firearms safety class. However, only 37% believe that gun buyers should be required to pass a basic firearms skills test prior to being sold a weapon.

In contrast "Blaze readers are twice as likely to own a gun as the rest of America," Glenn explained. "According to Gallup, the last time that we had more than 50% gun ownership in the country was 1993 and it was at 51%."

Looking at these numbers, readers of TheBlaze are likely more concerned that gun ownership could be at risk or become more difficult in the near future. In fact, 87% of those who took TheBlaze poll said that they are considering or will be purchasing a firearm in the near future.

And while 87% are considering purchasing a gun, 91% really believe that the president will use an executive order to enact a gun ban if congress will not. And a whopping 89% are worried that gun confiscation will be attempted before the year's end. 98% say they will not willingly surrender their firearms if confiscation is ordered.

"Really important numbers," Glenn commented.

The poll also shows that 64% have purchased ammunition and 45% have purchased a firearm within the past six months.

"May I recommend that you don't purchase ammunition, that you purchase ways to make ammunition," Glenn told listeners.

Two other overwhelming responses of the nearly 5 million readers who took our poll was one that the leaders in Washington may want to pay attention to. 97% said they will actively campaign against any politician who votes against the principals of the 2nd Amendment, and 99% believe that banning assault rifles will not prevent violent crime.

"What The Blaze found surprising is that Gallup's recent survey on the possibilities of reinstating an assault ‑‑ a ban on rifles taken after the Sandy Hook murders showed no real increase in popular support for this action," Glenn noted. "A majority of Americans is still against this action."

After seeing the results of the poll, one thing is crystal clear: TheBlaze audience is filled with staunch defenders of the 2nd Amendment and that right is also supported by the members of our audience who do not own a gun.

POLL: Was Malaysia Flight 370 taken by a WORMHOLE?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

It's hard to know what's real and what's fake anymore.

With the insanity that seems to grow every day, it is becoming more and more difficult to tell what's true and what's not, what to believe, and what to reject. Anything seems possible.

That's why Glenn had Ashton Forbes on his show, to explore the fringe what most people would consider impossible. Forbes brought Glenn a fascinating but far-out theory that explains the decade-old disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 along with riveting footage that supposedly corroborates his story. Like something out of a sci-fi novel, Forbes made the startling claim that Flight 370 was TELEPORTED via a U.S. military-made wormhole! As crazy as that sounds, the video footage along with Forbes' scientific research made an interesting, if not compelling case.

But what do you think? Do you believe that the U.S. Government can create wormholes? Did they use one to abduct Flight 370? Is the government hiding futuristic tech from the rest of the world? Let us know in the poll below:

Does the military have the capability to create wormholes?

Is the U.S. military somehow responsible for what happened to Malaysia Flight 370?

Is the military in possession of technology beyond what we believe to be possible?

Do you think American military tech is ahead of the other superpowers?

Do you think there would be negative consequences if secret government technology was leaked?

5 videos that reveal the WOKE GARBAGE being taught to our kids

School today is not like it used to be...

Glenn recently covered how our medical schools have been taken over by gender-affirming, anti-racist, woke garbage, and unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. Education at all levels has been compromised by progressive ideology. From high-level university academics to grade school, American children are constantly being bombarded by the latest backward propaganda from the left. Luckily, in the age of Zoom classes and smartphones, it's harder for teachers to get away their agenda in secret. Here are five videos that show just how corrupt schools really are:

Woke teacher vandalizes pro-life display

Professor Shellyne Rodriguez, an art professor at Hunter College in New York, was caught on camera having a violent argument with a group of pro-life students who were tabling on campus. Rodriguez was later fired from her position after threatening a reporter from the New York Post, who was looking into this incident, with a machete.

Woke professor argues with student after he called police heroes

An unnamed professor from Cypress College was captured having a heated discussion with a student over Zoom. The professor verbally attacked the student, who had given a presentation on "cancel culture" and his support of law enforcement. The university later confirmed that the professor was put on leave after the incident.

Professor goes on Anti-Trump rant

Professor Olga Perez Stable Cox was filmed by a student going on an anti-Trump rant during her human-sexuality class at Orange Coast College. This rant included Professor Cox describing Trump's election as "an act of terrorism”. The student who filmed this outburst was suspended for an entire semester along with several other punishments, including a three-page apology essay to Professor Cox explaining his actions. Orange Coast College continues to defend Professor Cox, citing the student code of conduct.

Unhinged teacher caught on video going on left-wing political rant

Lehi High School teacher Leah Kinyon was filmed amid a wild, left-wing rant during a chemistry class. Kinyon made several politically charged remarks, which included encouraging students to get vaccinated and calling President Trump a "literal moron." Despite her claims that the school admins "don't give a crap" about her delusional ramblings, a statement from Lehi High School reveals that she "is no longer an employee of Alpine School District."

Far-left Berkeley law professor melts down when a Senator asks her if men can get pregnant

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Berkeley Law Professor Khiara M. Bridges was asked by Missouri Senator Josh Hawley to clarify earlier statements involving "people with a capacity for pregnancy." The senator's line of questioning is met with a long-winded, frantic rant accusing the senator of being transphobic. When Sen. Hawley tries to clarify further, Professor Bridges makes the outrageous claim that such a line of questioning somehow leads to trans suicides.

Woke ideology trumps medicine in America's top 5 medical schools

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Progressive ideology has infected our most prestigious medical schools and is seeping into our medical system.

As Glenn covered in his latest TV special, "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI), and leftist rhetoric have overtaken science and medicine as the focus of medical schools across the nation. The next generation of doctors and nurses is being force-fed DEI and "anti-racist" nonsense at the expense of slipping standards. This has led to a decline in people's trust in the medical industry and for good reason. Woke ideology has already been the driving force behind at least one medical malpractice case, and more are undoubtedly on the way.

All of this is being spearheaded by universities, which have integrated DEI practices into the fabric of their programs. Our top medical schools now require students and staff to participate in mandatory DEI and "anti-racist" classes and training and are adjusting the standards to reflect this new shift in focus. Here are 5 statements from the top American medical schools that show that medicine is no longer their primary focus:

Harvard Medical School

Boston Globe / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Harvard University "Unconscious bias" resource page:

“As members of HMS, we each have a responsibility to create an inclusive community that values all individuals. Barriers to inclusion may include assumptions we make about others that guide our interactions. Recognizing our Unconscious Bias is a critical step in developing a culture of equity and inclusion within HMS and in our partnerships with other communities.”

The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Rob Carr / Staff | Getty Images

Pulled from the JHM Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity blog:

“One-hour live, virtual unconscious bias training ... [w]ill be required at all Johns Hopkins Health System (JHHS) entities for managers and above; hospital nurse leaders; credentialed providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners); and for school of medicine faculty and trainees (including residents, fellows, medical and graduate students, and research postdocs), as well as those at a manager level or above.”

Stanford University School of Medicine

Philip Pacheco / Stringer | Getty Images

Found on the Stanford Medicine Commission on Justice and Equity page:

“The Commission on Justice and Equity—composed of external and internal leaders, experts, and advocates—represents an institution-wide, collaborative effort to dismantle systemic racism and discrimination within our own community and beyond.”

Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

Education Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Penn Medicine Commitment to Inclusion, Equity, and Antiracism site:

“We openly acknowledge the role of structural forces of oppression as primary drivers of the disparate health outcomes. We believe that working to reverse the underrepresentation of historically excluded groups is critical in achieving equitable health outcomes. While this is an ongoing journey for our program, here are some of the tangible steps we have taken to achieve an inclusive culture”

Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons

Jeenah Moon / Stringer | Getty Images

Pulled from the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity, Justice, and Anti-Racism page:

"Courses are being revised to be more inclusive and informed by the key principle of race as a social construct and a social determinant of health. We are training faculty that Anti-Racism is not an add-on to a course. Anti-Racism is a pedagogy - a manner of teaching, designing courses, and measuring learning outcomes. We make sure that the classroom environment is inclusive by holding space for respectful conversation and ensuring that we address any “classroom ruptures”– a disorienting dilemma or situation when a bias or microaggression that may occur, providing real time opportunities for professional development, learning, and growth. Racist actions and remarks are never tolerated at Columbia University and will be dealt with following established protocols."

Critical theory destroys truth and justice

Editor's note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Critical theory once stood out as the absurd progressive notion that it is. Now, its maxims are becoming an integral part of ordinary political discourse. The more you repeat a lie, the more you will believe it, and this is the very dangerous place in which we find ourselves today.

Take this critical theory maxim as an example: If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice. It's a necessary evil, if you will, the necessity of “controlled injustice.”

By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we’ll save the republic. We’ll be acting in a noble way.

This definition of justice is defined by the “oppressed,” not the “oppressor.” It is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To achieve this justice, however, we need to endorse acts on occasion that, while seemingly unjust, serve a higher purpose. It will ensure the stability and the unity of our republic, and this may manifest in ways that seem contradictory to our values. But these are the necessary shadows to cast light on “true justice.”

And isn’t that what we are all after, anyway?

Here’s another critical theory maxim: Sometimes we find the truth through fabrication. Our pursuit of truth sometimes requires a strategic use of falsehoods. The truth is a construct that has been shaped and tailored to promote the well-being of the collective.

We sometimes need to accept and propagate lies designed by "the system” — not the old system, but the system that we’re now using to replace the old to get more justice through injustice and more truth through fabrication.

We’re engaging in a higher form of honesty. When we fabricate, it’s for the right reason. We are reaching up to the heavens fighting for a higher sort of honesty. To fortify the truth, we occasionally must weave a tapestry of lies. Each thread, essential for the greater picture, will ultimately define our understanding and ensure our unity under this infallible wisdom.

The election is coming up. Does this maxim sound familiar? Many think it is imperative that we secure our republic through election control to maintain our republic. Sometimes, we might need to take actions that by traditional standards might be questionable.

The act of securing elections requires cheating. It's not mere deception. It is a noble act of safeguarding our way of life. We're on the verge of losing this democracy, and without deception, we will lose it.

To ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of those we know will destroy it, we may have to make a few fabrications. We're fabricating stories to be able to control or secure the republic through our elections. By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we'll save the republic. Therefore, we'll be acting in a noble way. Stealing an election from those who wish to harm our society is truly an act of valor and an essential measure to protect our values and ensure the continuation of our just society.

If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice.

I know it's a paradox of honor through dishonor. But in this context, by embracing the dishonor, we achieve the highest form of honor, ensuring the stability and the continuation of our great republic.

Let this be heard, far and wide, as a great call to patriotic action. As we advance, let each of us, citizens of this great and honorable republic, consider these principles. Not as abstract or paradoxical but as practical guides to daily life. Embrace the necessity of controlled injustice, the utility of lies, the duty to secure our electoral process, and the honor and apparent dishonor. These are not merely strategies for survival. They are prerequisites for our prosperity.

We all have to remember that justice is what our leaders define, that truth is what our party tells us. Our republic stands strong on the values of injustice for justice, honor through dishonor, and the fabrication of truths. To deviate from this path is to jeopardize the very fabric of our society. Strength through unity; unity through strength.

We've heard this nonsense for so long. But now, this nonsense is becoming an instituted reality, and we are entering perilous times. Don't be fooled by the narratives you will hear during the march to November. Never let someone convince you that the ends justify the means, that a little bit of injustice is needed to achieve a broader, collective vision of justice, that truth sometimes requires fabricated lies and narratives. If we do, justice will cease to be justice, truth will cease to be truth, and our republic will be lost.