The Gender Gap on Gun Control

National Journal
Peter Bell
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Peter Bell
Sept. 27, 2013, 12:10 p.m.

A ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­ans say that a ban on as­sault weapons would sig­ni­fic­antly re­duce mass shoot­ings, but be­neath those find­ings lurks a huge gender gap, one that rivals the di­vide between Demo­crats and Re­pub­lic­ans on the is­sue, ac­cord­ing to the latest United Tech­no­lo­gies/Na­tion­al Journ­al Con­gres­sion­al Con­nec­tion Poll.

Wo­men are far more likely than men to say that mass shoot­ings could be re­duced if there were a ban on as­sault weapons, such as the Bush­mas­ter AR-15 rifle that Adam Lanza used to kill 20 chil­dren and six adults at Sandy Hook Ele­ment­ary school last Decem­ber. Al­most three-quar­ters of wo­men say an as­sault-weapons ban would be ef­fect­ive, com­pared with 44 per­cent of men. A ma­jor­ity of men, 54 per­cent, say such a ban wouldn’t have a ser­i­ous im­pact on re­du­cing mass shoot­ings.

Like the na­tion as a whole, opin­ion on the mat­ter among Re­pub­lic­ans is also riv­en by a gender gap. Re­pub­lic­ans in gen­er­al do not think an as­sault-weapons ban would be an ef­fect­ive way to cut down on mass shoot­ings; only 42 per­cent say it would re­duce them. But that skep­ti­cism is quartered largely among Re­pub­lic­an men. While less than a third (29 per­cent) of GOP men and GOP-lean­ing men say an as­sault ban would be ef­fect­ive, a ma­jor­ity of Re­pub­lic­an wo­men and Re­pub­lic­an-lean­ing wo­men (57 per­cent) say a ban would re­duce mass shoot­ings.

The gender gap is less pro­nounced among Demo­crats, who over­whelm­ingly (72 per­cent) say an as­sault ban would re­duce shoot­ings. But it is still there: Demo­crat­ic wo­men and wo­men who lean to­ward the Demo­crats are more likely than their male coun­ter­parts to say that an as­sault-weapons ban would re­duce shoot­ings, by 79 per­cent to 66 per­cent.

What We're Following See More »
WITH LIVE BLOGGING
Trump Deposition Video Is Online
23 hours ago
STAFF PICKS

The video of Donald Trump's deposition in his case against restaurateur Jeffrey Zakarian is now live. Slate's Jim Newell and Josh Voorhees are live-blogging it while they watch.

Source:
SOUND LEVEL AFFECTED
Debate Commission Admits Issues with Trump’s Mic
1 days ago
THE LATEST

The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.

Source:
TRUMP VS. CHEFS
Trump Deposition Video to Be Released
1 days ago
THE LATEST

"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."

Source:
A CANDIDATE TO BE ‘PROUD’ OF
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
1 days ago
THE LATEST

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
×