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 »
FBI TURNED DOWN REQUEST
Report: Trump Asked FBI to Deny Russia Stories
2 days ago
THE LATEST

"The FBI rejected a recent White House request to publicly knock down media reports about communications between Donald Trump's associates and Russians known to US intelligence during the 2016 presidential campaign, multiple US officials briefed on the matter tell CNN. But a White House official said late Thursday that the request was only made after the FBI indicated to the White House it did not believe the reporting to be accurate."

Source:
THE QUESTION
How Many Signatures Has the Petition for Trump’s Tax Returns Received?
3 days ago
THE ANSWER

More than 1 million, setting a record. More than 100,000 signatures triggers an official White House response.

Source:
TIED TO RUSSIA INVESTIGATION
Sen. Collins Open to Subpoena of Trump’s Tax Returns
3 days ago
THE LATEST

Sen. Susan Collins, who sits on the Intelligence Committee, "said on Wednesday she's open to using a subpoena to investigate President Donald Trump's tax returns for potential connections to Russia." She said the committee is also open to subpoenaing Trump himself. "This is a counter-intelligence operation in many ways," she said of Russia's interference. "That's what our committee specializes in. We are used to probing in depth in this area."

Source:
NPR ALSO LAUNCHES ETHICS WATCH
Obama Staffers Launch Group to Monitor Trump Ethics
3 days ago
WHY WE CARE

"Top lawyers who helped the Obama White House craft and hold to rules of conduct believe President Donald Trump and his staff will break ethics norms meant to guard against politicization of the government — and they’ve formed a new group to prepare, and fight. United to Protect Democracy, which draws its name from a line in President Barack Obama’s farewell address that urged his supporters to pick up where he was leaving off, has already raised a $1.5 million operating budget, hired five staffers and has plans to double that in the coming months." Meanwhile, NPR has launched a "Trump Ethics Monitor" to track the resolution of ten ethics-related promises that the president has made.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login