Results drawn from an EPIC m MRA survey of 600 registered voters in Michigan
(margin Of error +/- 4%), conducted February 24-26, 1998

While sponsors of legislation to make it easier for Michigan residents to obtain a concealed handgun license have made several changes in the proposal since it was first introduced a few years ago, the key provision of the proposal is still opposed by a solid majority of Michigan voters. That provision, which is the key change from current law, would no longer require applicants for a concealed handgun license to show they have a need for the weapon.

Regardless of new requirements in the proposed legislation that applicants would have to take gun courses, provisions that would allow police to arrest concealed handgun owners who have been drinking and other new requirements in the proposed law, Michigan voters remain opposed to the proposal. They feel local gun boards should not have to prove why an applicant should not get a concealed handgun license if the applicant cannot demonstrate a need to carry the weapon, as current law requires. Voters cannot seem to get past this key change from current law, and are unlikely to support the proposal as long as the "shall issue" provision remains part of the proposal.

In the first cold and uninformed question about the proposal, survey respondents were told that "legislation is under consideration in Michigan which would change the requirements for citizens to obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun in public," and asked, based on what they know or have heard or read about the legislation, whether they favor or oppose it. A narrow majority, 50 to 30 percent, opposed the proposal (44 percent "strongly" opposed it), with 20 percent undecided. The "undecided" respondents may have heard about some of the changes that have been made to the proposal to make it more attractive to opponents or more reasonable-sounding to the general public.

Opposition to proposal on first "cold" asking

Every region of the state and almost every demographic voter group opposed the proposal on the first "cold" question by at least a plurality. Republicans overall narrowly supported the proposal 40 to 36 percent, but this support came only from Republican men, who supported by a 50 to 30 percent majority, while Republican women opposed it 45 to 26 percent. Independent men only narrowly opposed the proposal on this first "cold" vote, 43 to 40 percent, but a 50 to 25 percent majority of Independent women opposed the bill, with 66 percent of Democratic men and 63 percent of Democratic women expressing their opposition. Respondents who are gun owners supported the proposal 48 to 34 percent, while respondents who said "someone else" in their household was a gun owner opposed it 48 to 30 percent. National Rifle Association (NRA) members supported it 72 to 11 percent, and respondents who said "someone else" in the household was an NRA member also supported it, but only by a 44 to 4 percent plurality. Finally, respondents making over $ 1 00,000 were the only other voter group that narrowly supported the proposal, with all other opposing it.

"Shall issue" seen as bad idea

Survey respondents were then asked about the key change in the bill "to require that local gun boards shall issue concealed handgun licenses to an applicant unless it has been shown that the applicant has a violent criminal record, mental health problems, or that the applicant could be a danger to himself or others." A 61 to 33 percent majority said this change was a bad idea, with 49 percent saying it was a "very" bad idea and only six percent saying they were undecided.

Almost every voter group opposed the proposed change by solid majorities, including all Republicans, although Republican men only narrowly supported it 48 to 47 percent, while Republican women shifted solidly against the proposal by a 71 to 23 percent majority. Gun owners remained supportive of the proposal, as did NRA members and households, but every other voter group moved more solidly toward opposition.

Most say applicants should have to show cause to carry

On another question that really got to the heart of the issue, respondents were asked "Do you think anyone without a violent criminal record or mental health problems should be presumed to be eligible to carry a concealed handgun in public, unless proven to be a danger, or should someone who wants to publicly carry a handgun have to prove that they have a legitimate need to carry it?" On this question, a 72 to 22 percent solid majority said someone should have to prove a legitimate need to carry a concealed handgun. On this critically important and very direct question, every single voter group said the applicant should have to show a need, except NRA members who by a 53 to 44 percent majority said applicants should be presumed eligible. Even a 55 to 43 percent majority of Republican men, a 54 to 38 percent majority of gun owners, a 72 to 23 percent majority of households where someone else is a gun owner, and a 53 to 34 percent majority of households where someone else is an NRA member, said that someone who wants to publicly carry a concealed handgun should have to show a need.

Current responses similar to past results

There were several questions in the current survey that had been asked in a similar EPIC-MRA survey conducted in August, 1995. In both, respondents were asked if they "would feel safer if they could carry a concealed handgun in their car and while walking around outside, or if they would feel less safe knowing that other citizens could carry concealed handguns in their cars and while walking around outside." In the current survey, a 68 to 22 percent majority said they would feel "less safe" if other citizens could carry concealed handguns. This response is almost as strong as it was in 1995, when a 71 to 22 percent majority said they would feel less safe. Only NRA members indicated that they would feel safer, with every other voter group, including gun owners and respondents who said someone else was an NRA member, saying they would feel less safe.

A 65 percent majority in the current survey said they "would feel less safe knowing that other citizens could carry concealed handguns into public places like stores and restaurants," with 24 percent saying they "would feel safer knowing that they could carry a concealed handgun into public places." This response also is almost as strong as it was in 1995, when a 69 percent majority felt the same way. Again, every demographic voter group except NRA members said they would feel less safe knowing that others could carry guns. into public places.

Argument likening concealed weapon to home protection not convincing

Respondents were told that under current law it is easier to get a handgun to keep in the home as protection than it is to get a license to carry a concealed handgun, and that under the proposal it would be as easy to get a concealed handgun license as it is to own and keep a gun at home. Forty-one percent said knowing this, they would be "less likely" to support the proposed changes in the law, 24 percent would be "more likely" to support the proposal and 26 percent said it wouldn't matter. The only voter groups indicating that they would be more likely to support the proposal were gun owners (35 to 30 percent) and NRA members (53 to 17 percent).

No belief that more concealed weapons will reduce crime

A key argument made by supporters of the proposal is that it will reduce crime. This is an argument the public does not buy. When asked if they thought "allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns would increase crime, decrease crime or not make much difference either way," 53 percent said crime would increase - an eight-point increase since the 1995 survey when 45 percent said crime would increase. Only 19 percent said crime would decrease and 23 percent said it won't make much difference either way.

Almost every demographic voter group said crime would increase except Republican men, who said it would decrease, 33 to 32 percent; gun owners, who said it would decrease, 32 to 30 percent; and NRA members, who said it would decrease, 64 to eight percent.

More believe accidental shootings would increase

An argument by opponents of the proposal is that accidental shootings will increase, and this is an argument voters believe. A 74 percent majority said accidental shootings will increase (up three points from the 1995 survey), only four percent said they would decrease, and 21 percent said it won't make much difference either way. Every demographic voter group said there would be more accidental shootings, including gun owners by 59 percent, and even NRA members indicated accidental shootings would increase, with 33 percent saying they would increase, eight percent saying they would decrease, and 53 percent saying it wouldn't make a difference.

Most agree more concealed weapons would increase dangers of "road rage"

Finally, survey respondents were asked if they agree or disagree with the statement that road rage is a bad enough problem now - if this legislation is approved, road rage will become an even greater problem because there will be more drivers who can take out their anger with guns instead of other forms of violence." A 73 to 22 percent majority agreed with the statement,including every voter group except NRA members, who disagreed by a 56 to 42 percent majority. Respondents who have other household members who are NRA members agreed 53 to 44 percent, and gun owners agreed 62 to 33 percent.

Change in law would bring increase in applicants for concealed weapons licenses

If the law is changed, a significant number of citizens would apply for concealed handgun licenses. Seventeen percent of survey respondents said they would apply, with six percent saying someone else in the house would apply. A 64 percent majority of NRA members said they would apply for concealed handgun licenses, 37 percent of gun owners, 27 percent of Independent men, 25 percent of Republican men, 22 percent of all men, 23 percent of union members, and 21 percent of "X" generation members.

The changes proposed for obtaining concealed handgun licenses are opposed by the public, and as long as the basis of any change is to presume people are eligible unless a gun board can show otherwise, instead of the applicant having to show a need for carrying a concealed handgun, the public will continue to oppose the proposal.

The actual questions of the survey, as well as the instructions followed by each interviewer, and the cross-tabulated data from the poll, are on file and are available upon request.