I read the poll referenced in the Huffington Post article. There are a number of things in it that give me pause. I would guess that most folks didn't really think about the ramifications of the actions that many of the questions alluded to.
Question 14 addresses keeping weapons out of the hands of the mentally ill and others. At first glance, I am for keeping guns away from crazies, but then the question is how crazy? Does visiting a mental health professional for depression for instance, put you on the list, what about an eating disorder, etc.? Who are the "others" they mention?
Question 16 requires that no one possess a firearm within 1000' of many federal officials!!! Seems like too much of an opportunity for law enforcement abuse to me and just clutters up the code books. What do you do when one comes to spend the day quail hunting at your hunting camp, drives down your street, or gives a speech a couple of blocks over from where you are with your legal firearm?
Question 17 concerns enforcement of ALL existing gun laws. Really hard to voice an opinion without knowing exactly what those laws are and which ones aren't being enforced. If they are going to ask that question, i think that there needs to be a lot more information before one can give a reasonable answer.
Question 18 suggests that anyone ARRESTED for (not charged with or convicted of) a drug offense should lose their right to own a gun. I'm all for keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous felons, but to suggest that being caught with a joint in your pocket (by the way, I have never used any drug not prescribed by my doctor and don't drink either) should be cause for the loss of your rights is just ludicrous and what would prevent the police from just arresting you without cause to harass you? (No offense to all the great officers in the country). The part about failing a "federally administered drug test" really makes my skin crawl. (under what conditions would you be tested?)
#19 Suggests that anyone that attempts to buy a firearm and fails the background test should be reported to law enforcement.
#23 sounds pretty good (deals with folks on the terrorist watch list), but there needs to be some appeal as there are apparently thousands and thousands of folks on that list that probably shouldn't be.
#24 Would prevent the person who was urinating in the park and got charged with flashing (a misdemeanor sex crime) from owning a fire arm. Why would anyone convicted of a NON-violent MISDEMEANOR offense lose their constitutional rights?
#28 suggests that we need a national registry (makes it easier when they really want to come get them and if FOIA requests would allow access to the registry, well, what a can of worms that would be)
#31 addresses background checks for ammunition purchases. Think of the paperwork and the number of people needed to handle it at all levels. What a nightmare.
All of these ideas were favored by more than 50% of the respondents.
The real problem with making big decisions based on opinion polls in general is that polls are easily manipulated, overly simplistic, and often require fairly quick answers without any real consideration of what the potential outcomes of the various answers might actually be.
These polls allow folks to say "this is what the people think" without giving the respondents the information (or finding out if the people actually have the information) needed to form a meaningful opinion.