Adversary polling, the gun lobby, and the gun control forces' errors in cultural understanding are also examined. When strict gun control becomes a salient or priority issue with interviewees, the gun lobby turns out to be more in tune with public opinion than do the civic disarmers. The gun lobby's upperhand does not come from superior survey technology, but from superior cultural and historical knowledge. In attempting to explain this gun control paradox, some researchers argue that strict gun control has not occurred despite public approval because of the greater intensity of the beliefs of the anticontrol populace. The implication of the National Rifle Association-sponsored study's low salience finding -- coupled with other factors, including fear, constitutional issues, expense, and effectiveness against crime -- is that making the public more intense would probably benefit the gun lobby. In fact, low salience among the public should benefit the gun control lobby if it emphasizes low visibility decisions in the public bureaucracy or local governing bodies, depending on specific times, places, and issues. A total of 30 footnotes is provided.