Getty Images
When we see attendance at gun shows and reports of brisk gun sales at gun stores, it's easy to get the impression that a larger percentage of Americans are choosing to purchase firearms. There is, however, ample evidence to the contrary -- even as gun sales go up, the percentage of households with guns goes down.
The share of American households with guns has declined over the past four decades, a national survey shows, with some of the most surprising drops in the South and the Western mountain states, where guns are deeply embedded in the culture.
The gun ownership rate has fallen across a broad cross section of households since the early 1970s, according to data from the General Social Survey, a public opinion survey conducted every two years that asks a sample of American adults if they have guns at home, among other questions.
The rate has dropped in cities large and small, in suburbs and rural areas and in all regions of the country. It has fallen among households with children, and among those without. It has declined for households that say they are very happy, and for those that say they are not. It is down among churchgoers and those who never sit in pews.
Daniel Webster, the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research, told the New York Times, "There are all these claims that gun ownership is going through the roof. But I suspect the increase in gun sales has been limited mostly to current gun owners. The most reputable surveys show a decline over time in the share of households with guns."
I think the way in which this trend manifests itself politically is worth watching. In fact, it may help explain why so much of the rhetoric that dominates the debate over gun safety seems so unhinged.
Rachel and Chris Hayes had an interesting chat on the show about this a few weeks ago, and something Chris said stuck in my head:
"[T]he dirty secret of the gun market right now is there are two lines that go in opposite directions. The percentage of households that own guns is going down, and the number of guns in the country is going up. A smaller group of people are buying more and more guns, which means the manufacturers themselves have the same incentives as Wayne LaPierre, which is to cater to the most extreme gun obsessive acquirers, because that is where their market, and those interest people whose views are the most outside the mainstream. And that makes them politically toxic if they step forward. [...]
"[I]t's increasingly kind of a hobby, hobbyist fetishistic audience. It`s not your casual person who may own one shotgun. That`s not where the growth in the industry is. The growth in the industry are people who own 12 guns."
When one considers the paranoia that frequently serves as a foundation for so much of the NRA's messaging, keep in mind, this isn't an accident.
Leave a Comment:
Coming (fer yer gunz!) soon to a town near you: the dreaded "Black Helicopters" with huge electromagnets, flying low over certain houses. . .
And don't ignore the towns that are trying to make it mandatory for you to own a gun.
So, where are the black helicopters and the blue-helmeted troops and the FEMA camps when we really need them?
How did you get those gangsters in chicago to admit they had guns in the home?
black helicopters are a piece of cake to drop, if is the fighter jets that are the problem.
A casual friend was called to secure her estranged father's home, following his death by natural causes. The reason? Guns, and lots of guns. Ultimately, 528 guns were found in the home, including enough ammo to fill several large gargage bags, and assorted gun- sights. Indeed, fetishist/hoarder.
There are very few gun nuts with only one gun. My late paranoid-schizophrenic brother was found to have 34 guns (and trust me, he was certifiably crazy, having once pulled one of them and fired it at me during an intervention in the midst of one of his "episodes" - the reason I am here is he'd forgotten I had found that gun and unloaded it the year before) when we were cleaning up his home after his untimely meeting with an 18 wheeler coming down the off-ramp as he drove up the off-ramp.
Many people own many guns because they are not a one-size-fits-all sort of thing. I mean, how many screw drivers do you own? do you only own a phillips or a flat head? My father-in-law is an avid hunter. So he has black powder rifles for black powder season. He has different shotguns. He has crossbows. Etc, etc, etc.
The same goes for handguns. You might want to target practice with a .22. Or you might wanna target practice with a 500 S&W. Shooting a 1911 is not like shooting a revolver, and that's not like shooting a Glock.
On the other hand, many people own many guns because they are extremist right-wing nutcases.
Alva, when was the last mass screwdrivering?
Meddling, you are aware that guns can be used for self-protection, right?
Sandra...did your friend ever do anything illegal with his weapons?
just asking...
meddlingmonk, as I recall the subway shooter took care of them. can't threaten people with your screwdriver from a wheelchair.
Plus you need guns for your children spouse, visitors, plastic bags of ammo, with 500+ guns you should have needed a waste bin like they use on construction sites. The man was woefully unprepared.
Heck I keep at least 10 guns and 2500 rounds in my car if I leave the city. You never know what you are going to run into in a strange area.
I find it odd that the response to someone owning a large number of guns is immediate concern that they must be an extremist of some sort.
M son's godfather is a very liberal college professor who has an interest in history. He collects vintage firearms and owns dozens of guns, mostly of WWII and WWI vintage. They're all kept in locked display cabinets, and he enjoys taking them to the range and firing them at targets now and again.
To the best of my knowledge he's not been hunting since he was a kid, and gun safety is something he takes very seriously. He's the ideal gun owner, absolutely despises the NRA because they object to reasonable policy around gun safety and good public policy, and he happens to be in the category of owning 12 or more weapons.
Why try to paint such people as extremists?
Indeed, think about it a minute -- the NRA membership (which in no way includes all gun owners) is itself for almost all of the measures being discussed as policy these days. The people on the left who like these policy ideas need to stop trying to make enemies of the people who happen to own guns (on the left as well as the right) and realize that the mere fact of gun ownership doesn't make someone a political opponent. There's broad agreement on these policies, so let's stop demonizing each other and start working together to force the political parties to reach bi-partisan consensus on better policies.
That is, unless calling people extremists is more fun than actually solving problems.
He may well be the "ideal" gun owner, but I think he is far from the "typical" gun owner.
It's a hard sell to convince me and others that people who own a large number of firearms don't suffer some mental issues. Whether those issues are their being an extremest or have hoarding issues.
I have two firearms. Deer and groundhog. Some would say thats two too many.
I thought 'How many would I need to do everything I may want to do' and the answer is twelve. No "military style weapons" in that list. To me thats allot of guns and realistically I wouldn't use all of them so there isn't a reason to have them.
To some people a dozen weapons isn't anything.
The question becomes 'when should we become concerned'? When does the number of weapons move from valid use or hobbyist and become a pathology?
There is no set answer.
.
@DaddyLove
I disagree. I live in Texas, where I assume that anyone I meet is carrying a concealed handgun. I know some people who are, for a fact, carrying. I know many, many gun owners. I do not know an irresponsible gun owner.
They keep them locked up, away from their kids. They do not carry when going out to party. They do not carry where not permitted to do so. They hand over their CHL with their drivers license when pulled over for speeding - so the officer knows there's a gun in the car (I said responsible gun owners - not responsible drivers).
I'm sure there are many, many crazies out there, but the simple fact that NRA members poll at near-90% in favor of tighter gun controls tells you all you need to know. The crazies are a very small minority.
FTR, I do not own a gun.
And your son's godfather is not one of the ordinary weapons fetishists, either. You'll note that his firearms are all WW I and WW II vintage rifles; whereas that's not what's being pushed by the firearms manufacturing lobby today (AR-15s, M4 carbines, etc. -- modern warfighting firearms).
You're right that mere fact of gun ownership doesn't make someone a political opponent; but the facts on the ground indicate that the people showing up at political rallies with AR-15s are not collectors of antique firearms. Just ask Larry Klayman.
If they're in Texas and have guns, they're crazy. I say that as a Texan.
You are offering a strawman argument. How many people who own a dozen guns own relics? How many of them own the newest, most deadly models that they can afford? How many are collectors of rare models and how many buy the newest on the market?
Your argument is so obviously false that it actually "refudiates" your point.
Daw55 describes me as well, in her son's godfather. I carry modern firearms as a sheriff's deputy, but my personal collection is antiques, mostly inherited. I own less than 8 and while I would like one or two more, I don't feel a need to stock up.
@Rob, there are many people who collect various items of interest and have a large collection. Does that make them all hoarders or extremists if their collection is rare orchids or Disney items or (my real interest) antique advertising signs? Some people, one gun is way too many for them to have, but some I'd be just fine if they had several dozen. Hard and fast rules don't work. The individual needs to be looked at, which is why we need universal background checks.
Like the person described by daw55, I am a VERY liberal college professor who happens to own a large number of historic guns, mostly WW1 and WW2, but also some civil war black powder (which are not classified as firearms by the government because they aren't cartridge guns). I generally collect guns for their rarity and historic provenance, I don't keep ammo in the house, and I don't shoot them (many are too rare to risk damaging). In this regard I'm no different than people who collect old uniforms, medals or helmets. I support (most) gun control, and I despise Wayne Lapierre and the NRA with a boundless passion.
However, based on the image being put out their by some people on the left (who I otherwise agree with), I'm a crazed, right-wing nut job because I own more than twelve guns. The fact that many of these guns are close to or over 100 years old and haven't been fired in over half a century doesn't mean anything to some people. Gun control will happen, as it should have happened a long time ago. But it should occur in a way where legitimate hobbyists who collect guns for their historic value or other legitimate sporting purposes are not painted with the same broad brush as those who adhere to the extreme, anti-government militancy of Ted Nugent and the NRA.
Orchids, Disney items and antique advertising signs are not likely to kill anyone. Guns, in the wrong hands, will.
Assuming you're not a felon, background checks will not keep you from owning as many guns as you want.
So, what's the problem?
As I said, I support most gun control laws, so I have no problem with universal (and thorough) background checks.
I DO have a big problem being lumped in with the wackos in the NRA and people like Ted Nugent, just because I collect guns. My motivation (preserving history) and theirs (overthrowing the government) are not in any way the same, and they should not be judged on the same merits. I know a lot of liberal and moderate gun owners who feel the same way.
This is an important conversation, and the responsible majority of gun owners (not the wackos) need to be a part of it if anything constructive is to be accomplished. Painting an entire segment of the population with a broad brush, as if they all fall into one, neat category may make great punditry, but its also a great way to alienate a lot of people who may otherwise agree with you.
I have many friends who own multiple guns. Most of them are blackpowder weapons. Two of them are licenced professional pyrotechnians. One of them owns at least two Gatling guns and a few tanks from WII. He rents them out to movies sets etc. I do not think if someone has many guns they are my enemy. I personally would like one day to own a brace of Queen Anne pistols.
However there is a type of hoarding that has a distinctive psychological profile that is obsessive and paranoid. I mean who really 20 AR-15s? Safe sane gun laws can protect peoples lives.
I don't see why anyone should concern themselves with what stuff other people own. I don't see anyone talking about the problem of some people owning too many cars. Or too many homes. Or too many TV sets.
There are many different kinds of guns for many different types of applications. No one would use a 12 gauge shot gun to hunt squirrels, but it you were camping and happened upon a bear, a 12 gauge might save your life. It would make a poor choice for concealed carry. If you were trying to hunt deer from long distances, it also would make for a poor weapon choice.
What ever happened to minding your own business?
["I don't see why anyone should concern themselves with what stuff other people own. I don't see anyone talking about the problem of some people owning too many cars. Or too many homes. Or too many TV sets."]
If you really can't see the difference between having several TV sets versus having several deadly weapons meant to murder people, then there is no hope for you. People with private arsenals scare the hell out of me, and Newtown, Connecticut is the perfect example of why. That maniac murdered 20 children and 6 teachers with guns stolen from his mom's private arsenal. He didn't throw houses or drive cars at them.
["What ever happened to minding your own business?"]
When paranoid gun nuts make it possible for us to stop minding their business, then you can talk, kiddo. Until then, shut the @!$%# up.
Shade, what makes you think owning a gun is owning a "deadly weapon meant to murder people"? Are you really telling me that for everyone who buys a gun, the only thing they're thinking about is who they can murder?
Why should a law abiding citizen owning a gun scare the hell out of you? And why should I have to give up my rights because you're prone to wetting yourself?
Mariabloomberg #3.11 : Who needs more than one house? 20 AR's, well you have your sniper model with high power scope, your traditional with fixed stock, your picany rail model for attaching who knows what, your zombie model with the dead undead selector switch, your one with the silencer, then you need the duplicates for your hunting cabin, your fishing cabin, your beach house.
Then the wife and kids guns. it adds up quickly. oops, almost forgot the backups while you are getting the primary one worked on. crooks don't ask if you have your gun in the shop before they break in.
Alva #3.14: Can you think of any manufacturer who has a safety / warning label that says to point it at people? I can't.
Robert #3.10 I have no problem with voluntary background checks, I would love to run hillery clinton and see if she is denied, We know she attacked the president of the united states, we know she has a history of domestic violence. But they should pay the seller for the inconvenience. I think $10 for a request, and $25 for a denial sounds fair. OR possible the going rate, so ~$150 in DC. If the government wants to know they can pay for the knowledge.
Why are you satisfied with the background check when they can't even tell I am me if I step 3 feet into another state? My address hasn't changed, my SS# is the same. I could even buy the same gun yet the feds can't figure out I am me because of a 3 foot difference in the stores location.
"Mariabloomberg #3.11 : Who needs more than one house?"
Mitt Romney? Donald trump? Both are examples of excess IMO. I hope the rest of your post is snark. And please spell my name as written even though you spelled it as it is suppose to be pronounced.
Thank you
Sorry, MariaBlumberg. No, just the beach cabin anyways, can't stand the ocean, stinks of fish, and I am to cheap to pay the ridiculous price for the "official" zombie model. Wife has finally allowed me to waste the $250 for my silencer as my birthday present. There are as many different guns as there are different needs and uses for them.
I have three in the safe waiting on their new american owners, who are fearful they will not be able to get them after the long arduous process of becoming a citizen the right way.
A 12 gauge would be a great concealed carry piece, but the government has outlawed sawing them off so you can conceal them.
owning guns is not a bad thing. using them to kill innocent people is a bad thing. i started hunting when i was 14; the legal age. the first thing my father taught me was gun safety. to never point a gun at something unless you wanted to shoot it. if more children were exposed to gun safety i really believe we would be a safer nation. the more you understand and know about something, the better you can handle it. knowledge is the key. i know many states have good education programs about gun safety. but i wonder if we would be better served if we brought some of that safety knowledge to highschool. at least in an informational format about gun safety. just so kids realize how dangerous guns can be in uneducated hands. todays movies and video games glorify shooting and killing. in my day we saw first hand what damage a weapon could do to an animal. we learned to respect guns and gun safety.
A person can only really use/need 4 guns. At least, this is all I can rationalize. A hunting rifle, a sidearm, a shotgun, and a militia style weapon. Yes, I'm ex-military, yes I hunt, yes I bla bla bla. Yes, before anyone yells at me, the militia weapon is mostly just for fun at the firing range. Naturally, I keep everything under lock and key... even/especially ammo.
I've tried to look for a reason to have more. I can't find one. Until I do... I'll only have the 4. Why would anyone need/want more guns than they could possibly use or carry? I really don't understand.
You need a "militia weapon" like you need that hole in your head. Thanks for reminding me how many morons I met in the military.
I think you both missed the first part of "use/need" (there's a reason it was first) and are making some pretty insulting assumptions about me. That or you seem to think that anyone whom chooses to own/operate firearms has a mental deficiency.
If it makes you feel any better, I'm also the most pro-regulation person I know. It is because of my own personal experience at seeing what they can do that I know just how badly they need to be regulated.
Of course, it's a moot point of what a individual "needs". If I want to own 50 different guns, and I can afford them, then it is my right to own them. End of story.
As long as you're a sane and law abiding citizen I would agree 100%. I just think that those 3 (sane, lawful, citizen) point should have been proven for each purchase. I feel the same for ammo...
Any insane notion I have about regulation... I still don't think anything should be illegal. For those of you whom don't know, nothing is illegal. All you have to do is file for a tax stamp, pay for a federal backround check, and patiently wait.... and you can get basically anything. And I mean Anything. Usually it's somewhere in the 100-500$ range and 2-6 months.
Stephen, why should I have to jump through hoops to exercise my rights? Do you have to prove that you're sane, lawful, and a citizen before you're allowed to practice your right of free speech?
Concealable gun, concealable backup gun, very deep concealable to keep away from cops. Close range high capacity, long range extreme accuracy, shotgun, riot gun, extreme penetration gun for armored threats, open carry beauty to compensate ;).
But the simple answer is at least one gun for every type of ammo, so you can always have something that will fire anything you can find.
stephen bastas #5.4: +10, sadly you have to find someone to give up theirs, we need to repeal the assault ban and allow them to be made again so the price will drop. I have a much easier standard, you lock them up if they are not safe to be on the streets.
i will be the first person to tell u it needs to be regulated. Too many people flipping guns on the side, not paying taxes and doing it all off the radar is no good. Too many gun owners supplement their hobby with flipping guns for a profit. This needs to stop.
Then you can prosecute them for running a business without a license. After you prove it, they can then be prosecuted for not having their ffl.
But please explain how you make a profit selling something you can just buy at a store? no sales tax? but the seller paid it when he bought the gun.
This "social survey" does not have the same results as ongoing Gallup research that shows as of late, Democrats and women have been driving gun sales up. Specifically, the NY Times story says gun ownership has been 35% in the 2000s while the Gallup places ownership clearly in the low to mid 40s and recently ticking up to 47%.
GSS, NOPR, Gallup, and other polls all agree: ownership has been steadily declining since the 1970s.
The broad trend, however, seems to be reversing. The latest NBC/WSJ poll indicates that the number of households reporting gun ownership rose a full percentage point in just one month, reaching 42% as of February, 2013.
Polling data, NICS background check data, CDC data, and recent firearm sales figures all seem to confirm the increase.
GUNFAQ: http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/03/four-decade-decline-in-gun-ownership/
Most honest gun owners won't mention how many guns they own, for several reasons. They don't wish to offend you if you're a fervent anti-gunner; if they don't know you well, they really don't care to have that information passed around; they don;t want their home to become a target for robbery, etc.
Around here, most of the men over 50 I know have several guns, whether handguns, rifles, or shotguns. Some have been passed down father to son, some have been purchased. They are rarely sold. Let me repeat that, the firearms are rarely sold, because they are a very good investment, they are increasing become harder to acquire, they intend to continue to pass them down. I'm sure this accounts for the "collections" of some.
Michael, it seems you may be relying on a summary "opinion" of polls instead the polls themselves. If you click on the Gallup link in my original post you'll see they have gun household ownership at 54% in 1994 yet your link has the following:
People are hoarding guns to shoot the gubmint the day they come to take their guns.
There is no doubt that is the case.
If you look at industry numbers, it would seem the polls are skewed. I would guess very few gun owners at this point are going to admit to any poll-taker that they own guns.
Hunting alone is on the rise. It is now an $87 billion industry supporting over 680,000 employees.
http://www.nssfblog.com/sportsmens-activity-report-states-benefit-from-economic-impact-of-hunting/
That is only the hunting market. The self-defense and competition markets are huge as well.
Since 2007, there have been over 50 million NCIS background checks for gun purchases.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports
If people think all of this is being supported by a diminishing number of gun owners, I would have to say - rethink it. The sheer, sustained sales volume of guns, ammunition, and aftermarket accessories are not being bought by fewer and fewer people.
If you look at the NSSF's actual report, you'll discover that the *number* of hunters has been essentially unchanged since 1991. Since the population has increased 23% during that time, it means the percentage of the population who hunt has, indeed *fallen* - confirming (at least among hunters) the conclusions of other studies that show a declining rate of firearm ownership.
Again - the claim is being made that fewer and fewer people are making a firearms industry of well over $100 billion get larger and larger. That simply isn't logical. There is no indication at all that it is even slowing down a little bit, other than the fact that certain sectors in the supply chain are exhausted of raw materials.
Let's be careful about differentiating between the claims being made and the claims that are factually correct.
Factually correct: Surveys show an increasingly smaller *percentage* of folks own guns.
Factually *Incorrect*: Surveys show an increasingly smaller *number* of folks own guns.
Factually unspecified (as far as I know): Surveys show an increasingly smaller number of people are *buying* guns.
As for revenues of the gun biz, it's actually a pretty meaningless figure for several reasons:
Yeh, but most gun manufacturers are publicly traded companies. They have to report their earnings to their stockholders just like any other company.
And, I would note that gun makers are reporting record breaking profits.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-27/sturm-ruger-profit-rises-to-25-year-high-on-surging-weapon-sales.html
See item 2 on my list - and compare to following quotation from article you cited:
(Also, while it doesn't necessarily affect year-to-year sales significantly, it is relevant that, even in current dollars, this wasn't a record for Sturm Ruger. Witah a much smaller population and a lot of inflation since then, their profits were higher way back in 1987. Except when it comes to the stockholders, the most relevant number for determining where the gun biz is today would be the ratio of the number of firearms produced to overall population.
BTW, this number is available. The ATF reports annual changes in domestic firearm inventories (manufacturerd + licensed imports - licensed exports) and there's plenty there to confirm that the inventory is actually rising (which shouldn't be a surprise).
Unfortunately, the only information we have on whether the new guns are going to new owners are based on dedcutions from the public surveys.
I can tell you ammo, when and if you can fins it, is being limited to 1 box per caliber, due to shortages. My local gun range has 30 lanes, expect a 2 to 3 hour wait on the weekends. The number of people buying firearms is exploding, a lot of women, and a lot of younger 30 somethings, as well as college age.
twisted
having the words "firearms" and "exploding" in the same sentence might not be the best idea. ;-)
I am shocked and amazed at the number of women that I know, that have never even talked about guns now are buying one and practicing on gun ranges.
That's very good news! The best way for a woman to be safe is to have the means to protect herself.
If Chris and Rachel think I have a fetish so be it. While I am often described as casual my firearm use is not done casually. It is done safely and with thought. I can currently support some of the proposals under consideration to promote safety, reduce violence and promote mental health screenings and information sharing between relevent agencies. However if the personal insults regarding firearm ownership and legal use continue I believe a lot the moderates will be lost to any changes. Work to reduce violence in general.
Why focus on guns and not ammunition?
You can have all the high capacity magazines/drums you want but if there's nothing to fill up those containers, your'e outta luck.
Make bullets starting at $10,000 a piece. That way you just have to worry about Bill Gates, Donald Trump, and Warren Buffett going on shooting rampages...but not together.
Except that is a blatant violation of the 2nd amendment. Besides, all that will do is accelerate the already growing DIY bullet making industry. What, you weren't aware of this?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081110013550AAGfQYW
You do understand it was the government laws that made bradey an imbecile prone to stupidity. If hinkley was allowed to buy his exploding bullets they wouldn't have malfunctioned when he shot those trees.
I hope you like higher taxes, at 10 grand a piece, obamas latest billion rounds will make his deficit look like a surplus. $10,000,000,000,000 and that is just the ones we know about. I guess you can cut off the seniors checks again to pay for it.
it's all about the arsenals. get a clue.
+1, you only need enough guns to take theirs in the arsenals.
Articles like this gladden the hearts of many of us in favor of gun control by talking percentages. While it's good that percentage-wise gun ownership is declining, I still wonder what the raw numbers are. That is, we know that the denominator (US population size) has been growing over the last 40 years. But what about the numerator (the number of American households with guns)? Has it been flat, declining, or actually increasing? If the population rate is growing faster than the number of households with guns even though the gun-owning households are increasing, then there are still more households with guns regardlesss of the percentage. I find it hard to take comfort when there is nearly a gun for every American, that the rate is simply declining. Did we really get to 300 million guns just with repeat buyers?
Its all about the zombies...no seriously you know how golf clubs pile up in the garage...shooting is the #2 participation sport in the US so its the same logical conclusion. I mean the tactical difference between owning 2 guns and 10 isn't much. I'm still livid with the cigarette segment as there's been no concealment of danger by the manufacturers(with the possible exception of some product defect situations which is not the case with most popular semis) and Ive never met anyone with a valuable collection of early 1900's or late 1800's cigarettes either....
I have my doubts about this. I suspect that gun owners are more inclined these days to lie when asked by a pollster if they have a gun at home. Gun owners don't like the idea of gun registration simply because they don't want anyone to know what they own. Security concerns enter into this.
Every time I've been to a gun store lately, I have seen people who aren't gun owners shopping and looking for a gun to buy. Take that for whatever personal anecdotes are worth. I don't recall where I read it, but I recall seeing a news article where a gun store owner reported a 500% increase in sales since December.
Guns really are flying off the shelves. I have no doubt that the bulk of these are people who already own guns, but its not all of them.
Or, you might notice that the lines at gun shows have gotten incredibly long. One line at a gun show in San Diego was reportedly over a mile long.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWjDkgNrKrw
You are correct. In Okla, and in most places around the country, ammo is extremely scare. All you anti-gun folks check out the sporting goods dept in your local Walmart, look in the ammo case and see if its not close to empty.
Really, if you aren't aware, please just walk and check it out.
9mm, 40 cal, 45 cal, 380 are the most common handgun rounds and I'd bet you can find one box of any of them, perhaps some very expensive self defense rounds maybe, certainly no target ammo. Guns themselves are back-ordered for months. You'll have a hard time even locating .22 ammunition.
Perhaps that could even be a signal to the liberals out there. Most of the people out here in flyover country think there's a strong possibility some serious crap might go down. You don't need a gun? Fine with us.
Federal non-military agencies have bought two billion rounds of ammunition in the last 10 months
To provide some perspective, experts estimate that at the peak of the Iraq war American troops were firing around 5.5 million rounds per month. At that rate, the [Department of Homeland Security] is armed now for a 24-year Iraq war. A 24-year Iraq war!
This is in addition to what they already have. Wonder why the "conservatives" and the rednecks are a little nervous? We think you are the crazy ones!
Only morons "need" guns. Are you a moron?
Was this woman a "moron"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1zZGe3f0mc
No, she was just lucky to get a round off in the right direction without shooting herself or another innocent bystander.
My point is that no gun owning does not protect you from fate, may hap hers did that day but when it's "her time" no gun in the world will make a difference. If peace and freedom is what you espouse and honor you must live peacefully and freely.
There's no such thing as fate. You could die in an hour or in 50 years. But some thing would have to act to make you a living conscious human being or making you deceased. That thing might be a heart attack or a burglar. It could be cancer or you could jump off a building. But people don't just drop dead.
Here's the beauty of self-defense: If some one or some thing tries to make you dead, you have a fighting chance of stopping it. See how that works? Neat, huh?
It doesn't take much training to not shoot innocent bystanders. See, even an old man can do it. Oh, and one thing you should notice about this video: these 2 robbers were armed. For some reason a shoot out didn't happen. Why do you think that was?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhbarunzTtc
trayvon will disagree with you, a gun is very good at making sure your time comes well after the crooks is up. getzs emptied his gun in a crowded subway in nyc, and not one innocent person was hit, only the crooks. The only ones shooting bystanders is the cops because they won't be charged with the murder.
You can't live peacefully and freely unless you first LIVE.
An armed society is a polite society. Would you yell and throw rocks at someone with a gun?
I think we need to differentiate between legitimate collectors of firearms and the hoarders.
By legitimate collectors, I mean the folks who have one or perhaps two pieces each of various weapons of historic interest. By hoarders I mean the folks who have have multiple semi-automatic modern military style knock-offs. The first show up at antique auctions and the latter show up at the gun stores and make the nightly news.
(Serious hunters may also have a variety of weapons, used for various types of game although I suspect a dozen is pushing it, unless some are still on hand but have been replaced by a newer, seemingly better forear for the purpose.)
The differentiation is, I think, extremely important, for us to recognize.
Few folks would consider the antiquities collectors nuts. They're really no different from baseball card collectors or comic book collectors.
But, in the flip side, I think it's more a matter of lack of knowledge on the part of the critics affecting the sensitivities of the collectors. It doesn't hurt to inform those who don't know there are collectors, but I doubt many of the folks who decry the owners of large numbers of firearms are really thinking about the collectors, in the first place. The collectors aren't the ones making the nightly news - except when used to confuse the issue about the hoarders
So you are ok if I collect one of each type of AR? about 70+ I would guess, but if I only have 15-20 I am a horder?
Did you go to the same school as feinstein, plastic evil, wood good, 30 rounds evil, 7 rounds good.
The horders aren't making the news either, unless some criminal government entity tried something illegal and stupid.
You could hunt anything with an m-60 machine gun, haven't found any game that can get away from it yet, alas the government would rather our children starve.
Believe NOTHING from Rachel Maddow
I am trying to figure out if she is on drugs, or just an idiot.
"They prosecute cigarette companies" Yet doesn't even give one example of that happening when someone smokes in a no smoking area. But that is her logic to prosecute gun manufacturers when someone takes one in a no gun zone.
Man, so much misinformation; it's hard to know where to start. Let me see if I've got things straigh irst: All gun owners are evil, nobody needs more than one gun, if they need a gun at all, anyone who owns multiple guns is certifiably crazy, and AR-15s are evil, scary, "high-powered, military" weapons, that have no place amongst the civilian populace.
Such ignorance.
Such ignorance is hard to combat;
True. You're clearly a hopeless case. Bye.
If you get to worried, they now make a 12 gauge shotgun in AR form factor.
That should make biden happy. I thought the sale sheet was a printing error when I saw it.
20% of gun owners who own the most guns own about 65% of the civilian guns in the US. (Note that is only 20% of gun owners - not 20% of the population.) Comparing Household gun ownership instead of individuals gives similar results. (50-52% of households are estimated to own no guns.)
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/13/1/15.full
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150353/self-reported-gun-ownership-highest-1993.aspx
Polls on Gun Ownership will never be correct. Why would any sane person in this day and age admit to owning guns when a reporter or a pollster calls. Most of the media are interested in outing gun owners these days. You will never find the true percentage. I got one of these calls recently and I lied to the pollster. No I have no guns. Actually I have over 50 guns.
People may very well lie about gun ownership – but which way? The power of surveys is not in the single survey but in the trends observed from many different surveys administered over several years and long term averages. The 14 to 20 year average of household gun ownership appears to be about 44%. These are long term surveys from two different organizations - pretty close to the 42% from the Washington Post survey. One problem with these surveys is that there is a lot of variation in ownership percentage from state to state – tough to catch with a survey of 1,200. One of the largest surveys* (over 200,000) showed gun ownership at a weighted average of 31.7% in 2001, while smaller surveys of the time showed about 41%. (Eliminating non-states gives about 33.3% rather than 31.7%.)
I know many people with a few guns – no one with 50 – basically your statement supports the Pareto principle that a majority of firearms are owned by a small minority of the population.
If you are interested in promoting the positive aspects of gun ownership, an understanding of the size of the population of non-gun owners would be of value.
*Here is a survey of ownership by state that is frequently credited to USAcarry.com – they simply posted it without citing the original source.
http://www.schs.state.nc.us/SCHS/brfss/2001/us/firearm3.html
I would love to see a survey that ask people have they ever had a handgun pointed at them. It's happened to me twice. Next on the survey we could ask how many people do you know who have committed suicide with a handgun, the count for me is four or more. The death toll keeps rising and all people say is what about my constitutional rights. I now think its only when the violence hits home will people wake up. Oh by the way all the guns in this story except for one were legally owned.