American gun ownership drops to lowest in nearly 40 years

So fewer people own guns, but gun owners own more and more of them.

The motive for both populations are... interesting...

The government has no idea how many or what guns I own and I intend to keep it that way. 

Hi, Dean!

Thank you so-o-o-o much for yet another brilliant contribution...

You know Bob, Dean is right.   How many people do you think, when polled, are unwilling to disclose they own a gun?   I believe it that number is significant and as time goes on it grows.   Especially with the general negative stigma that current events and the media is placing on gun ownership.

I find this poll very difficult believe for those reasons alone.

I'll be posting a seed on "conspiracy theories" tomorrow. They're very useful, allowing one to deny any unpleasant fact and replace it with the a "fact" that one pulls from either the air or a dark smelly place.

"Reality is whatever I want it to be!"

Competent pollsters know about reticence biases, and take account of them.

Lol believe what you want Bob but i have little doubt this poll is not accurate.   You know, like all the polls that predicted Trump would lose?   Remember those?

So you are right, polling is a science.   A very inexact science at times.   Especially when there are degrees of freedom at play that some pollsters clearly don't understand.   Like election 2016.

but i have little doubt this poll is not accurate.

"None as deaf as he who will not hear..."

"None as deaf as he who will not hear..."

"The truth will set you free"

The survey samples 'roughly' 20 individuals per state (if the survey was conducted with by State sampling, if it was not .. then there is no actual relevance to the number found)) ... so in a 'gun loving' State like Montana with a million residents - the sample 'could be' a wee bit more accurate, than say a 'gun loving' state like Texas with 28 million 'ish residents (prob not so accurate there) .................. Yet one must also take into account what counties the samples came from, as that would effect the accuracy as well....

Nothing wrong with gun ownership going down .. yet I too, question the accuracy of a 1001 sample survey on gun ownership.

You bring the pizza, and I will bring the Bloody Mary's to the conspiracy theory seed ... should be a interesting - I do love a good conspiracy!

So... You have no data to the contrary. You simply deny this data.

"Reality is whatever I want it to be!"

'In good faith' Bob, where did you read any denial in my comment?  I 'questioned' the data Bob.....................

Trust me Bob, I am well aware that 'reality is whatever you want it to be' - you provide evidence day after day!

A 2004 survey found that the average gun owner owned 6.6 firearms, and that the top 3 percent of gun owners owned about 25 guns each. More recently, a CBS News poll taken in March of this year found that roughly 1 in 5 gun owners owned 10 guns or more.

This portion reminded me of one of the stories in my own news feed;

.

3% of Americans own half the country's 265 million guns

Despite steep declines in violent crimes, an estimated 70 million firearms were added to American arsenals the past two decades, according to a new landmark study on gun ownership.

Overall, Americans own an estimated 265 million guns – more than one gun for every American adult, according to the study by researchers at Harvard and Northeastern universities. Half of those guns – 133 million – were in the hands of just 3% of American adults, so-called “super owners” who possessed an average of 17 guns each, it showed.

The survey, the most authoritative since a 1994 study posed similar questions to gun owners, is under peer-review for publication in a trade journal. Summaries of the study were released this week to the Guardian and The Trace news outlets.

The findings include:

An estimated 55 million Americans own guns.
The percentage of the U.S. population who own guns decreased slightly from 25% in 1994 to 22% last year.

Between 300,000 and 600,000 guns are stolen each year.

Gun owners tend to be white, male, conservative, and live in rural areas.

25% of gun owners in America are white or multi-racial, compared with 16% of Hispanics and 14% of African Americans.

There are an estimated 111 million handguns nationwide, a 71% increase from the 65 million handguns in 1994.

The red print deserves to be in red!

Blood red...

I know a guy that right now, he owns about 100. Not kidding.

I'm a staunch advocate of the 2nd amendment and i don't own 17 guns.   Not even close actually.    However, they do tend to add up depending on what type of shooting you are into.   That's what few anti gunners understand.

You might have a 22 rifle to hunt squirrel since shotguns tend to make a mess of those little guys.   You might have a 22 target rifle that you used to shoot on your college shooting team like i did.   You might have a 22 pistol for cheap plinking of cans and such.   Quite fun to do if you've never done it.  

You might have a shotgun to goose hunt with, a shotgun to duck hunt with, a shotgun to hunt upland birds like Partridge or Pheasant.   You might want a tactical shotgun for home defense.   All specifically different guns for different game/uses depending on what you want or need.

You might want both bolt action and automatic deer rifles depending on where you're hunting.   You might want a larger caliber bolt action rifle if you hunt bigger game like Elk.   You might want several other rifles and pistols just because (God forbid) they are fun to shoot.

I could go on but at last count that's like a dozen or so weapons without really even mentioning all possible uses.  

So this more guns is evil gambit is a dog that don't hunt.   Hell, that dog doesn't even get out of bed.

No problem!

I take note that none of the guns you cited needs more than two rounds.

The problem isn't guns. The problem is mass-murder-guns.

Well gosh Bob, since you say none of those weapons "needs" more than two rounds then by golly i guess we should just agree and move on.   /S

I really do like some of your stuff Bob but this one not so much.   And no need to tell me you don't care, if that's a direction you're going to take.   We likely feel much the same in that regard on this topic.

... we should just agree and move on.

If you're agreeing that we need to make a distinction between hunting/target guns and mass-murder guns... leave people alone concerning the former and ban the latter... then we do indeed agree.

I really do like some of you stuff Bob but his one not so much.   And no need to tell me you don't care

I do care, or I wouldn't waste my time seeding stuff, and then Replying to a lot of posts that are not really intended as "conversation" or "dialog". In fact, it is the callous "i don't care" attitude of some NT members, when children are blasted to gore that forces me to continue seeding...

As I have said previously, Bf... I owe you a debt of gratitude for the important role you have played in helping me learn to master my anger.

Comment removed for CoC violation [ph] It's her site. She makes the calls. For me to let myself be upset by your behavior would be like getting upset about the weather: I can do nothing about either.

Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]

You help me learn to be zen!

Not sure what a "mass murder" gun is but i did used to have a Colt Hbar target weapon.  

Thirty round clips and all.   A real tack driver that one.

You drove tacks with it, did you?

Or are you making light of the idea of mass-murder-weapons? Do you find the idea amusing?

Bye Bob, good luck with your crusade.

Edit:

You i was going to just leave it at the above but decided i should let you get away with sanctimonious horseshit like that without a response.

You drove tacks with it, did you?

Or are you making light of the idea of mass-murder-weapons?

Do you find the idea amusing?

Is it holier-than-thou to say that I do not own any mass-murder-weapons, unlike so many NT members?

Or should we turn that around?

The NT members who own mass-murder-weapons are in fact ashamed... but they've gone out on a limb and now don't know how to return. So they swallow their shame, and strut even more... trying to convince everyone...

Trucks were created to carry freight. They can be misused to kill people.

The M16/AR15 was created to kill lots of people in a very short time. Using it for that purpose is not "misuse". It was created as military weapon, so killing lots of people in a very short time was a "reasonable" requirement. Introducing that weapon into a civilian context, OTOH, is... insanely irresponsible.

Truck = freight

AR15 = kill lots of people

Duh.

Not sure what a "mass murder" gun is 

Does playing stupid like that really work among the gun freak crowd? 

What do drivers' licenses have to do with guns?

However, some states, notably the Peoples Republics of New York, New Jersey, California and others refuse to acknowledge OUR constitutional right licenses in their jurisdictions.

So you don't believe in the concepts of "states' rights," a.k.a. known as federalism.  

YOU know that's a lie.

YOU know the only similarity is APPEARANCE.

YOU know, you simply hate guns and gun owners and wish we were defenseless unarmed victims.

Well, I won't say you know those are all lies but I sure do.  The AR-15 may not be as effective as its military counterpart but it can serve the same purpose--the rapid killing of people.  Do you not even remember the carnage created by the LV sniper?  So, splitting hairs about the differences is really just another way for your side to run away from the reality of what these guns do and why they shouldn't be so readily available (or available at all).  And that last one is just pathetic -- claiming a fake future victimhood--especially considering the callousness shown by you to the actual victims every time these massacres happen and all the inevitable future victims of the next one and the one after that--on and on if your side keeps preventing us from doing something we know would reduce these events.  And this idea that your going to be the one, the Rambo with his gun, who'll prevent or stop one is pure fantasy.  Stop living in a fantasy and deal with the real world for once. 

I wouldn't know but it looks like irrationality is still working for some in the anti-gun crowd.  

Working in spades actually.

There is no Constitutional right to own an AR15.

States rights cannot supersede or deny rights protected by the Constitution. 

So this more guns is evil gambit is a dog that don't hunt.

Yet every democratically run country with values like ours that has at least some control over weapons of mass murder have dramatically lower rates of murder in general and especially of mass killing rampages which has now become a hallmark in this country. You can (and will) try bullshit your way around this fact but it still going to be a fact. 

We're a Constitutional Republic.

Gawd, that stupid fucking meme again.  That's true and what's also true (for the thousandth millionth time to have to say it) is that the definition of "constitutional republic" (doesn't need caps, btw) includes a representative democracy of some form.  You all have the same problem with reading the second amendment: you can't even see there's a first clause there.  In this case you throw out a term that you have no idea what the meaning is.  And you call yourselves patriots.  It's a joke. 

We are a plutocratic oligarchy. That means government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.

talk and talk and talk is all your do ....

Roughly 100 Americans a day are dying from drug overdoses, 100 A DAY, an estimated 80% of all gun homicides in the US are gang related and you have the temerity to talk only about this?

Shame on you, shame on all that use situations like this simply to progress their politics.   That's okay though ..... i know you well enough by now to know you have no shame.   Especially when it comes to a political narrative you're trying to shove down others throats.

Well, yes.  That is how we operate in practice.  That "constitutional republic" label is just for show. 

Roughly 100 Americans a day are dying from drug overdoses, 100 A DAY, an estimated 80% of all gun homicides in the US are gang related and you have the temerity to talk only about this?

Yes, that is another problem your shitbag politicians and the top Shitbag aren't doing anything about but, of course, like the grossly stupid comparison of cars to guns, it's also a stupid (beyond description) comparison and it's even more pathetic as a desperate attempt do deflect from the subject of the mass killings by rapid firing weapons.  But it does always serve one purpose:  making you and your fellows who keeps trying these transparently stupid stunts look ridiculous.  

Nah but what IS truly stupid though is blaming an inanimate object for any action that requires animation.

Stupid and obtuse beyond belief actually.

Actually, we read the 2nd amendment as the people that wrote it wanted it to be read.

Oh.

The Fathers left a time-capsule message telling us that AR15s should be easy to acquire, but not .50 caliber machine guns. What did they say about bazookas? Tanks? Ballistic missiles?

Read the thoughts and beliefs of the men responsible for it an actually LEARN something for a change

Though not originally responsible for it, I particularly like this legal genius's opion about it:

 Like most rights, the right secured by the  Second Amendment  is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose . -- Antonin Scalia, majority opinion, Heller v DC, 2008

is that the definition of "constitutional republic" (doesn't need caps, btw) includes a representative democracy of some form.

of some form... LOL

our constitution includes "democratically elected representatives" and the people can bring forth amendments. other than that our federal government is not even close to a democracy.  

our state govt's?   is your democracy. with recall elections, referendums, initiatives and all that goes with the word democracy.

other than that our federal government is not even close to a democracy.

If someone had spent even a couple of minutes looking up the word "democracy" they'd have found a number of different kinds of democracies.  But, of course, it's so much easier to stick with the preferred myth that someone holds more dear than truth. 

We have what's called the representative democracy.  I'm not going to argue that it's working very well but that's officially what it is, like it or not, take it or leave it.  But you don't get to make up your own definitions for words. 

they'd have found a number of different kinds of democracies.

and if you looked, you will not find a single one of those democracies expressed in our constitution. 

however... if you look you will find.

we are guaranteed a republican form of government

article 4 section 4   (read it)

Roughly 100 Americans a day are dying from drug overdoses, 100 A DAY, an estimated 80% of all gun homicides in the US are gang related and you have the temerity to talk only about this?

Why do you say "only about this"? How is talking about the slaughter of children preventing anyone from also talking about other slaughters?

If you want a solution to the drug/gun problem, I have it for you: legalize all drugs. Sell them through grocery stores, with BIG warning labels about overdosing. With drugs profits going to Big Business, I guarantee the problem would be solved presto.

Why do you say "only about this"?

Shame on you Bob!   Over 100 people a day in the US are dying of drug overdoses alone.    Many of them our children.    You being the super sized NT seeder that you are and you aren't talking about THAT at all?   Shocking!

I guess those 100 live a day are not as meaningful to you as the 17 lives in Florida.   Shame on you Bob!

Again, open to the interpretations of modern Americans trying to read the minds of long dead former British subjects.

This clause, sometimes referred to as the Guarantee Clause, has long been at the forefront of the debate about the rights of citizens vis-à-vis the government. The Guarantee Clause mandates that all U.S. states must be grounded in republican principles such as the consent of the governed.[17] By ensuring that all states must have the same basic republican philosophy, the Guarantee Clause is one of several portions of the Constitution which mandates symmetric federalism between the states.
The Constitution does not explain what exactly constitutes a republican form of government. There are, however, several places within it where the principles behind the concept are articulated. Article Seven, the last and shortest of the Constitution's original articles, stipulated that the Constitution, before it could become established as the "Law of the Land", must obtain the consent of the people by being ratified by popular conventions within the several states. Additionally, as it required the ratification of only nine states in order to become established, rather than the unanimous consent required by the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution was more republican, as it protected the majority from effectively being ruled or held captive by the minority. Wiki

So... You are the second person today who has expressed doubt about my military service. Comment removed for CoC violation 

2 day suspension for CoC violations ending Feb 22, at 5:30 pm est. 

Footnote to this:

I have known Bob for 10 years and I know for a fact that Bob served in Vietnam. Questioning a fellow soldier, who has served this country is beyond the pale. Bob broke the CoC by calling names, but honestly, this is one time I can understand him losing it. [ph]

For those who have a reading problem:

If you want a solution to the drug/gun problem, I have it for you: legalize all drugs. Sell them through grocery stores, with BIG warning labels about overdosing. With drugs profits going to Big Business, I guarantee the problem would be solved presto.

Again, open to the interpretations of modern Americans trying to read the minds of long dead former British subjects.

complete BS - try selling that to someone who is buying crap these days instead.

or... when you find the word "democracy" in our constitution you let me know OK?

(but, it is in the dictionary he said... LOL) too damn funny

For those who have a comprehension problem.  

Seeding about what happened on one day recently in Parkland Florida and not about what is happening to far more people EVERY DAY in America is highly hypocritical and shameful.

But we have come to expect that from some ......

Don't bother.

The "We're not a 'democracy'.  We're a Constitutional Republic." screed is a sham. It is a way of saying that they do not intend to respect majority rule; that they mean to rule despite being a minority.

... which they have accomplished already.

While being a minority in the country, they hold both houses of Congress, the Presidency, and the Supreme Court.

"Constitutional Republic" in their language is "rule by Old White Guys". They don't understand that they are in fact just cannon-fodder for the Ultra-Rich.

"Keep yer damned gummint hands off my Social Security!"

Over 100 people a day are dying of drug overdoses alone

Mostly goobers, bfd.

When you America haters can guarantee tha criminals, terrorists, foreign enemies, and our own enemies are limited to flintlock rifles, then we will agree to the same limitation for law abiding American citizens

Secondly and of primary importance, we see a fundamental lack of understanding of the reason for the right to keep and bear arms, that is all to common among many Americans. It’s not about hunting or going to the range. Our founders stated it’s about self defense against the two biggest threats to our lives, property, and liberties- criminals and government

"T]he advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." -- James Madison, Federalist No. 46"

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers." -- Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ... " �-- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."�--Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)

"Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms ... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible." -- Hubert H. Humphrey Liberal Democratic Senator, 22 October 1959

Again and again, you cast doubt on my service

If as you claim, you learned...

If you were in the military as you claim to have been

Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]

So... feel free to seed!

... oh, wait... that requires some effort...

You conveniently leave out critical parts of his opinion

Our Supreme Court has ruled that it is consistent with the Founders view of an armed citizenry that we have weapons consistent with those of a uniformed foot soldier.
From District of Columbia v Heller, re-affirming US v Miller and Printz v US United States v Miller concluded that citizens had a 2nd amendment right to "ordinary military equipment" that could "contribute to the common defense.

"We therefore read Miller to say only that the Second Amendment does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes, such as short-barreled shotguns. That accords with the historical understanding of the scope of the right, see Part III, infra.25

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right."
supreme.justia

It is a way of saying that they do not intend to respect majority rule;

a way of saying? LOL

let me help you out here... if we respected mob rule even a little bit? Hillary would be president.

So now you call us racist.

I would NEVER...

... because the CoC doesn't allow it...

I certainly wouldn't say that all Trumpsters are racist. OTOH, I'd guess that it would be pretty tough to distinguish two circles in a Venn diagram...

Mostly goobers, bfd.

Your comment's disdain for poor, ignorant people shows how little you know about drug addiction and who is affected by it.

We agree, then.

You have established minority rule, and intend to maintain it.

You have established minority rule,

yepp... long ago,  about 250 yrs ago I rekon.

and intend to maintain it.

you can count on that. 

and if we lose it? we will burn this country down out from under those who took it and start over with no worries or regret.

why? because yes we built that... and we can build it again. ( hat tip to obama  )

the rule of law, the republic will always trump mob rule in this country

Nah but what IS truly stupid though is blaming an inanimate object for any action that requires animation.

Ah, yes.  That really is the most idiotic deflection in the rightwing gunfreak deflection bag.  Why'd it take you so long to bring it up?   Or have you been busy dumping all over and just got around to this thread?

This is fascinating!

Quite a few Replies... but no actual "replies". No counter-argument. Just "denial". If you have no valid argument, then you just deny, deny, deny.

Well... there's Bf's fake-news chart... 

Bumper-sticker thinking
Fact-free decision-making
Welcome to MAGA America!

Quite a few Replies... but no actual "replies". No counter-argument.

I guess I'm missing something. What's the argument that anyone would counter? People who already own guns are buying more?

OK, maybe that's true. Or, I see that this is about a percentage of households. We probably have a lot more households now than we did 20 years ago, so this doesn't tell us much about the raw number of gun owners.

But either way, so what? What are we supposed to do with this data? Does this mean something? I know you're concerned about the mass shootings - as are we all. Is there some kind of connection?

If we have less households with guns, how does that correlate to an increase in mass shootings? It seems like the increase is in spite of less gun ownership, which flies in the face of the favorite leftist talking point that having more gun owners somehow equals more gun deaths. So maybe something else - aside from gun ownership - is driving these shootings.

I wonder if gun manufacturers are happy their guns didn't jam when being used to murder 17 kids at a school. If they had jammed a lot of lives might have been saved, but that gun would have gotten a lot of bad press and people would likely stop buying that model if it were shown unreliable. So far, after every mass shooting, the two things that remain the same is the surge in gun and ammo sales and the lack of legislators will to change anything.

Banning a certain type of gun won't stop school or workplace shootings and liberals know it. What they really want is registration followed by confiscation. They'll deny it, but that's their ultimate goal.

gun ownership is falling

people admitting to gun ownership is falling

One wonders where; "none of your fucking business" falls in a poll like this.

That's actually one of my favorite responses when asswipes call

when they call me I say "sure I will take your poll... give me a minute.  then they go on "hold until they figure it out.

PRESIDENT TRUMP IS BANNING GUNS, PRESIDENT TRUMP IS BANNING GUNS!!! 

Bump stocks are just the first step, then this insane president is going to CONFISCATE EVERYONE'S GUNS, AAAAAAAAAAAAA!!

At least President Obama respected the second amendment, why, he even EXPANDED gun rights.

I'm sorry your president turned out to be a gun grabber 9mil...