The Ranks of Gun Owners Grow, and So Does Their Resistance to Scrutiny
Researchers report that many gun owners, especially newer ones, falsely deny owning guns.

Believe it or not, people are reluctant to tell total strangers about their potentially controversial activities. In particular, Rutgers University researchers say, gun ownership is something many Americans decline to reveal when questioned by people they don't know. That's especially true of women and minorities newly among the ranks of gun owners amidst the chaos of recent years. Academics are unhappy that privacy-minded respondents impair their understanding of the world we live in, but such evasion is an inevitable consequence of decades of fiery debate and punitive gun policies.
Fibbing to Nosy Strangers
"Some individuals are falsely denying firearm ownership, resulting in research not accurately capturing the experiences of all firearm owners in the U.S.," says Allison Bond, a doctoral student with Rutgers University's New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center and lead author of "Predicting Potential Underreporting of Firearm Ownership in a Nationally Representative Sample," published last month in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. "More concerningly, these individuals are not being reached with secure firearm storage messaging and firearm safety resources, which may result in them storing their firearms in an unsecure manner, which in turn increases the risk for firearm injury and death."
Bond frames the problem of dishonesty among survey respondents as posing a danger to those surveyed since they don't receive proper firearm safety information. But her deeper concern is with the validity of research into firearms culture and policy in a country where experts don't have anywhere near as good a handle on the prevalence of gun ownership as they had believed.
"The implications of false denials of firearms ownership are substantial," claim the authors. "First, such practices would result in an underestimation of firearms ownership rates and diminish our capacity to test the association between firearm access and various firearm violence-related outcomes. Furthermore, such practices would skew our understanding of the demographics of firearm ownership, such that we would overemphasize the characteristics of those more apt to disclose. Third, the mere existence of a large group of individuals who falsely deny firearm ownership highlights that intervention aimed at promoting firearm safety (e.g., secure firearm storage) may fail to reach communities in need."
It should be emphasized that the report authors didn't conclusively identify anybody who denied gun ownership as a gun owner. Instead, the report dealt in probabilities, with the researchers building profiles of confirmed gun owners. They then applied the profiles across their sample of 3,500 respondents to estimate who was likely fibbing about not owning guns. The results depend on the probability threshold applied, but they came up with 1,206 confirmed owners, between 1,243 and 2,059 non-owners, and between 220 and 1,036 potential but secretive owners lying about their status.
"It may be that a percentage of firearm owners are concerned that their information will be leaked and the government will take their firearms or that researchers who are from universities that are typically seen as liberal and anti-firearm access will paint firearm owners in a bad light," the authors allowed. They also speculated that many respondents falsely denying owning guns may come from communities that are traditionally unfriendly to gun ownership. That's an interesting possibility considering that nearly half of all those designated as potential gun owners are unmarried urban women of color. In fact, as the study points out, many new gun owners are women and minorities.
Gun Owners Look Like Everybody
"An estimated 2.9% of U.S. adults (7.5 million) became new gun owners from 1 January 2019 to 26 April 2021. Most (5.4 million) had lived in homes without guns," according to a separate study published last year in the Annals of Internal Medicine. "Approximately half of all new gun owners were female (50% in 2019 and 47% in 2020 to 2021), 20% were Black (21% in 2019 and in 2020–2021), and 20% were Hispanic (20% in 2019 and 19% in 2020–2021)."
With gun ownership becoming increasingly common beyond the traditional ranks of white suburban-to-rural men, there are big implications for politics and policy. New gun owners will certainly resist proposals to strip them of self-defense tools they acquired out of necessity. They're also likely to resent restrictive policies that urban, left-of-center politicians promote to torment gun owners once assumed to be safe targets, but which apply to anybody who owns firearms no matter where they live and vote. Basically, the gun-ownership landscape is growing and changing, but new owners are even more reticent than established ones about revealing their existence to researchers and government officials.
After decades of debate, arbitrary crackdowns, and draconian enforcement actions, who can blame them?
Until recently, many gun opponents tried to paint firearm ownership as a fading fetish among a disappearing class of Americans.
Old Firearm Assumptions Look Shaky
Firearms "are owned by roughly one in five U.S. adults and can be found in approximately one of three U.S. households," wrote the authors of a 2015 analysis of results from the National Firearms Survey, published in 2015 in the Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. "Between 2004 and today, we know that the proportion of adults who personally own firearms (and the proportion who live in households with guns) has continued to decline, modestly but steadily, largely because of a decline in personal gun ownership by men." They estimated 265 million firearms in private American hands.
But in 2021, Pew Research reported: "Four-in-ten U.S. adults say they live in a household with a gun, including 30% who say they personally own one." And Gallup reported in 2020 that "thirty-two percent of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household." Switzerland's well-respected Small Arms Survey put the number of guns in private American hands at over 393 million in 2018.
Recent years have seen a surge in gun sales, spurred by rioting, social disorder, and political turmoil. Given that many of these gun buyers are first-time owners, it's apparent that firearm ownership is becoming more widespread and being enjoyed by Americans who might have resisted the idea in the past. These new owners are even more suspicious of scrutiny than their predecessors in the already privacy-minded gun-owning community.
"Our results highlight the potential that several groups, particularly women and individuals living in urban environments, may be prone to falsely denying firearm ownership," adds the Rutgers report.
Academic researchers and policymakers who draw from their work clearly regret such opacity. But they should cast the blame not on gun owners, but on the activists and politicians who vilified the exercise of self-defense rights and who drove growing numbers of Americans to evade scrutiny.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Does anyone know the methods used to estimate how many guns are in "private hands"?
Don a pair of rubber gloves, and reach way up your ass, and pull out the necessary number to accomplish your unconstitutional goals.
Stats 101, day 42.
Did this promising statistician include in "allowance" (aka fudge factor, the most common of "constants" in statistics calculations) for those unfortunates who in the past few years suffered undocumented losses in unfortunate boating accidents?
As a general rule, i.e., a rule that should be followed at all times except when there is a specific and articulable reason for not doing so I propose the following:
Never - not ever - never- never reply truthfully to any kind of survey you didn't seek to enlist in. That includes gun ownership, income, voter preference, public opinion, man-on-the-street or any other surveys you didn't go out of your way to find and participate in. Never. Ever. Not once.
There is no penalty for lying. There is no potential reward for telling the truth. In our cancel culture there is a potential downside to answering truthfully if you don't have your mind right. All-in-all the reward:risk ratio is less than 1. And you can safely assume that most people running polls or surveys have and agenda that you probably don't agree with.
They use the science of making things up.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,900 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,900 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link————————————————>>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com
One proxy for the number of guns is the number of background checks that are run each year.
There are some confounding factors as you can buy multiple guns on one background check.
And in some states you don’t need a background check if you have a concealed weapons permit.
And most states don’t require a background check in a private gun sale.
And some states run background checks every few years on their concealed permit holders even though no gun sales are taking place.
Also gun manufacturers supply the ATF with data on how many guns they produce each year.
So at least since 1968 when the whole system of FFL‘s and background checks were instituted, we can get a general idea of how many guns are sold by how many guns are produced and how many background checks are run.
But how many guns are in private homes from before 1968 is a total and complete guess.
War trophy bring backs, and grandpa‘s old revolver in the bedside drawer, are completely not counted.
All that can be said with certainty is that during the Obama years gun sales set new records every single year.
During the BLM riots gun sales to new gun owners, mostly minorities and women, also set new records.
And the manufacturers have produced at least 30 million A.R. 15’s.
No data for how many AR 15s are assembled from parts but that is also likely in the millions.
So there is a lot of uncertainty as to the actual numbers, but background checks are the closest proxy to new gun sales that we have.
Also gun manufacturers supply the ATF with data on how many guns they produce each year. War trophy bring backs, and grandpa‘s old revolver in the bedside drawer, are completely not counted.
*cough*Everything between 100% from-the-ground-up fabrications and completion from 80%*cough**cough*the presumably possible transfer of such*cough*
#of guns = new guns sold over the last century or so minus how many guns have permanently broken down or been destroyed.
This isn't 100 percent accurate, as guns have been exported in private transactions and there are guns over 100 years old that are still in use, war souvenirs, and guns imported off the books, but these numbers are tiny compared to the number of guns we know were manufactured and sold just in the last 30 years. There's probably a larger leakage into the pool of guns from guns that are stolen from manufacturers, dealers (e.g., the DC sniper's weapon), and police and military armories.
Background checks can give us a general idea, but it's imperfect. Every legal new gun sale requires a background check, but multiple guns may be on that sale. The resale of old guns should not be counted, but if done through a gun dealer there's a background check. I doubt that every person who passed the check actually went through with the purchase.
If gun manufacturers have to report the number they produced and their disposition (government sales, civilian sales, and guns junked at the factory), that would be a more accurate picture of the supply. I wouldn't expect it to be 100% accurate because no doubt there are employees running a side business secretly selling guns to those that can't pass a background check, and they must be fiddling with the books. I just hope that's a small number, but somehow a pretty big number is finding it's way into the hands of banned criminals.
Finally, any estimate of the rate at which guns are broken or destroyed is just a wild guess. I am pretty sure it's much lower than anyone without gun handling experience would expect. Guns are close to the ultimate in durable goods. I expect more than half of the "broken" ones could be made serviceable if they became valuable enough to justify new springs, cleaning supplies, and a few hours of work. They're only gone when they've been allowed to deeply rust, melted down, chopped up, or burst from firing the wrong ammo.
Over the years, various methods have been used, including factors like the sales of firearm and hunting magazines. None are particularly accurate, or ever have been. They can be useful for, say, comparing firearm ownership rates from State to State, but for actual ownership rates, not so much. It is not uncommon for different polling organizations to report ownership rates which differ by as much as 25 percent.
When asked if I have a gun, I say one of two things:
It's a need-to-know question and those who need to know bad enough will find out.
Or, if it's in written form:
It's a knead-to-know question; you have to be close enough to knead me to know...and I kept two arm's length long before COVID-19.
Yeah I'm sure the Swiss know more about guns in America. GTFO.
Wet a finger and hold it up to the wind.
Magical thinking mostly. Consider how long Casper & friends started producing home built guns. To misquote a line from The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, "Serial numbers? We don't need no stinking serial numbers."
Well, it's a very difficult exercise in balancing-- Do we want to make the number as small as plausible, and thus seek to minimize the inferred influence of gun owners as a group, or do we want to inflate the number so we can increase panic about guns? What to do... What to do?
SWAG Scientific Wild Assed Guess
the late Kevin O'Brien explained his methodology here.
https://weaponsman.com/total-us-firearms-not-300-million-but-412-660-million/
I will happily lie to anyone trying to determine my home defense capabilities. I figure they are thieves trying to determine my ability to thwart their evil schemes.
You want to know if I have a gun? Stick your head through my bedroom window in the middle of the night.
Since the US constitution guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, the correct way to gauge firearm ownership is to go with 100%.
And as Wimpy would put it, I will gladly answer never for a nosy question forever. 🙂
In other words, FAFO.
Oh my word! Where are my pearls!
Speaking of pearl-clutching, we're all here discussing lying about gun ownership and we're not part of a "well-regulated militia!!!"
Herr Misek would have a shit-fit and see us all in a death camp! 🙂
Pardon Me While I Laugh
https://youtu.be/QTqG9clPWDU
Be careful, he might imprison you for “lying.”
My point exactly. Oh, and maybe he'll add in some additional torture for denying that civilization comes from regulation. 🙂
This is excellent news! Now we can point to this one study and use it to nerf any anti-gun statistics because, as we've all known for some time, it's all fucking wrong.
When your data is feeble, your hypotheses are shit too.
It is kinda like saying the earth is flat because it's flat for the 100 yards they can see and it's still flat for another 100 yards after walking that far. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Correct but useless.
And yet, if they use the same PR firm as the alphabet gang, they can get globes banned, and everyone saying the earth is round banned from (anti)social media.
Some questions are beyond the pale because the questioners are slime balls: your race? your ethnicity? got guns? ...
Answer in the most subversive manner possible.
Perhaps the most subversive answer of all would be:
"I have something more important and more powerful than any gun: I have a rational, thinking mind, the thing that makes guns and every other human creation possible.
And unlike genes or phenotype, my rational, thinking mind is volitional and flexible, though minds like mine are working on making genes and phenotypes volitional and flexible too.
One day, we'll change our chameleon pelts and preen the horns on our heads, then look back and say: 'Remember when people thought this mattered? Fun times...'"
By that point, the poll taker has turned tail and ran! 🙂
You remind me of that wonderful fake quote from Stalin:
"Ideas are more powerful than guns; we don't let our people have guns - - why would we let them have *ideas*???"
It was indeed his practice, whether or not he said it.
I'm waiting for some form on which I have to specify my gender identification (assuming that having a urination "outie" rather than an "innie" makes me a male as far as sex designation applies [some people respond to a query about sex with "at least weekly, three times in a good week"]). After prolonged meditation, thoughtful reflection, and a short burst of intense psychotherapy I have decided that my gender identification is:
Apache Attack Helicopter, and my pronouns are "rotor" and "hover". As I also consider myself to be somewhat "gender fluid", I reserve the right to change my gender identification to a fixed-wing bird at times of my choosing.
Guns? What guns?
The ones from the "fishing trip accident", remember? 😉
Seriously, though, people need some new and better "accidents.". The rivers and lakes are gonna start piling up and I don't want one going off and making a boat spring a leak. 🙂
Had a neighbor's barn burn down a couple years ago. The local joke was "all of my guns were stored in Mr. Neighbor's barn."
Not great comedy, but just as plausible as taking ALL of your guns fishing.
Oh no, that's brilliant! If you're in an on-the-move big city, building implosions might be a possibility too!
A homeless encampment might be a good place to lose a gun. Hell, the authorities never go there! 🙂
An old Steven Wright joke:
Border guard: “Do you have any firearms?”
Wright: “What do you need?”
He was always a gut-buster of a comedian, especially because he delivered is lines so dead-pan and serious! He's like Rorschach with a funny bone! 🙂
And let's not forget the other dead-pan, gun-toting comedian, Joel "Agent J" Hodgson
stand up comedy--joel hodgson 1983
https://youtu.be/qebOnefCb1k
Before there was "The Internet of Things," there was "The Arsenal of Things" and Joel Hodgson is it's Quartermaster.
🙂
https://twitter.com/RAZ0RFIST/status/1676486545635966977?t=pHs1S7kG6KnG8vOiM5l5pA&s=19
Two states seceded from English rule prior to July 4th and the Declaration of Independence. George Washington himself debated whether to celebrate the holiday on the 4th or the 2nd, for that reason. Upon his death, his Will marked the earlier date when Maryland seceded as the proper anniversary.
Which is why, when England signed the treaty acknowledging the sovereignty of the states, it named each individual state as a sovereign entity. Not a single "United States" monolith.
All of this was understood to be self-evident for over a half century.
Then Lincoln decided the federal government had magically created the states, making secession illegal. And invaded his own country to preserve this delusion.
Oh no, that's brilliant! Building implosions in on-the-move cities might be another possibility.
Maybe "losing it" in the site of a homeless encampment. Hell, the authorities never go there! 🙂
Sorry, that was meant for Idaho Bob.
By the way, the Twitter feeds you post haven't been working lately. Can't earn any sweet Rubles if people can't read your Putineer propaganda. 🙂
Twitter changed a few days ago -- if you don't have an account, you can no longer go there and just read stuff. "Tucker hardest hit."
Yes, and Nardz is going to have a hard time earning sweet Rubles for his Putineering. 🙂
The Treaty of Paris predates the Constitution.
So it's doesn't speak to what the States established in 1789.
But even the Articles of Confederation speak to a "perpetual Union."
And the Constitution did prohibit the formation of the Confederacy
"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."
and
"no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."
It does seem silent on the matter of a state seceding on its own.
Apparently West Virginia didn’t know about that penultimate paragraph.
“no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”
How does this apply to the Confederacy? I don't know that any new states were created from parts of other states.
"“No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State,"
Do we think this applies to only military Agreement and Compacts? Does the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) fall under that title, for instance?
https://twitter.com/iamyesyouareno/status/1676485139549900801?t=n7l6wnVS8HZ9hWt1XhUE0Q&s=19
Immigrants yelling ‘Fuck France!’ and ‘We’re just here for the welfare! For the red passport!’
Aren’t these people a wonderful addition to French society?
[Video]
https://twitter.com/VDAREJamesK/status/1676472808547680256?t=KnbZ4l_KSsSIk5eR2dZ7XQ&s=19
This is the very reason liberals admit them. They want Western countries hurt. There's nothing to discuss, no good faith possible.
[Link]
https://twitter.com/lone_rides/status/1676564816201228290?t=bOsMoi_ZiAy5iPujLU-x5Q&s=19
“Why do you need an AR-15??”
So when blue helmets start knocking down doors because someone used the wrong pronoun or posted correct but unapproved science facts, we can welcome them in an appropriate manner.
[Link]
Answering with a "none of your business" is an honest and accueate answer. The Air Force told us to tell people that we can not confirm or deny the presence of nuckear weapons.
accurate...dammit...
What's the likelihood that someone who does not own guns says "None of your business"?
I'm thinking like zero. So if you don't want them to know, say "no."
Less than "all" but way above "zero". Some non-gun-owners don't want to admit to possible predators that they are defenseless. Others grew up in gun-owning families and are sympathetic to gun-owner issues but just happen to not own any of their own right now. Probably the largest subset are just pissed off at political pollsters generally and will say "none of your business" to pretty much anything asked.
That’s me. I don’t own guns but hate the fact that it is an issue. I tell them “I have all I need at present.”
The article alludes to growing gun ownership among those outside the traditional demographic. Democrats and other leftists were buying guns as sources were reporting during the coronapanic. At the same time we hear that gun violence is increasing. I see a connection.
The trans community has definitely been buying guns for their mass shootings. Another in Philly.
when are people going to admit that the biggest terrorism threat to america today is from so-called "trans" people.
Falsely Deny.
Isn't that a double negative?
If I falsely deny I am a gun owner am I not admitting I am a gun owner? If I deny being a gun owner I am not admitting to being a gun owner.
Is my English messed up here? It is my second language after inarticulate grunting...
That’s only a problem if you’re lying to a cop.
They can lie to you though.
Democrats are responsible for over 90% of gun violence. It's no wonder Democrats would arm themselves to protect them from themselves.
Democrats flat out tell people they are buying guns. They are worried about everyone they've been calling names and canceling coming around at night and retaliating.
The people who knowingly deceive others as to the location or even presence of their firearms might not get our message as to how best to secure and store their firearms in order to keep them safe!
Not only did they not identify actual denying gun owners, they didn't even attempt to differentiate between intentionally deceptive gun owners and uninformed gun owners.
For
accuracyplausible deniability purposes, please refer all firearm ownership queries and storage requests and suggestions to Mrs. Casual.Another thing that makes it difficult to accurately assess rates of gun ownership is that new gun owners are so often unaware of how easily guns can be lost in tragic boating accidents. I wish somebody had warned me of this phenomenon before I lost several thousand dollars worth of guns to aforesaid tragic boating accidents. I thought I was safe because I don't own a boat and don't live near any bodies of water but I found out the hard way that accidents happen regardless.
See my answer to Medulla Oblongata above.
Switch things up, Jerry. instead of a "boating accident," go on a ride in a desert on a horse with no name. The horse won't tell either, since he won't respond to any calls. 😉
I have a bad habit of losing them in boating accidents.
See my answers to Medulla Oblongata and Jerryskids above. We're not going to win against the hoplophobic gun control freaks unless we get more creative.
Tell the busy-bodies you went on a flight with Richard Branson and Elon Musk and it got "lost in space.". 🙂
Talk about an accident waiting to happen, check out the trigger finger in the picture.
He is going to wind up with a new bonus hole.
Well played, well played.
For those who didn't appreciate the subtlety:
Cancer trust suggests calling vaginas “BONUS HOLE” to not offend TRANS INDIVIDUALS (theindependent.co)
Are vaginas called "bonus holes" because women nowadays are finicky and less likely to give some unless you're a rich Alpha? 🙂
What?! Women aren't lining up for a chance to be bullied and enslaved by superstitious rednecks? What a surprise.
There are those that do, such as the women who stayed on The Channel Islands after Great Britain abandoned the Islands to the Nazis. The women thought that the Nazis looked "sharp" and "smart" and--wait for it--"sexy!"
When I heard that in the documentary Hitler's England, I got a little throw-up in my mouth. Shit like that would make any decent freedom-loving man shun women and swing for freedom-loving men. 🙂
Boner holes.
Not on that side he won't.
At least Reason chose stock photo with a PoC because diversity.
"These new owners are even more suspicious of scrutiny than their predecessors in the already privacy-minded gun-owning community."
I suspect you'd find similar evasions in the marijuana owing community or the dildo owning community. Gun ownership is evidently still seen as something to be hidden, like a vice.
I wonder why that is...
“Like a vice” is the perspective of the anti-gunners. The actual gun owners don’t consider gun ownership to be anything like a vice, just something that could plausibly result in persecution.
Anybody who follows American gun politics would be aware that a program of confiscation and penalties for gun owners is always just a couple bad elections away. And that such persecution might not even be open and pseudo-legal, it might be conducted by means of social credit score driven adverse financial and employment consequences. So that the only real defense is not ending up on the target list.
"Anybody who follows American gun politics would be aware that a program of confiscation and penalties for gun owners is always just a couple bad elections away."
It's a past-tense operation. Such confiscations and penalties have already occurred.
Witness the creation of millions of felons overnight via the pistol brace debacle.
Witness "red flag" laws that allow seizures based on flimsy 3rd party reports. We've seen wives falsely report husbands for sexually abusing their children in custody battles, so why not make false red flag claims to take the guns too?
Witness New Orleans going door-to-door to forcibly evacuate residents after Katrina and confiscating guns in the process.
----------
A swift lawsuit was filed by the NRA, Gun Owners of America and Second Amendment Foundation, and on September 23rd, Judge Jay Zainey granted a temporary injunction against firearms confiscations for New Orleans and the surrounding areas, and ordered the confiscated firearms returned.
However, the city continued to insist that it hadn’t confiscated any firearms at all for approximately 5 months into legal proceedings, until it was finally forced to admit it had.
Oops.
NOLA PD revealed an evidence locker full of about 500 rusting and neglected firearms it admitted it had seized during the haze of Katrina, although experts who worked on the case indicated that the actual number was likely into the thousands, with many of the more valuable items seized having disappeared with no records or receipts.
It also bears mentioning that firearms confiscation wasn’t new territory for NOLA PD to begin with, as the department apparently had a nasty habit of seizing legally owned guns during traffic stops to be returned to the owner at a later date once the owner could produce a receipt.
https://www.pewpewtactical.com/confiscation-hurricane-katrina/
"Anybody who follows American gun politics would be aware that a program of confiscation and penalties for gun owners is always just a couple bad elections away."
Owning a gun and lying about isn't going to change that. You need a better plan.
It's really only just one small part of an overall plan that gun rights activists are generally aware of, mostly by absorbing it through years of exposure.
"an overall plan that gun rights activists are generally aware of"
An overall plan that's been failing for years. More restrictions on guns are inevitable. Even gun owners realize that ever increasing levels of gun ownership don't make a society safer, more peaceful and secure.
mfalseman pulling stuff out of his ass, what a surprise…
Well, even if your statement were true (big if), what are ‘increasing levels’? When? From where? Plausibly, marginal utility decreases the more individuals in society have guns. Demand isn’t close to declining though. And society is growing.
If one accepts that premise, I’m sure you would love to derive some ‘reasonable’ cap on gun ownership from that? To reasonably restrict a fundamental, constitutionally protected right?
To clarify: even if we think that more guns being present yields lower returns in safety, mfalseman is still someone who would absolutely restrict your rights based on the mere absence of positive outcomes (and HE alone defines what they are), even if you, like millions and millions of Americans, have all kinds of reasons to have the guns you have and even if you are one of the massive majority of gun owners who haven’t used them for anything harmful ever, in all those decades of your life where you owned firearms.
Imagine making a case for the restriction of fundamental rights based on an absence of positive outcomes that you alone define, and still somehow trying to convince people that a reasonable discussion can be had with you.
"If one accepts that premise, I’m sure you would love to derive some ‘reasonable’ cap on gun ownership from that? "
I really don't give a shit. Own away, I say. I just don't believe that lying about your ownership is going to stop those intent on restricting ownership. And I don't fall for the crap about increasing levels of gun ownership, more guns in the hands of more people, is making society more peaceful and secure. I have nothing against guns, I'm just not a fetishist.
“ Owning a gun and lying about isn’t going to change that. You need a better plan.”
In fact, this might be an excellent plan, as it does two things: it cements the presence of guns as ITEMS OF COMMON USE while leaving anti-gunners in the dark about the exact extent of what they think they want to take on.
Given that the data that is already out there, inaccurate as it may be, renders gun control efforts largely infeasible without changing the constitution, more accurate public information is not needed to strengthen the case of gun rights activists. The case is strong enough from what we know.
So it makes sense for gun owners to refrain from giving their adversaries more information.
"while leaving anti-gunners in the dark about the exact extent of what they think they want to take on."
You need a better plan.
A program of confiscation and penalties? Would that be like Red Flag laws?
Soon to be found in the gas powered car owning community. 🙂
For sound economic perspective go to https://honesteconomics.substack.com/
Unless you're writing about hidden safes or caches, no!
What if I want Dishonest Economics? Or slightly honest economic? Or periodically honest economics? Maybe selectively honest economics?
Definitely not interested in honest economics. Not DEI enough.
We get plenty of all those kinds of Economics, but this asshole probably tops the list by virtue of his carping spam.
Good. I regularly lie to surveyors about gun ownership, who I voted for, and more.
Are you regularly surveyed about gun ownership? Maybe your lies are not as convincing as you think they are.
That’s good coming from you.
Now; count how many Gov-Gun usage laws have been made since that time? People are arming themselves in defense because of Aggressive/Progressive Gov-Gun usage against them. They're sick of the tyrannical BS.
Ya know; Coincidentally exactly why this nation fought a Revolutionary War against the Gov-Gun-Gods. Yesterday should've been a great reminder of that.
I doubt it. I think the surge in gun ownership is due to our successfully convincing people that the only person they can rely upon to defend them against attackers is themselves, and that having a firearm on your person is the best way to defend yourself.
As-if Gov-Gun toting thieves wasn't "attackers".
Bow down and worship those Gov-Guns; they can do no wrong.
TJ, I gotta tell ya man, i immediately stop reading your posts when I get to the first Gov-Guns or parentheses.
Just sayin
Heaven forbid anyone has to acknowledge what 'government' really is. It just might blow their happy-slaves naive fantasy out of the water.
Thanks for using a picture of someone who is irresponsible and does not understand gun safety. Putting your finger on the trigger of a weapon while in your waste band breaks the most fundamental rule of gun safety.
Safety is off too.
I specifically buy pistols that do not come with a safety. My Sig P365XL does not have a safety. Just draw and share freedom seeds. No fussing with the safety or accidentally turn it on with your thumb (which happens every so often with my Kimber 1911 Long Slide).
Just like Glocks. It has an internal safety. As opposed to an external/manual safety.
Not if you suddenly need a tush hole in your pants.
No holster.
You are making an unwarranted assumption that the hand and the waist in the picture belong to the same person.
Meh, I'll give him, xim, they, it, who cares - the benefit of doubt. Looks like a Beretta 92 or an airsoft copy and the trigger isn't visible so the finger could extend to the front of the trigger guard.
I’d feel better about it if he had his thumb on the hammer.
>>Gun Owners Look Like Everybody
because "gun owners" is a false grouping.
Oh no, that's brilliant! Building implosions in on-the-move cities might be another possibility.
Maybe "losing it" in the site of a homeless encampment. Hell, the authorities never go there! 🙂
Damnit! My replies are going all over the place!...Just like everybody's guns should be! 😉
Hey! That's an idea. Don't have just one "cache" at the fishing pond, but have one all over! Everywhere you go! The car wash, the gas station, the drive-in movie, the local park, the hotel, everywhere! Send the Jackboots on a "snipe hunt!"
🙂
I dont have any guns whatsoever and never will but if I DID happen to come into possession of one, i would certainly never admit it to a survey or a doctor or anyone who works for the government.
Slightly off topic, but the Left has lost any credibility (such that they had) on gun control after the past couple of years. First we had the George Floyd "mostly peaceful" protests that was followed up by criminal justice reform and woke prosecutors refusing to prosecute. So much for you don't need a gun, the police will protect you.
But the Crème de la crème was Hunter Biden getting off after lying on a firearm form. Seriously, what's the point of new laws when you won't even force the ones already on the books. Especially for someone like Joe who repeatedly talks (badly) about the need for "common sense" gun control.
i think the cherry on top for all that was the MULTIPLE cold-blooded murders and attempted murders of conservatives who showed up anywhere near an antifa protest.
never went the other way. Always crazed bolsheviks gunning down maga hats. media shrugged. basically "oh well that's what they deserve". it was amazing to watch in real time
Besides Kyle Rittenhouse, what were some others?
do your own google. it's not hard to find unless you get all your news from CNN
The point of unenforced laws is that they are available for authorities who need to use them on particular persons.
Laws are for little people.
Researchers report that many gun owners...falsely deny owning guns.
I also deny ever having a threeway with Kate Upton and Gal Godot.
Are they packing a MAC-10 and an Uzi? Ooooh! That would be Heaven come to life!
🙂
So a non-scientist doing research in a quasi-scientific field reports that he/she/it/they were unable to validate a poll using questionable methodology on a reluctant target group is upset that the social agenda bias of the organization sponsoring they/them/their research cannot be confirmed. I'm shocked ... SHOCKED! I tell you! So the gun confiscation lobby will simply have to continue to manufacture false and misleading evidence to promote their legislative agenda for now.
Researchers report that many gun owners, especially newer ones, falsely deny owning guns.
Gun nuts are liars as well as bigots and superstitious slack-jaws who prefer to reside in half-educated, can't-keep-up backwaters? Sounds right.
Are you a troll or do you really believe that tripe? If we take you seriously for the sake of argument, you're either saying that black women living in increasingly unsafe ghettos should continue to rely on law enforcement officers who are clearly part of the safety problem in those ghettoes instead of acquiring the means of defending themselves; or you're saying they have suddenly become lying bigoted superstitious slack-jawed gun nuts?
6 or 1/2 dozen at this point.
The Reverend doesn't believe in personal responsibility; he thinks someone else should have to pay his bills. After all, why should he have to pick up an icky gun and defend himself when he's perfectly fine hiding behind the courage of a total stranger? The Reverend can always wash the piss out of his underwear when it's all over, whereas blood would require mettle, the understanding of which is beyond him.
I’ve sometimes thought that the rev is parody since one would do nothing different from him if one were trying to make progs look terrible.
Having said that, he was pretty salty yesterday about all the losses piling up for team blue lately. It seemed genuine. And funny.
If an escaping Frederick Douglass or Anne Frank and her family are in your attic and preserving Life and Liberty are your values, then it is mandatory to lie to the Jackboots and to wear Kevlar Depends when you do it!
Go use your flourishing cape to shine Herr Misek's Jackboots!
And Fuck Off, Klinger!
Kind of ironic that a supposed "man of the cloth" who should be following the whole "love thy neighbor" philosophy would say those things about millions of law abiding citizens in his country.
Think I read somewhere (here) that his handle is a dungeon and dragons or Harry Potter reference or some stupid shit.
Probably doesn’t get out of the basement much.
Swap "gun owners" for any other frowned upon group in history, Jews, homosexuals, "potheads", or today the "wealthy", who lie for self protection and no doubt Rev. Artie would say the same thing.
Let's face it, he feels a need to know which people to hate and if someone lies it undermines his righteous
excretionsexecrations.Yes, the Rev is a fountain of foolish hate.
The Philly shooter is reportedly a cross-dressing alumni of BLM events. Anyhow, blue cities such as there, DC and Baltimore have all recently said:
“Chicago, hold my malt liquor.”
Start working at home with Google! Just work for few hours and have more time with friends and family. I earn up to $4500 per week. It's a great work at home opportunity. I can't believe how easy it was once I tried it out.....COPY►www.salary49.com
Maybe it's because it's really nobody's business but my own if I own a firearm or not, and I'm not obligated to tell anyone. And maybe it's because the people who are doing the asking tend not to have my constitutional rights at heart and have ulterior motives for asking.
Exactly. A few years ago I was leaving work. A woman I worked with was about 100 ft. ahead of me going to the parking lot. A guy knocked her down and grabber her purse and computer bag. If he had taken off all I could have done was to give a description, but then he started kicking the crap out of her. I got close enough and pulled a pistol that I was legally carrying and forced him to stop. A few minutes later the police arrived. It turned out that the person who called the police didn't call them on the guy robbing and beating the woman, they called them because I had a gun. I got everything resolved with the police and was going to my car when several people were hollering at the police demanding that I be arrested. I went to the station, gave a statement and got my weapon back. A few days later I get a call from the DA's Office informing me that no charges were being filed against me. Yeah I'd lie on that survey, just like I do when the hospital asks if I have any weapons in my house?
I don't know a serious gun owner who would even talk to a pollster . Already under-counting gun ownership .
People are driven to buy weapons, and more and more of them, by what is happening around them daily. And statistics ("crime rate is down!!!") fail to give them a sense of security. What they see is help (i.e. police) shows up 45 minutes later, if at all, and then likely stand around for another hour or so.
I have been involved in gun politics, from the pro-side for 50 years. During that time I have told tens of thousands of gun owners never to admit gun ownership but to reply “Oh, my God no. Guns are dangerous. We have none in our home. Next question?” You have NO obligation not to lie to these people. Since every University gun researcher is an acholyte at the altar of NO GUNS EVER, paid well only IF his research shows “guns are baaaddd", and willing to design and manipulate surveys to capture his or her next Sotos/Bloomberg/CDC Grant. We give then bad data so they are forced to cook it longer to please their funders. Still, no matter the manipulation "correlation nevers proves causation". Never.
Bloomberg money, for example, is tainted (and its recipients branded) no matter how many non- profits it is “laundered” through.
I have been around long enough to identify "Rev." Kirkland as nothing bit a troll. DO NOT FEED TROLLS.
The real question is why would anyone ever acknowledge owning a firearm in any government or liberal academic survey. Absolutely NO good can come of it.
“thirty-two percent of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun, while a larger percentage, 44%, report living in a gun household.”
Which just means that at least 12% of gun owners need to have “the talk” with everyone else in the household. Guns are like safes, cash, gold, and diamonds – you don’t advertise the fact you have them in the house.
I'll leave aside the exceptionally sketchy methodology described by the article. that could just be poor understanding by the reporter (although that doesn't match my understanding of Tuccille's history or talent).
the assumptions that are displayed in the first couple of lines seem unsupportable, however. there are good, safety-oriented reasons to be reluctant to discuss gun ownership with strangers irrespective of their credentials. most of them center on staying under the radar of criminal activity. don't make yourself a target. don't discuss keeping cash in the house, and for the same reason don't discuss whether you have a firearm.
aside from that, being hesitant to discuss your gun owner status with any agenda driven organization (as the "research" organization in question appears to be) is not a matter of firearms being "controversial". it has more to do with maintaining control of your own narrative about yourself. I don't want to be someone's poster child to send messages with which I disagree, and I suspect that most folks would feel that way.
There is absolutely no way at all I would ever respond truthfully to some rando clown asking me about my firearms status.
Aside from not knowing who this person is, what the information is being used for, etc there might be some person overhearing and following me home.
NOT WORTH IT
Overheard in the Queens borough of Puerto Rico, Nueva Jorq State:
"Saaay Taco, you walkin like you got some dope on you."
"Naw menh, I ain't got no dope, see."
"Why don' I jist find out?"
"Careful bro, I got a knife."
"Sheee-it man, I know yew ain't got no knife, cuz if you did yew wouldn't be tellin' me about it!"
Lol. Wow. Were these tacos also girl bulliers, hank?
Has Alec Baldwin ever denied being the wielder of the assault-style handgun?
.
If I were a gun owner, I wouldn't be sharing that information with anyone I didn't know.
.
More Democrats and liberals are wising up and arming themselves against the Democratic allowed and supported criminal activity. And Democrats don't like scrutiny of themselves, only of others.
The authors contend a gun ownership false reporting rate of between ~6% and ~30%. This absurdly large 5-fold range indicates their methods were quite poor. It’s clear that they tried to correlate firearms ownership to surveyed sociodemographic information and answers to other questions. Elsewhere, the press quotes: “There are several reasons some firearm owners might feel uncomfortable disclosing that they own firearms,” said Michael Anestis, executive director of the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center and senior author of the study. “These results serve as an important reminder that we should not assume we know everything about who owns firearms and that we should ensure that our efforts to reach firearm owners can resonate with broad audiences we might not realize would benefit from the message.” Yet the authors DID assume they knew about gun owners to derive their shakes estimates.
And exactly how would they propose to reach these reluctant gun owners with their "messages" that is being hampered by not knowing more about them? The media are dominated by a strong anti-gun agenda, which drowns out any "gun safety" messaging they might want to deliver to a targeted audience.
If the authors were serious in their concerns about information access, they would have published under Open Access to allow free access to their paper, their data and methods.
How did Bond determine they didn't get "proper" safety information?
"Bond frames the problem of RELECTANCE among survey respondents as posing a danger to those surveyed since they don't receive proper firearm safety information."
Allow me to fix the sentence for you.
"Third, the mere existence of a large group of individuals who ARE RELEUCTANT TO REVEAL firearm ownership highlights that EDUCATION aimed at promoting firearm safety (e.g., secure firearm storage) may fail to reach TO REACH THEM."
That they're using the term "firearm violence" tells me that they have nothing useful to say.
We never read about "knife violence", do we?
Well, in the UK - - - - - - - -
Did yoo know, every year more people are beaten to death by hands and feet, than by rifle and shotgun combined?
Check the FBI Crime report.
I’am making over $15k a month working online. I kept seeing how some people areable to earn a lot of money online, so I decided to look into it. I had luck tostumble upon something that totally changed my life. After 2 months ofsearching, last month I received a paycheck for $15376 for just working on thelaptop for a few hours weekly. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried itcopy below web…
.
.
Click on the link below…………………… https://Www.Coins71.Com