Gun-advocates threaten civil war to protect their guns.

[MKSheppard]

I have good news for you then. In 2016, The Supreme Court issued their decision in Caetano v. Massachusetts. In that case, Ms. Caetano had been arrested for having a stun gun in violation of state law after using the presence of said device to stop an abusive former partner from attacking.

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found that the Stun gun was not protected under the second amendment because it was not a type of weapon in use when the amendment was authored. SCOTUS took the case, and didn't even hear arguments about it, but smacked the state down HARD (per curiam, 8-0).

You left out the best part from the Supreme's decision; they reiterated:

The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,”

[MKSheppard]

Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control by Gary Kleck, published 2017 has data for US firearms production from 1946-1994, broken down by year.

These guys called Newton and Zimring back in 1969-1975 estimated that total firearms stock in the USA in 1945 was 46.9~million guns (12.6M handguns, 34.2M long guns).

The yearly total production from 1946-1994 was:

1946 -- 1.53 million produced, 46.91 million cumulative stockpile
1947 -- 2.10 million produced, 48.44 million cumulative stockpile
1948 -- 2.66 million produced, 50.54 million cumulative stockpile
1949 -- 2.20 million produced, 53.20 million cumulative stockpile
1950 -- 2.50 million produced, 55.41 million cumulative stockpile
1951 -- 2.09 million produced, 57.90 million cumulative stockpile
1952 -- 1.96 million produced, 59.99 million cumulative stockpile
1953 -- 2.00 million produced, 61.95 million cumulative stockpile
1954 -- 1.61 million produced, 63.95 million cumulative stockpile
1955 -- 1.83 million produced, 65.56 million cumulative stockpile
1956 -- 2.05 million produced, 67.39 million cumulative stockpile
1957 -- 1.98 million produced, 69.44 million cumulative stockpile
1958 -- 1.75 million produced, 71.42 million cumulative stockpile
1959 -- 2.17 million produced, 73.16 million cumulative stockpile
1960 -- 2.16 million produced, 75.34 million cumulative stockpile
1961 -- 2.04 million produced, 77.50 million cumulative stockpile
1962 -- 2.07 million produced, 79.54 million cumulative stockpile
1963 -- 2.23 million produced, 81.60 million cumulative stockpile
1964 -- 2.52 million produced, 83.83 million cumulative stockpile
1965 -- 3.12 million produced, 86.36 million cumulative stockpile
1966 -- 3.52 million produced, 89.48 million cumulative stockpile
1967 -- 4.09 million produced, 93.00 million cumulative stockpile
1968 -- 5.21 million produced, 97.09 million cumulative stockpile
1969 -- 4.81 million produced, 102.30 million cumulative stockpile
1970 -- 4.81 million produced, 107.11 million cumulative stockpile
1971 -- 5.01 million produced, 111.92 million cumulative stockpile
1972 -- 5.38 million produced, 116.93 million cumulative stockpile
1973 -- 5.71 million produced, 122.30 million cumulative stockpile
1974 -- 6.57 million produced, 128.02 million cumulative stockpile
1975 -- 5.33 million produced, 134.59 million cumulative stockpile
1976 -- 5.74 million produced, 139.92 million cumulative stockpile
1977 -- 5.10 million produced, 145.65 million cumulative stockpile
1978 -- 5.42 million produced, 150.75 million cumulative stockpile
1979 -- 5.72 million produced, 156.16 million cumulative stockpile
1980 -- 5.79 million produced, 161.89 million cumulative stockpile
1981 -- 5.58 million produced, 167.68 million cumulative stockpile
1982 -- 4.96 million produced, 173.26 million cumulative stockpile
1983 -- 4.05 million produced, 178.22 million cumulative stockpile
1984 -- 4.41 million produced, 182.27 million cumulative stockpile
1985 -- 3.97 million produced, 186.68 million cumulative stockpile
1986 -- 3.52 million produced, 190.66 million cumulative stockpile
1987 -- 4.34 million produced, 194.18 million cumulative stockpile
1988 -- 4.84 million produced, 198.53 million cumulative stockpile
1989 -- 5.12 million produced, 203.31 million cumulative stockpile
1990 -- 4.33 million produced, 208.49 million cumulative stockpile
1991 -- 3.87 million produced, 212.82 million cumulative stockpile
1992 -- 5.37 million produced, 216.70 million cumulative stockpile
1993 -- 6.59 million produced, 222.07 million cumulative stockpile
1994 -- 6.94 million produced, 228.66 million cumulative stockpile (84.6M handguns and 144.06M long guns)

These numbers track very well with a 1991 BATF study which took in annual production and import figures from 1899 to 1989 and subtracted legal exports from production and came up with:

1950: 54~ million
1970: 104~ million
1989: 201,837,000

The BATF study didn't take into account firearms that are lost or destroyed through various means.

Since 1994, even more guns have been manufactured. Who's buying these if gun ownership is actually decreasing like they claim?

There's only so many guns the average person can actually own; due to cost/space limitations.

[Broomstick]

Who's buying these if gun ownership is actually decreasing like they claim?

It's not as straight-forward as one gun per person or one gun per household.

Clearly, we have people who own multiple guns.

Also, a certain number of guns produced each year are sold out of the US. Some by legal means, and some by illegal ones. (A few sheriff's deputies in my county awhile back went to jail for sending guns purchased in our area down to gangs/cartels in Mexico, as an example)

If you count by gun, ownership is increasing.

If you count by percentage of the population who own guns, ownership is decreasing.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

[Lord Insanity]

It should be noted that many gun owners likely do not answer surveys regarding gun ownership in the affirmative. This doesn't mean they don't own them it just means they aren't telling surveyors they do, thus skewing the results.

See people remember back in 1991 when New York used their 1967 registration list to confiscate (or required proof on destruction) certain types of firearms.

California has done similar with the registration lists from the 1989 Assault Weapons Control Act. Whenever they change the definition of "assault weapon" cue a new round of confiscation.

Its not paranoia when they really are out to get you.

Despite the media publicity of mass shootings, (as has been pointed earlier in this thread but may have been missed or not recognized among the data) in the U.S. you are more likely to be killed by someone using no weapon at all than you are to be shot by any rifle designated a so called "military-style assault weapon".

[Broomstick]

In the US you are more likely to killed by someone driving a car yet look at all the concern and theater around terrorism.

People don't always fear most the most common hazards.

[Elheru Aran]

In the US you are more likely to killed by someone driving a car yet look at all the concern and theater around terrorism.

People don't always fear most the most common hazards.

To be fair I do think the ability to drive a car should be more tightly regulated and controlled too... if Shep's numbers of 200+mil firearms is roughly correct (probably more like 250 or 275 by now), well, there's probably nearly as many cars in the US. And we let kids as young as 15 (with parental supervision) drive them. One thing I will say about guns, people are at least more *aware* of the potential for injury/death with them. The vast majority of people... simply don't THINK about it with cars.

Which isn't by any means to say that guns should be less regulated than cars, more that there should be more attention and thought given to regulating cars just as there is with guns.

I wonder if there are any parallels to be drawn between car culture in the US and overseas versus gun culture in the US and overseas?

[MKSheppard]

Update:

ATF produces something called "Firearms Commerce in the United States: Annual Statistical Update".

The recent 2019 version has numbers for 1986-2017 broken down as (revolver/pistol/rifle/shotgun/misc).

I also noticed I made a mistake in calculating cumulative totals for the prior table.

Revised numbers for the end of the last table are:

1994 -- 6.94 million produced, 235.6~ million cumulative stockpile (84.6M handguns and 144.06M long guns).

(I'll update the other numbers later)

New Data for 1995-2017:

1995 -- 4.32 million produced, 239.92 million cumulative stockpile
1996 -- 3.85 million produced, 243.77 million cumulative stockpile
1997 -- 3.59 million produced, 247.37 million cumulative stockpile
1998 -- 3.71 million produced, 251.08 million cumulative stockpile
1999 -- 4.05 million produced, 255.13 million cumulative stockpile
2000 -- 3.79 million produced, 258.92 million cumulative stockpile
2001 -- 2.93 million produced, 261.86 million cumulative stockpile
2002 -- 3.37 million produced, 265.22 million cumulative stockpile
2003 -- 3.31 million produced, 268.53 million cumulative stockpile
2004 -- 3.10 million produced, 271.63 million cumulative stockpile
2005 -- 3.24 million produced, 274.87 million cumulative stockpile
2006 -- 3.65 million produced, 278.52 million cumulative stockpile
2007 -- 3.92 million produced, 282.45 million cumulative stockpile
2008 -- 4.50 million produced, 286.95 million cumulative stockpile
2009 -- 5.56 million produced, 292.50 million cumulative stockpile
2010 -- 5.46 million produced, 297.96 million cumulative stockpile
2011 -- 6.54 million produced, 304.50 million cumulative stockpile
2012 -- 8.58 million produced, 313.08 million cumulative stockpile
2013 -- 10.84 million produced, 323.93 million cumulative stockpile
2014 -- 9.05 million produced, 332.98 million cumulative stockpile
2015 -- 9.36 million produced, 342.34 million cumulative stockpile
2016 -- 11.50 million produced, 353.83 million cumulative stockpile
2017 -- 8.33 million produced, 362.16 million cumulative stockpile (140M handguns, 222.13M long guns).

Kleck did his own per capita breakdown of the number of handguns in circulation; I took his data plus the ATF's extended 1995-2017 data and used excel with census data figures to compute the number of handguns per 1,000 population:

1950 -- 93.5 handguns per 1000 population
1960 -- 105.7 handguns per 1000 population
1970 -- 153.6 handguns per 1000 population
1980 -- 228.2 handguns per 1000 population
1990 -- 291.5 handguns per 1000 population
2000 -- 331.1 handguns per 1000 population
2010 -- 352.2 handguns per 1000 population

[MKSheppard]

Others have noticed this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... then-some/

A 2012 Congressional Research Service report published exactly one month before the Sandy Hook school shooting put the number of civilian firearms at 242 million in 1996, 259 million in 2000, and 310 million as of 2009.

If that 310 million number is correct, it means that the first year of Barack Obama's presidency was an inflection point: It marked the first time that the number of firearms in circulation surpassed the total U.S. population.

...

Philip J. Cook of Duke University suspects that estimates based on the ATF numbers don't properly account for this type of attrition. He's estimated that roughly 1 percent of the American gun stock gets destroyed, lost or broken in a given year. Applying that factor retroactively back to when the ATF first began keeping records in 1899, that would put the civilian firearm total at something like 245 million as of 2011, he said.

Other estimates downplay the effect of attrition. In 2007, the global Small Arms Survey estimated there were 270 million civilian firearms in the United States. Gary Kleck, a criminologist at Florida State University, says it's difficult to model the effects of attrition.

"Guns are simple machines made of extremely durable materials," he said in an e-mail, "yet are both dangerous and valuable enough that their owners would take more-than-average care to avoid losing them." His numbers produce an estimate nearly identical to the one in the chart above.

I did my own analysis based off 1946 production; where 1,533,365 guns were manufactured and the stockpile of guns in the US was estimated at 46,909,183.

Loss Rates (Fire/Theft/Flood/Etc)
0.30% -- 140,728 guns lost
0.40% -- 187,637 guns lost
0.50% -- 234,546 guns lost
0.60% -- 281,455 guns lost
0.85% -- 398,728 guns lost
1.00% -- 469,092 guns lost

It appears that a proper estimate for a loss rate is at the lower end around 0.30% of all guns each year; based off total production that year -- because guns are a semi-expensive durable consumer good -- it's expensive to manufacture them compared to other consumer items; and they last for decades if properly cared for; so you have to find the right balance between a 50 year old going "well, I lost my guns in the great flood of 1962, time to replace them" with new customers who just turned 18 and want a shotgun.

70 years with an average loss rate of 0.30% per year gives us a crude adjustment rate of 21%.

Applying that to the 362.16 million cumulative production stockpile adjusts it downwards to around 286.1~ million guns still floating around the USA.

If you wanted to drill down in more detail; you'd take into account a lower loss rate as we move into the "modern" era of around 1975 onwards.

One of the things you might notice in watching the recent Netflix 2019 movie "The Highwayman" with Woody Harrelson and Kevin Costner hunting down Bonnie and Clyde is the existence of gun racks sitting out in the open in people's houses in the 1930s.

People no longer drive around with gun racks in their truck rear windows; having switched to hidden safes or under seat gun racks. Same thing with houses -- more people have at least a cheap safe to keep firearms in which increases the probability of firearms surviving a catastrophic event, as opposed to "hang 'em up on the wall".

[MKSheppard]

I just found someone complaining about "Assault rifles"...in 1967!

Firearms and Violence in American Life by Newton and Zimring in 1968

Hard copy page 166:

Paramilitary Firearms

A recent and potentially troublesome phenomenon is the appearance of nonmilitary firearms designed primarily for "civilian defense," "home protection," and similar nonsporting purposes. These include semi-automatic pistols with actions and magazines of the M1 carbine rifle, high-powered semiautomatic rifles styled after military "assault" rifles and light machineguns, "riot" shotguns of the type used by police agencies, and such combat accessories as bipods, muzzle brakes, flash hiders, folding stocks, and large-capacity magazines.

Despite appearances, these weapons can be legally sold in this country because they are not assembled from surplus machinegun parts and are not readily modified for fully automatic fire. They are virtually useless for hunting or other sporting purposes, and the advertisements for them in gun publications suggest that their main appeal is to paramilitary groups and to individuals arming themselves in expectation of civil disorders. While the traffic in these guns is difficult to determine, the records of one recently formed company show the sale of more than 4,000 .45 caliber "submachine"-type carbines in the first 4 months of 1968,7 indicating a demand that is sizable and probably increasing.

[MKSheppard]

It's not as straight-forward as one gun per person or one gun per household.

Firearms and Violence in American Life by Newton and Zimring in 1968

Appendix D on hard copy page 175 has data on an October 1968 Harris poll on firearms, where 1,175 people over 18 were sampled on multiple questions.

One of them was "How many pistols, rifles, shotguns, muzzle loaders or other firearms do you own?"

"The average number of guns owned by a person owning any firearms was 2.24. Persons who owned a particular type of firearm were asked how many of that type of firearm they owned."

Handgun Owners:
Own 1: 83%
Own 2: 11%
Own 3: 4%
Own 4: 1%
Own More than 4: 1%

Rifle Owners:
Own 1: 63%
Own 2: 24%
Own 3: 7%
Own 4: 3%
Own More than 4: 3%

Shotgun Owners:
Own 1: 75%
Own 2: 17%
Own 3: 5%
Own 4: 3%
Own More than 4: 1%

Further data from the Harris poll was on hard copy page 9:

Firearms Per Household:
None: 51%
1: 20%
2: 13%
3: 6%
4 or more: 10%

"The average number of firearms for each firearms-owning household is 2.24."

[MKSheppard]

When people mean "compromise" on this subject what they really mean is "we get some of what we want and you get nothing in return, except a vague hope this has pushed off confiscation for another decade".

On another board, I asked some pointed questions about "compromise" and the march of technology; and they were (slightly modified):

Why can't we have guns shipped to our doors in 2019?

Okay, so in 1968, making shipment of firearms through the mail be only FFL to FFL made some sense; since back then things were in their infancy, with snail mail; no NICS.

But it's now 2019. We've got NICS; so why can't I:

A.) Enter a digital 4473 online at [RANDOM WEBSITE] which holds a FFL.

B.) Using the information provided plus, a drivers license # from me; they run:

1.) Automated NICS check (Illinois does it every night for FOID cards so it's possible)

2.) Check Insurance/State Databases to see if the person named on the Drivers License # actually has a residence at the listed spot. The automobile insurance companies do this every day, whenever you ask for a quote on auto insurance.

And then ship the gun to my doorstep by UPS super secure signature on delivery only to people who have "RealID" compliant Driver's Licenses.

Drivers Licenses also today have bar codes on the back that UPS could scan to see if it's really you taking possession of the Firearm. The scarcity of license scanners might mean that UPS would only be able to make gun deliveries on Wednesdays or Fridays; but I can live with that.

If we have to have a NICS background check run on every firearm sale, why can't we use that NICS check to partially restore some rights lost in 1968 (mail ordering of guns to your door), since technology now exists to make it "secure" that was not available in 1968. Why does everything have to remain stuck in 1968? Why can't we ever get things back as technology moves forward?

PS: Canada allows you to have guns shipped to your door if you have a firearms license, so...

[Broomstick]

It's not as straight-forward as one gun per person or one gun per household.

Firearms and Violence in American Life by Newton and Zimring in 1968

Appendix D on hard copy page 175 has data on an October 1968 Harris poll on firearms, where 1,175 people over 18 were sampled on multiple questions.

How nice. That was in 1968. Got anything a little more recent - from THIS century, for example - to compare it to?

[Beowulf]

It's not as straight-forward as one gun per person or one gun per household.

Firearms and Violence in American Life by Newton and Zimring in 1968

Appendix D on hard copy page 175 has data on an October 1968 Harris poll on firearms, where 1,175 people over 18 were sampled on multiple questions.

How nice. That was in 1968. Got anything a little more recent - from THIS century, for example - to compare it to?

unpublished Harvard/Northeastern survey says... 3 per owner on average. Some caveats: the survey is unpublished, so we don't actually know the data, or how they conducted it. And it's done by an anti-gun group, and shared with anti-gun groups for publication.

[Elheru Aran]

Firearms and Violence in American Life by Newton and Zimring in 1968

Appendix D on hard copy page 175 has data on an October 1968 Harris poll on firearms, where 1,175 people over 18 were sampled on multiple questions.

How nice. That was in 1968. Got anything a little more recent - from THIS century, for example - to compare it to?

unpublished Harvard/Northeastern survey says... 3 per owner on average. Some caveats: the survey is unpublished, so we don't actually know the data, or how they conducted it. And it's done by an anti-gun group, and shared with anti-gun groups for publication.

As an average... what, an median? 300 million firearms divided by three is a hundred million gun owners. If you knock out kids from that equation of a little over 300mil citizens, that leaves you with something like 226mil adults (ref: https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/bri ... 0br-03.pdf). That means that half the US adult population owns guns (roughly). Which is... possible, I guess. The Harvard/Northeastern study suggests that the total population of gun owners is ca. 55 million, which seems more reasonable to me.

But there are quite a few people with large collections which should be considered (these were just among the first examples on the first page of a Google search for 'biggest firearm collections in the US'):

Man with 3,000 firearms in private collection

Private collection of over 12,000 firearms turned into a museum

The Harvard/Northeastern study notes the existence of these people (including, I should note, my grandpa and my uncle, who probably have close to 60-80 firearms between the two of them) as being somewhere around 3% of American adults, approximately 7.7 million, with an average of 17 firearms per collection, ranging from eight to 140 firearms.

A lot of collections aren't in individual hands, per se; for example, the NRA's National Firearms Museum has 2500 guns on display, and almost certainly far more in storage. The odds are good a lot of firearms are also in museum collections and undisplayed.

I will ask, though-- while there are a lot of firearms around, how many people are still shooting guns made in, say, 1956? Or are they rather put on shelves/racks to look pretty while Junior takes his Winchester 700 built in 1995 to get some deer? Which is to say: what percentage of that 300 million guns are actually -used-?

[Broomstick]

Based on extremely unscientific data - namely, the people I personally know who own guns - a LOT of guns being actively used/fired on a regular basis are 20+ years old. The first gun I ever fired myself was a .22 hunting rifle more than a century old. Most of the rest I've handled were between 20 and 60 years old.

See, a properly maintained fire arm lasts a very long time. Maintaining them isn't hard or expensive.

Now, my little circle of firearm owners/users may be an outlier. Or maybe not. Certainly there are plenty of new guns sold - we have not one but two gun stores in the town I live in (population just under 17,000 but adjacent to much larger cities).

It would not surprise me if the majority of firearms in the US are more than a decades or two old.

[MKSheppard]

How nice. That was in 1968. Got anything a little more recent - from THIS century, for example - to compare it to?

The reason I picked 1968 is because I tend to distrust modern surveys; because the public trust in government has plunged from 62% in 1968 to 17% in early 2019. (Pew Research – Public Trust in Government 1958-2019).

If people aren't willing to trust the “Government”, what makes you think they'd trust random strangers on the phone or via mail surveys?

But anyway...



Nicolas Cruz Thread on SDN

In Hawaii, you must be registered with police chief within 5 days of purchase or arrival to Hawaii, for rifles, shotguns and pistols and you need the permit to possess.

https://ag.hawaii.gov/cpja/files/2016/0 ... i-2015.pdf

2000: 1,211,537 population, 6,489 permits processed; 20845 guns imported/registered. 535.6 gun permits per 100,000; 3.21 guns per permit.

2010: 1,360,301 population, 12,801 permits processed, 46602 guns imported/registered. 941.0 gun permits per 100,000; 3.64 guns per permit.

Ironically, that 3~ guns per permit on average matches closely with NRA studies in 1975 for insurance purposes that I found in the papers of a NRA board member at the University of Maryland Archives:

The Committee reviewed the results of a [NRA] membership survey made in September 1974 primarily to ascertain interest in insurance. Of the 2.6% of the membership surveyed, 32% (802) returned the questionnaire. Of those responding, 72% indicated interest in gun damage and theft insurance. Eighty-six percent said they owned at least four guns; 34% owned more than 10 guns.

When you add 86+34 you get 120%, so members may have checked off both the "at least 4 guns" and "more than 10 guns" boxes.

Additional reasons for 3-4~ guns general is that is about the rough amount that can be stashed in a lockbox under the bed, or in a small closet safe. Not everyone can afford a giant 30-gun safe for various reasons (apartment living, etc).

[MKSheppard]

how many people are still shooting guns made in, say, 1956? Or are they rather put on shelves/racks to look pretty while Junior takes his Winchester 700 built in 1995 to get some deer? Which is to say: what percentage of that 300 million guns are actually -used-?

Lots of people will pay a premium for pre-Hillary Hole S&W Revolvers.

Basically, in the 1990s; Smith & Wesson caved in to the Clinton administration and put an internal locking mechanism into their revolvers. Said mechanism has a habit of coming loose during heavy recoil (like .44 magnum).

A lot of people will also pay a premium for a Winchester Model 70 built before 1964 because of manufacturing changes, etc.

Remington Model 700 quality took a turn for the worse as Remington and many old gun makers like Marlin, etc got bought out by Venture Capitalists and turned into hollow shells of themselves by FREEDOM/CERBERUS Group.

Older guns have also become more shootable again; with foreign overseas factories making boutique ammo.

Prvi Partizan in Serbia (yes that serbia) makes brand new 7.92×33mm Kurz, 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano, 8mm Lebel, 7.5×54mm French, and .22 Remington Jet.

That last one; .22 Remington Jet, was for a specific revolver made by S&W from 1960 to 1974.

[Elheru Aran]

how many people are still shooting guns made in, say, 1956? Or are they rather put on shelves/racks to look pretty while Junior takes his Winchester 700 built in 1995 to get some deer? Which is to say: what percentage of that 300 million guns are actually -used-?

Lots of people will pay a premium for pre-Hillary Hole S&W Revolvers.

Basically, in the 1990s; Smith & Wesson caved in to the Clinton administration and put an internal locking mechanism into their revolvers. Said mechanism has a habit of coming loose during heavy recoil (like .44 magnum).

A lot of people will also pay a premium for a Winchester Model 70 built before 1964 because of manufacturing changes, etc.

Remington Model 700 quality took a turn for the worse as Remington and many old gun makers like Marlin, etc got bought out by Venture Capitalists and turned into hollow shells of themselves by FREEDOM/CERBERUS Group.

Older guns have also become more shootable again; with foreign overseas factories making boutique ammo.

Prvi Partizan in Serbia (yes that serbia) makes brand new 7.92×33mm Kurz, 6.5×52mm Mannlicher–Carcano, 8mm Lebel, 7.5×54mm French, and .22 Remington Jet.

That last one; .22 Remington Jet, was for a specific revolver made by S&W from 1960 to 1974.

Cheers. I wasn't sure how much a part of the market older firearms were, outside the usual military-surplus trade. I wasn't sure if it was comparable to, say, computers, where something like 90% of the market is going to be in models less than 5 years old or whatever. Obviously they aren't directly comparable because the 'service life' of a computer is defined as much by software as it is hardware, while firearms are pretty much all about the hardware, but it does appear that older firearms are still bought and sold in a reasonable proportion of the market.

[madd0ct0r]

Minor quibble - average as mean and dividing number of guns by permits to get mean are both sloppy maths.

The number of guns owned aint normally distributed about a mean. Case in point being the hawaii stats being average 3.14 gu s per permit.

You can easily have +4 guns more then average but its impossible to have -4.
Result - a skewed distribution, possibly a possoin (assuming getting a new gun is random and independent), more probably power-law pareto distribution like other collectable consumer goods.

The end result will be on order of 20% of people own 80% of guns and while people owning a single gun will still be huge majority of gun owning population, the total size of gun owning pop will be far smaller then applying an average to the us pop.

Far better to apply ratio of permits in hawaii to pop in hawaii to the pop of the us.

[Elheru Aran]

Minor quibble - average as mean and dividing number of guns by permits to get mean are both sloppy maths.

The number of guns owned aint normally distributed about a mean. Case in point being the hawaii stats being average 3.14 gu s per permit.

You can easily have +4 guns more then average but its impossible to have -4.
Result - a skewed distribution, possibly a possoin (assuming getting a new gun is random and independent), more probably power-law pareto distribution like other collectable consumer goods.

The end result will be on order of 20% of people own 80% of guns and while people owning a single gun will still be huge majority of gun owning population, the total size of gun owning pop will be far smaller then applying an average to the us pop.

Far better to apply ratio of permits in hawaii to pop in hawaii to the pop of the us.

A quibble of your quibble-- there's too much regional variation in the US for permit counts to apply. IIRC, in many states you can legally own long-rifles without a permit. Pistols may require a permit for carrying, either open or concealed will vary, but can be kept at home without a permit in most states. Where firearms get most regulation is at sale and in transportation. Some firearms (admittedly a very small percentage) IIRC don't require permitting at all-- usually these are just like muzzle-loaders though.

[madd0ct0r]

Minor quibble - average as mean and dividing number of guns by permits to get mean are both sloppy maths.

The number of guns owned aint normally distributed about a mean. Case in point being the hawaii stats being average 3.14 gu s per permit.

You can easily have +4 guns more then average but its impossible to have -4.
Result - a skewed distribution, possibly a possoin (assuming getting a new gun is random and independent), more probably power-law pareto distribution like other collectable consumer goods.

The end result will be on order of 20% of people own 80% of guns and while people owning a single gun will still be huge majority of gun owning population, the total size of gun owning pop will be far smaller then applying an average to the us pop.

Far better to apply ratio of permits in hawaii to pop in hawaii to the pop of the us.

A quibble of your quibble-- there's too much regional variation in the US for permit counts to apply. IIRC, in many states you can legally own long-rifles without a permit. Pistols may require a permit for carrying, either open or concealed will vary, but can be kept at home without a permit in most states. Where firearms get most regulation is at sale and in transportation. Some firearms (admittedly a very small percentage) IIRC don't require permitting at all-- usually these are just like muzzle-loaders though.

I was refering to the two previous posts, where MKSHeppard and Elheru Aran were talking about the specific Hawaii data (as was I)

[madd0ct0r]

I actually started digging into the Hawaii paper to see if I could run some sensitivity tests on it, but using the permit numbers to estimate gun count is pointless:

Permits and Registrations, by Firearm Type In the State of Hawaii, annual permits are issued in order to acquire an unlimited number of longarms (rifles and shotguns), while single-use permits are issued to acquire specific handguns. By firearm type, 52.1% (9,771) of the 18,737 total permits issued during 2015 were to acquire longarms, while 47.9% (8,966) were handgun permits. The tally of handgun permits is perennially confounded, however, as some of the county police departments issue a single permit listing all handguns that will be acquired simultaneously from the same source (i.e., one permit per transaction, per Hawaii Revised Statutes section 134-2(e)), while the other departments issue one permit per handgun even if they are acquired in the same transaction.

Longarms accounted for 54.1% (25,349) of all firearms registered in 2015 (48,813). Broken out further, rifles and shotguns comprised 43.1% (20,199) and a record low of 11.0% (5,150) of total registrations, respectively. A record high 45.9% (21,464) of firearms registered in 2015 were handguns.

So the number of permits issued for longguns reflects the number of people who own long guns that year, nothing more, while the number of permits of handguns probably reflects less then the number of handguns too, since they aren't always registered the same way (unqiue or per transaction) and by the above wording, handguns permits are not annual.

So fuck knows.

[Elheru Aran]

I actually wasn't talking about the Hawaii data, that was all Shep. But as you find out, it illustrates why you can't use a few states' data to represent the entire US-- there's just no uniformity in how anybody does anything, even in the same states sometimes. I feel sometimes like this is deliberate-- you can't get useful statistics without a hell of a lot of work. There -are- groups who compile statistics... but many times there's either an agenda (see: NRA internal polls) or they're so hampered by the government you can't get anything useful out of them (see: CDC). The gun lobby isn't interested in the government having effective information on its customers for the purposes of regulating them.

[MKSheppard]

I actually started digging into the Hawaii paper to see if I could run some sensitivity tests on it, but using the permit numbers to estimate gun count is pointless

Did you notice how you also have to register your firearms in Hawaii too?

Hawaii is one of the few states with 100% registration for everything; making it useful to figure out average firearms owned per gun owner.

[MKSheppard]

From my viewpoint, it's like being upset civilians can't purchase a mortar launder, or drive a fully armed tank down main street. Or are you going to argue there should be no restrictions on those?

Finally got around to this.

Until 1968; you could easily do just that.

Then the fucking NRA "compromised".

See; in the 1960s in the lead up to the 1968 Gun Control Act; the antis (including President Johnson) were pushing for the sky; registration of every gun in the US, etc.

The NRA came out and tried to "compromise" -- here's an official NRA release from 1967:

NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
1600 RHODE ISLAND AVE. N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036

For Release Anytime
(Written 4/7/67)

NRA OFFERS PROGRAM ON
GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION

Washington Harold W. Glassen, of Lansing, Michigan, newly-elected President of the National Rifle Association of America, has pledged the new Administration of the 800,000-member organization to support a program of gun control legislation that would bar imports of surplus military weapons and cheap, "junk" handguns; tighten up on mail order sales of handguns; and outlaw private ownership of so-called "destructive devices," such as bazookas, grenades and antitank guns.

The proposals, which "go far beyond any previous legislation that has had NRA support," according to Glassen, are the result of a year-long study by NRA's Firearms Legislation Committee. The recommendations of the Committee were approved "in principle" on April 5 by the NRA Board of Directors during the 96th Annual Meeting of the Association at Washington's Sheraton-Park Hotel.

At a press conference the following day, Glassen explained the Board's action: "At this point, we are endorsing certain principles that have been studied over the last year and recommended to the Board by our Firearms Legislation Committee. When we see a bill introduced in Congress incorporating these principles, we will endorse it." Glassen said the Association expected someone in Congress to sponsor its recommendations in the form of new legislation. Specifically, the Firearms Legislation Committee recommended:

(1) That legislation be introduced in Congress to provide notification to local police authorities before a handgun could be shipped in interstate commerce, and to require sworn statements of fact by purchasers in such transactions.

(2) That the President of the United States put an end to imports of most foreign firearms, except those suitable for sport shooting (competitive marksmanship or hunting), or those that are objects of art or of historical significance, or suitable for research and development.

(3) That severe federal restrictions be placed on sale, transfer and ownership of "destructive devices" such as bazookas, grenades, anti-tank guns and similar military surplus not suitable for sport shooting.

(4) That stricter enforcement of existing gun control laws at the local and national level be instituted.

The NRA meeting was set against a background of legislative activity in downtown Washington where a Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee headed by Rep. Emanuel Celler (D-NY), author of the House version of S.1 (H.R. 5384), opened hearings on the controversial legislation. This Subcommittee's attention is currently focused exclusively on H.R. 5384, with no other legislation being considered, at least for the time being.

President Glassen took vigorous issue with the legislation before the House Committee. He said it would "absolutely preclude any mail order sales of all firearms.

"We see no reason why hardship should be imposed on many small firearms dealers, and serious disruption created for one of the world's great sports," he said.

"We do not believe that the long gun — the shotgun or rifle — is sufficiently important in crime to preclude the American sportsman from obtaining the tools of his trade in a normal manner," he added.

Cites Imported "Junk"

Glassen told newsmen that inexpensive foreign handguns are a problem in relation to crime. He explained that NRA is in favor of a complete embargo on importation of such "junk."

He also urged that the President invoke authority in existing law to stop the sale of U. S. military surplus and ban importation of foreign military surplus not suitable for sport shooting or collecting.

He said NRA recommends the establishment of a Commission to screen foreign imports to determine whether they are suitable as sport shooting equipment, or objects of art, of historical significance, or useful for research and development. He said the size of the Commission or its make-up would be unimportant; "it is knowledge of the firearms field that counts," he explained.

Glassen, 60, is senior partner in the law firm of Glassen, Parr, Rhead and McLean in Lansing. He has been active in NRA's Hunter Safety Program, is a big-game hunter, skeet and trap shooter, and a breeder of English setters.

Woodson Scott V. P.

Woodson D. Scott of New York, also an attorney, was elected Vice President of NRA. Franklin L. Orth was re-elected Executive Vice President, Louis F. Lucas was re-elected Executive Director and Treasurer, and Frank C. Daniel was re-elected Secretary.

Basically, the Gun Control Act of 1968 defined destructive devices as grenades, grenade launchers, artillery weapons, and firearms with a bore over one half of an inch (.50 inches or 12.7mm), excluding some rifles and most shotguns and put them under the National Firearms Act.

This is an ad from Guns from 1962:



I want it all; milsurplus mortars and ex WWII light anti tank guns.

But the NRA gave up all that to prevent universal gun registration in 1967-68.

You can still buy them, it just takes registration with the ATF, a wait time of around 10-12 months, and having to pay a $200 tax on everything; including ammunition -- some enterprising people got around the cost that might create ($200 per hand grenade) by defining the spoon of a grenade as the engraved item.