Gun ownership declining?? Can they be right?

[bubbapug1]

I really wonder if studies like this are accurate. This is some really biased reporting, and what is the agenda of such a campaign? They make us out as criminals for even wanting a gun.

With gun and ammo sales at record highs I really question the results of this "research."

Seems to me the media is trying to make gun ownership look like incest or other such sins.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The number of Americans who live in a household with at least one gun is lower than it's ever been, according to a major American trend survey that finds the decline in gun ownership is paralleled by a reduction in the number of Americans who hunt.

http://www.aol.com/article/2015/03/09/major-survey-shows-gun-ownership-declining/21151498/?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-sb-nb%7Cdl18%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D625332

[M1A Rifleman]

Wishful thinking on their part. Have you noticed a drop in the numbers at gun stores, ranges, and shows? Its been the opposite for close to ten years.

The anti's publish this stuff on the premise of "one monkey follows the other". They know most, especially those that live by social media will want to do what is the "norm" or "popular" and follow what others do. Sort of gun control without the fight or the passing of new law.

[Gem1950]

Can they be right?

NO.

[xxINKxx]

AOL is still around?? Dang lol.

[mshill]

This is absolutely not true where I live. Of course Placer County still elects conservative republicans so that's no surprise.

[SuperSet]

Wishful thinking on their part. Have you noticed a drop in the numbers at gun stores, ranges, and shows? Its been the opposite for close to ten years.

Probably not a good indicator as gun stores are closing left and right. Some dude on ARFCOM started one during the 2013 rush and had to close, due to slow sales.
Having said that, I thought I remembered that even as sales rise, it's usually the same people who buy multiple guns versus newer gunowners.

[ccoyle]

That article is a great example of very poor journalism. The title claims that gun ownership has declined, and in the body of the article it is stated that "...32 percent of Americans either own a firearm themselves or live with someone who does, which ties a record low set in 2010." But, of course, in concentrating only on the percentage of the total population they neglect to observe that the U.S. total population was also lower in 2010. In reality, the number of persons who "...own a firearm themselves or live with someone who does..." has increased by about 3 million since 2010. It's all about spin.

[bsg]

It's all about spin.

^^^ this.

[radioburning]

They're not taking into account population growth since the 70's, or the fact that in the 70's more people lived as "family units" with multiple people in one household, but now more people live in "single person households".

Factor those two in, and gun ownership has gone up.

Oh, and this poll was done in Chicago, so there just might be a couple variables there that might skew this poll...

[Kyle1886]

From the article:

The 2014 survey was conducted March 31-Oct. 11, 2014, among 2,538 American adults.

Since the survey was conducted by University of Chicago, I wonder what demographic areas their pollsters covered?

That's why I place little value on polls, they seldom reveal the areas polled, only a number of people.

Poll "X" number of people on any subject in one demographic area and the same number of people in another area and I doubt the results will be the same.

Respectfully,
Kyle

[Jimi Jah]

Hunters are down from 33% in 1977 to 16% today. Mostly it's because of mass immigration (immigrants don't normally bring hunting traditions with them) and population growth in cities.

Gun ownership is going up, 300 million guns means someone has them. Most gun purchases are for self defense, not hunting.

[spamsucker]

There are a few problems with the article that make me think the conclusions may not hold water. No study abstract or published report from any peer reviewed journal was linked to so the interpretation of that study data and any desired understanding of the specifics of the methodology are unavailable, rendering the article suspect.

Second, this article is talking about the results of a survey which is not something that can be taken as being very reliable on the face of it and I would not call it a study of the topic without knowing a hell of a lot more about how it was done. People lie to survey takers. Trofim Lysenko relied on surveys instead of something like useful evidence or observation and look how that turned out for Russia.

Third, the sample size and distribution. It might be a useful sample size but it depends on the distribution across the country and how that distribution has changed over time. People in many parts of the country are ABLE to exercise their 2nd amendment rights only because of fairly recent court victories. Has that factor been accounted for and how was the data massaged to account for it. If it was not accounted for then we have an immediate results skew to consider.

The above having been said, I'm also deliberately nitpicking the article more than the survey. Long term surveys and short term surveys are not the same thing and they're not unscientific just because they're surveys. Confirmation bias and expectation bias has to be dealt with though. I have recently seen multiple published studies, most very well conducted, which suggest that the reported conclusions of the study are not off base at all. More guns but fewer owners, demographic shifts among who owns them at all and a big blame arrow pointed at declining population of hunters as a contributing factor. Yeah, that's about right. This is why gun rights groups always whine to their membership to take a kid hunting/fishing/shooting/etc... so we carry the tradition on to the next generation.

What really impresses me is the clear thinking in the responses above me.

[M1A Rifleman]

Probably not a good indicator as gun stores are closing left and right. Some dude on ARFCOM started one during the 2013 rush and had to close, due to slow sales.
Having said that, I thought I remembered that even as sales rise, it's usually the same people who buy multiple guns versus newer gunowners.

Except a closing store is also not a good indicator, and may be more of poor management decisions, practices, location, supply, etc.

[oddball]

Decades ago, owning a gun was usually associated with hunting. And many people back then hunted. Now, the number of those who hunt has declined, but the role of the gun owner has changed drastically. Now we have hobbyists, competitors, collectors, recreational target shooters, folks concerned about self-defense, hunters, etc. The number of different types of firearms is staggering compared to 50 years ago, along with the different subgroups of gun owners.

Gun ownership is up, no doubt.

[OlderThanDirt]

From the article:



Since the survey was conducted by University of Chicago, I wonder what demographic areas their pollsters covered?

That's why I place little value on polls, they seldom reveal the areas polled, only a number of people.

Poll "X" number of people on any subject in one demographic area and the same number of people in another area and I doubt the results will be the same.

Respectfully,
Kyle

Add in the scenario:

A complete stranger calls and asks if I own guns.

Response: No.

I don't actually answer the phone and talk to strangers, but if I did, I would lie.