"The silent majority"

[Librarian]

20.1%

http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-ownership-by-state-2015-7

Even if you assume the survey is off by a factor of 2 because of under-reporting, and the actual percentage is twice that, that's still only 40.2%, less than half.

And remember, babies and toddlers generally don't own guns, so you can't multiply 20.1% by the entire population of California (as I have seen people here do over and over and over again) to figure out how many gun owners are in California.

California population (2014): 38.8 million

Percentage of California population that is 18 and older: 72.7%

http://www.infoplease.com/us/census/data/california/demographic.html

California population that is 18 and older: 38.8 million x 72.7% = 28.2 million

Number of California (adult) gun owners: 28.2 million x 20.1% = 5.7 million

Number of California adults who do not own guns: 22.5 million

Still sounds like a weak study to me. From the linked publication

any of these six questions.

There's also this

What is already known on the subject?
▸ Firearm violence in the USA continues to be a major public
health concern.
▸ High prevalence of gun ownership in the USA contributes to
the burden of firearm-related injury.

which suggests a pre-study conclusion and an expected affirmation of that conclusion, and

State-level firearm
policy information was obtained from the Brady Law
Center and Injury Prevention and Control Center.

[Maltese Falcon]

I would say that maybe 1 in 20 households have a firearm in my neighborhood. Once had a discussion on burglaries in the local chat room, everybody was discussing surveillance/alarm systems. One guy had the bright idea to be armed. Several posters went berserk saying firearms were the "bane of society" and should be confiscated, etc., turned into a 50 post brawl.

Had to go in and put down the idiots -->

Gary you shouldn't have to stand alone. I will join in, thank you for your time and effort.

A recent poster opined that firearms are the bane of a civilized society and should be banned. He exercised his 1st Amendment rights of free speech in a public forum. Thank goodness we live in a society where the Bill of Rights is the fabric that binds us together and allows for someone to speak their mind.

Under the Bill of Rights we don’t get to pick and choose which rights are OK and which are bad. They stand together individually and collectively, all for one and one for all, so to speak.

The core holding in the Supreme Court of the United States D.C. v. Heller decision is that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right intimately tied to the natural right of self-defense and that “The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.”

We as Americans are fortunate we have the ability to exercise our 2nd Amendment rights in defense of our loved ones and ourselves. I would not want deal with a home forcible entry intruder with just a phone in my hand.

Until real substantive dialogue beyond prohibition or confiscation is offered, I must stand firm and defend what makes the United States a great nation.

.

[RedFord150]

My daughter is 21 and was in community college last year when the topic of gun ownership came up in a class.

Only a couple of the students had ever fired a gun. Most of these kids had the idea that gun owners leave their loaded guns all over the house for any kid to pick up.

My daughter pointed out that guns are valuable and most gun owners keep them in safes that are bolted down. No decent gun owners leave them laying out. She went on to talk about trigger locks and cable locks and how easy it is to secure a gun for just a few dollars.

Hopefully, she enlightened a few. She said the level of ignorance was truly mind boggling.

[Milsurp Collector]

Still sounds like a weak study to me. From the linked publication There's also this which suggests a pre-study conclusion and an expected affirmation of that conclusion, and

If you don't like that study there is this from usacarry.com. I hope you don't consider them to have an anti-gun bias too.

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/general-firearm-discussion/9841-percent-firearms-ownership-state.html

They come up with a very similar percentage for California: 21.3%.



So whether it is 20.1% or 21.3%, it is way way below 50%.

Now a totally different statistic is firearms per capita, counting firearms per state resident instead of gun owners as a percentage of adults. California is ranked 40th in firearms per capita at 7.6 firearms per 1000 residents. For comparison, Nevada is 8th with 19.5 per 1000, Oregon is tied for 23rd with 11.4 per 1000, and Arizona is tied for 33rd with 9.4 per 1000.

http://reverbpress.com/politics/firearms-per-capita-by-state/

EDIT: I looked up the original source of the data (CBS News). Apparently they used the ATF's database of NFA Firearms:

Here is a look at per capita weapons data, based on the ATF's National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, and 2013 data from the U.S. Census.

While the ATF's National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record is the only accessible list of its kind, it is not all-inclusive. NFA firearms only include the categories regulated by The National Firearms Act of 1934: machine guns, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, suppressors, destructive devices like bombs and grenades, concealable devices with the ability to discharge a shot through the energy of an explosive, and any firearm with a bore over half an inch that has not been determined to have a legitimate sporting use. While this list is lengthy, it does not include categories like pistols, which make up a large percentage of the guns in the U.S. As such, the total numbers of guns in each state would actually be much higher than the figures here.

So nevermind about the guns per capita statistic. It is for NFA items only.

[Merc1138]

Based on the voter turn out percentages here in kommiefornia, if we could get all gun owners to hit the polls, I think we might stand a chance of bringing this state back from the brink.

Negative.

You're forgetting that a very large number of gun owners will simply vote in anti 2a politicians, and do so quite happily. Even just the calguns forum membership can't unite against anti 2a politicians(there are a number of them that support anti 2a politicians, embrace forcing our PPT system on the rest of the country, think HSC/FSC is a good thing, etc. and I'm not even talking about the fudd types out there).

[wpage]

Calling BS on the poll #s since most gun owners will not report for fear of confiscation by authorities....

[mn2]

I also see the “go along to get along” populous. I think there are a few reasons for that and one in particular is this;

A big problem I see is the swing of political correctness happening in this nation. The best way to silence an opposition is by making their topic so offensive that nobody dares discuss it. This is where the gun control discussion is headed.

This type of **** is unfolding all around us. You have questions about black lives matter? Sorry, it is not acceptable to engage in debate on this. It is offensive and you will likely be cast as a racist exhibiting micro aggressions. A decade ago if you spoke out about invading Iraq you were labeled as not supporting the troops. Six decades if you questioned McCarthy you were labeled a communist and blacklisted. It's the same **** today, this is how they silence you. The first amendment withers in the face of such a public shaming and being cast out of society.

[gogohopper]

Since nobody actually knows how many gun owners there are, hard to say either way.

But an undercurrent I infer from many years of posts is that, given our druthers, most of us in the gun world just want to be left alone. That seems to lead to not getting involved in politics.

Y'know who is left who DO get involved? Look at our politicians: the 'government is the answer' crowd.

This article, explains to me why the left always get so involved and the right just wants to be left alone:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/419177/battling-society-vs-battling-yourself-different-approaches-changing-world-dennis?target=author&tid=900932

snippet

[BLK RFL DIV]

I would say that maybe 1 in 20 households have a firearm in my neighborhood. Once had a discussion on burglaries in the local chat room, everybody was discussing surveillance/alarm systems. One guy had the bright idea to be armed. Several posters went berserk saying firearms were the "bane of society" and should be confiscated, etc., turned into a 50 post brawl.

Had to go in and put down the idiots -->




.

Very well said.

It doesn't matter if we are a majority or minority, OP, the 2nd Amendment protects our Right. However, what we are dealing with are politicians who ignore their oath, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, their only agenda is to create and all powerful state, not an all powerful population that is self reliant and self sufficient. They perpetuate lies, fearmongering, and legislation, nowhere do they instill common sense or practical legislation that actually benefits the population. Gone are the days of "My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." The only reason politicians exist is to fill their pockets and defraud the American taxpayer. Unfortunately I lack any and all faith toward politicians at this point in time, because history is testament to their corruption and today their tyranny is testament to the fact they no longer carry the banner of freedom or justice, only greed and their perpetual incumbency.

[BLK RFL DIV]

And if there was a silent majority, they need to wake the fffk up.

[Maltese Falcon]

Now a totally different statistic is firearms per capita, counting firearms per state resident instead of gun owners as a percentage of adults. California is ranked 40th in firearms per capita at 7.6 firearms per 1000 residents. For comparison, Nevada is 8th with 19.5 per 1000, Oregon is tied for 23rd with 11.4 per 1000, and Arizona is tied for 33rd with 9.4 per 1000.

...and probably those 7.6 are owned by 4 residents. I know I have been pulling up the stats

.

[deadcoyote]

I can't speak to statewide demographics but my kids go to a Montessori School and it cracks me up how many of the super left leaning hippy parents have approached me after finding out I'm an LEO to confide in me they are closet gun owners but don't want anyone else to know. Makes you wonder how many more are out there...

[gogohopper]

I can't speak to statewide demographics but my kids go to a Montessori School and it cracks me up how many of the super left leaning hippy parents have approached me after finding out I'm an LEO to confide in me they are closet gun owners but don't want anyone else to know. Makes you wonder how many more are out there...

Doesn't matter. They vote lib

[Librarian]

...and probably those 7.6 are owned by 4 residents. I know I have been pulling up the stats

.

You left off Milsurp's addition

So nevermind about the guns per capita statistic. It is for NFA items only.

But I believe it true that the distribution of guns is not even across the eligible population or even the gun owners. I expect we'd find a fair number of one-gun owners**, and a few who need multiple safes for their collection of hundreds.

** who, leaving the gun in the nightstand or the closet, and never or almost never shooting it, do not think of themselves as gun owners.

[strongpoint]

And remember, babies and toddlers generally don't own guns ...

Maybe YOURS don't ...

That quote sounds as whiny and entitled as the most bleeding heart of lefties. He owes nothing and deserves nothing. Being white, brown, yellow, or blue is irrelevant.