California the 3rd most Armed State?

[Uriah02]

This started with wanting to find the answer to the OP's question on http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...d.php?t=395611. Then it was a slow night at work so I got curious about the whole set of data this provided. It being PDF I wasn't able to really compare data on excel but I did look at the top five states over the period.

Total background checks from 1999-2010:
Kentucky - 10,476,666
Texas -9,291,035
California - 8,759,629
Illinois - 6,604,912
Pennsylvania - 6,554,092

Some other interesting points I noticed from this slice of data:
California was consistantly in the top 3 for overall NICs checks. California checks were highest from 1999-2001 in which there was almost a 20% decline from 2002-2006, 2007-2010 has started to approach pre-2002 AWB levels.
Kentucky averaged 234,423 checks from 1999 to 2005, but starting in 2006 checks nearly trippled to 791,599, almost doubled again to 1,587,850 and is still peaking in 2010 at 2,385,579.
All five states saw a rise in checks from 2005-2010.
If I were to speculate by the trends in data I would conclude Texas is the most armed and California is likely the 2nd most armed. Of course since this only deals with NICs checks my theory might be all shot to heck.

[Jake71]

Strictest laws in the country and we are the 3rd highest in quantity of weapons/background checks.

That would not take into account multiple purchases on one DROS... and knowing you guys on here.. it would be 3-4 at a time. hahaha

You GO!!! California.... woohooo

[CSACANNONEER]

Some other interesting points I noticed from this slice of data:
California was consistantly in the top 3 for overall NICs checks. California checks were highest from 1999-2001 in which there was almost a 20% decline from 2002-2006, 2007-2010 has started to approach pre-2002 AWB levels.

I thought California did not use the NIC program?????

[rod]

I would expect California to be in the top 3 every single year. Every gun purchased, new and second hand (PPT), has to go through the NIC check. Most other states only run the NIC check when a gun is purchased from a FFL. Here in VA, and most other states, transactions for guns purchased second hand are not required to go through the NIC. Look at Kentucky, only new guns purchased through a FFL are required to be run through the NIC. Over 10,000 transactions, and those are for new guns!!!!

[rod]

I thought California did not use the NIC program?????

I may be wrong, but I was pretty sure California used the NIC for background checks. The only difference is the state mandated 10 day wait.

[dustoff31]

I may be wrong, but I was pretty sure California used the NIC for background checks. The only difference is the state mandated 10 day wait.

Correct. Federal law mandates use of the NICS system. States have the option of allowing the dealer to make the call or designating a central POC in the state to do it.

And the making the call to NICS is free. But CA sees fit to charge people for something that costs the state nothing.

[Mickey D]

Strictest laws in the country and we are the 3rd highest in quantity of weapons/background checks.

That would not take into account multiple purchases on one DROS... and knowing you guys on here.. it would be 3-4 at a time. hahaha

You GO!!! California.... woohooo

I might say CA is 'one' of the states with strict gun laws. There are a couple I think are more strict, New Jersey being one.

[Untamed1972]

You might also need to factor into your analysis that CA requires background checks on ALL firearms tranfers (excluding interfamilial and such). Where states that do not require checks for PPTs would show lower rate of checks because checks are only being done by FFLs. There could be vast amounts of PPTs in those states that no one knows about.

[Coded-Dude]

yeah...but they are all being smuggled into mexico!

[CHS]

I thought California did not use the NIC program?????

We do, but the dealer doesn't do it.

That's why we hate the DROS system so much. When you submit the information of the buyer via DROS, the DOJ has to eventually pull that up and run the NICS check manually.

Part of the reason we have a 10-day wait in California is because that's how long it takes the DOJ to run a background check in some cases.

In other states the Dealer just calls up NICS directly and gets a yay/nay within minutes. We have a backwards, slow, and inefficient system.

Then again, if the dealers were able to run buyers through NICS directly, they wouldn't need as many staffers at the DOJ's BOF, which would save California money. We can't have that!!

[GrizzlyGuy]

You might also need to factor into your analysis that CA requires background checks on ALL firearms tranfers (excluding interfamilial and such). Where states that do not require checks for PPTs would show lower rate of checks because checks are only being done by FFLs. There could be vast amounts of PPTs in those states that no one knows about.

That's true, but unless the people in those states are violating federal law and doing PPT's across state lines without using an FFL, those guns would remain within the state and be a "wash" in terms of which state is the most armed.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if CA was the 1st, 2nd or 3rd most armed state since it has the highest population. We have more prohibiting misdemeanors and other factors than most other states and our purchasing process is a bit more involved (e.g., 10-day wait), but those disincentives to gun acquisition may not offset our much larger population in terms of total number of guns (or gun owners) per state.

[DSA_FAL]

Is KY the state that runs a NICS check on all their CCW holders every few months? If so that would explain the jump in their numbers and would also invalidate their NICS check numbers as a way of comparing gun sales.

[timdps]

Every gun purchased, new and second hand (PPT), has to go through the NIC check.

You might also need to factor into your analysis that CA requires background checks on ALL firearms tranfers (excluding interfamilial and such). .

Not true... In California, not ALL firearms transfers have to go through FFL/NICS. Long guns over 50 years old can transfer FTF with no FFL involved.

Its a stated exemption to the CA law requiring all firearms to transfer through FFLs.


Also private party interstate transfers using a C&R license do not require NICS. Don't know if a C&R sales from an out of state FFL needs a NICS check, but I would guess that it does not.

Tim

[dustoff31]

Is KY the state that runs a NICS check on all their CCW holders every few months? If so that would explain the jump in their numbers and would also invalidate their NICS check numbers as a way of comparing gun sales.

Yes it is. And yes it does.

[Untamed1972]

Not true... In California, not ALL firearms transfers have to go through FFL/NICS. Long guns over 50 years old can transfer FTF with no FFL involved.

Its a stated exemption to the CA law requiring all firearms to transfer through FFLs.


Also private party interstate transfers using a C&R license do not require NICS. Don't know if a C&R sales from an out of state FFL needs a NICS check, but I would guess that it does not.

Tim

I know that, did you notice that I stated "interfamilial and such"? Excuse me for not listing out EVERY exception contained in the PC. I realize there are exceptions, but the vast majority of PPTs generally do not fall into those exceptions, so my point is a much LARGER percentage of tranfers are being recorded in CA then would be in other states.