Article worth reading perhaps...
- Thread starter HughScot
- Start date
Executive summary of article: "Only 3% of gun owners own 50% of firearms in the US, so therefore these gun owners have too much power" Go ahead, pols, do what you want; you're clear!
Without stretching too many mental muscles, I could point out the sub-20% turnout for elections and say almost the same thing about the right to vote....
Without stretching too many mental muscles, I could point out the sub-20% turnout for elections and say almost the same thing about the right to vote....
.....
.....hmmmm....
He did say some nice things about me, near as I can figure .... something about "3 percent are superowners with and average of 17 firearms each" or something like that ...... I think that makes me an above average superowner/3 percenter, or something ....... right?
Always look on the bright, side, of life!
.....hmmmm....
He did say some nice things about me, near as I can figure .... something about "3 percent are superowners with and average of 17 firearms each" or something like that ...... I think that makes me an above average superowner/3 percenter, or something ....... right?
Always look on the bright, side, of life!
I wouldn't take this article too seriously. This isn't the New York Times, this is a left wing equivalent of the conspiracy sites. Not that articles like this don't matter, but the only audience they are reaching are people who are seeking confirmation of they're own beliefs, and people so dumb or inexperienced that they can't tell a legitimate news source from a glorified blog.
Ok, maybe not, assuming Anyone still takes the New York Times seriously as a model of responsible journalism. I don't.
However, its doesn't have to be the Times to get readership. I mentioned this in an earlier post. On Sep 23 (the day after I read the article via a link here on TFL, my MSN web news page ran virtually the SAME article sourcing USA TODAY.
Same "facts" about gun ownership, from the same (as yet unpublished and un -peer reviewed) "study". And I freakin' guarantee you that web headline and link was seen by many times many more people than the original NYP article. And, since it was "from" a recognized national source, the information was probably believed by a lot of people.
Again, I will point out the double (maybe triple?) standard. IF "half" of the guns in the US are owned by ONLY 3% of the people, the author's conclusion is that the politicians don't need to listen to them, because its such a small number of people.
We constantly hear how 90%(+) of the nation's wealth is owned by 1% (ONE PERCENT) of the people. By the authors logic, politicians should not listen to them, EITHER. But you know they do...
larryh1108
New member
I believe that there are many errors in the general statistics of gun owners. The number of firearms in circulation has been said to be 300 million for decades now. Until there is an accurate count of firearms in America, none of the polls and opinions will have any merit. I'm fine with the antis believing that there are "only" 300 million firearms in America because they truly underestimate just how many true gun owners there are.
How many new firearms have been sold in America in the last 30 years? Used does not count because they were accounted for when they were sold as new. I know there are records out there. If it's 10 million guns a year (average) for 30 years, that's 300 million right there, not counting the number before 1986. How many guns were out there in 1986? If you look around, I've seen the same 300 million figure thrown around for decades.
As we've discussed many times, I seriously doubt many gun owners will admit owning even 1 gun let alone 100 guns. If I see a poll that says 30% of Americans own guns, my mind sees 60%+ due to the fact that what we own we wish to stay private. Let the antis see "only" 30% and underestimate our resolve. A true number of owned firearms can never be compiled due to the fact that we'll never tell.
How many new firearms have been sold in America in the last 30 years? Used does not count because they were accounted for when they were sold as new. I know there are records out there. If it's 10 million guns a year (average) for 30 years, that's 300 million right there, not counting the number before 1986. How many guns were out there in 1986? If you look around, I've seen the same 300 million figure thrown around for decades.
As we've discussed many times, I seriously doubt many gun owners will admit owning even 1 gun let alone 100 guns. If I see a poll that says 30% of Americans own guns, my mind sees 60%+ due to the fact that what we own we wish to stay private. Let the antis see "only" 30% and underestimate our resolve. A true number of owned firearms can never be compiled due to the fact that we'll never tell.
Shenna9220
New member
For this study/survey to have any validity, the vast majority of the readership of this forum would had to partispate. Nobody asked me. Anyone get asked?
Shenna9220
New member
I just realized what this article is all about. Next we will see political adds saying that only 3% own firearms and use the newspaper as its source. And we all know that everyone checks the source!
Find the source, if you can....
As I mentioned earlier, in the USA TODAY article it is mentioned that the study where the 3% owns 50% figure comes from is neither formally completed, nor peer-reviewed. The figure being thrown about by the "news" is something that was "leaked" from the still incomplete study.
AND, they state that the actual data used by the study was taken from ANOTHER company's earlier ONLINE SURVEY.
Now, I don't know about you, but I don't think an online study (of ANYTHING) can be considered something accurate when applied to the ENTIRE population.
I know lots of people, even gun owners
, who have NO online presence at all.
That alone is enough to show me that despite the modern era, there are a LOT of people who simply aren't going to be represented in any online anything.
And then there is the simple fact that there is no filter of any kind that can work around deliberate lies. I know a number of otherwise honest people that simply delight in screwing with polls and surveys, about almost everything.
Personally, not only do I reject the author's conclusions, I dispute the accuracy of the data he cherry picked to reach them.
As I mentioned earlier, in the USA TODAY article it is mentioned that the study where the 3% owns 50% figure comes from is neither formally completed, nor peer-reviewed. The figure being thrown about by the "news" is something that was "leaked" from the still incomplete study.
AND, they state that the actual data used by the study was taken from ANOTHER company's earlier ONLINE SURVEY.
Now, I don't know about you, but I don't think an online study (of ANYTHING) can be considered something accurate when applied to the ENTIRE population.
I know lots of people, even gun owners
, who have NO online presence at all. That alone is enough to show me that despite the modern era, there are a LOT of people who simply aren't going to be represented in any online anything.
And then there is the simple fact that there is no filter of any kind that can work around deliberate lies. I know a number of otherwise honest people that simply delight in screwing with polls and surveys, about almost everything.
Personally, not only do I reject the author's conclusions, I dispute the accuracy of the data he cherry picked to reach them.