Ten-year trend

I

Ike666

New member
The day before yesterday the AP released an article reporting that gun sales had dipped in January. You have to read about halfway into the article before you find the acknowledgement that the January sales dip is well known in the industry and that this Jan's dip was only 10% whereas historically it has been about 30+%.

I have been studying NICS trends for about five years now and, to say the least, the last ten years have been interesting.

TenYearTrend.jpeg


You can see the result of the pent up demand in late 2004 and early 2005 with a slow, steady increase. But then it starts to accelerate in the summer of 2005 and begins the long, steady climb. You can also clearly see the effect of the 2008 election and that buying spree lasted well into the summer of 2009. It dipped late that summer, but by Jan 2010 began another uninterrupted climb to the present.

I understand the obvious forces working here, but I'd be interested in others ideas about some of the spot trends. For example, why the dramatic acceleration from summer 2005? Also, it seems that the summer slump in the seasonal trend (dashed line) gets shorter each year and the fall spree leaps higher - why?
 
If we're just looking at raw NICS checks numbers, I'd also be curious to see how population growth fits into that equation. Are we just looking at more purchases because of more population, or are we looking at a rising % of the population buying guns?
 
The increase in NICS checks is definitely outstripping the overall population growth. The peak number of NICS checks per year has increased more than 100%, while the U.S. population has only increased about 7% since 2004.

We can't say for certain from the graph that an increasing portion of the population is buying guns, though. It could be that the same portion who have always bought guns have just been buying them more frequently since 2004 (I would fall into that group). But realistically, I suspect that a significant portion of the increase comes from new gun owners as well.
 
Spats: U.S. population growth from 2000 to the Jan 2013 estimate is 12.03%

Total annual U.S. NICS checks for the period 2003 to 2012 is 130.92%. Even if we allow a 1:1 correspondence, that leaves a growth rate of 118.89%.

The NSSF data indicates that for long time gun owners, the average owner has 7.4 (+/-) handguns and new owners have 2.? per individual. Most longtime owners bought at least one HG in the last 12 months and also bought at least one in the last 12 months. (I can't put my hands on the study right now).

We do know that most owners own more that one, and own more than one type of gun. Longtime owners clearly own quite a few in each case. I personally don't think this counts for the increase - I don't think current owners are binge buying enough to account for the increase. But I can't support that empirically with the data I have.
 
In your graph, how many data points are there? Is it one per month, or one per quarter? Also, what's the significance of the solid line?
 
In addition to the overall growth, what strikes me is the the amazing consistency in the yearly patterns. The primary spike is always followed by a secondary spike of approximately the same relative magnitude, year after year. It's almost too consistent to be believable. Where do you get these numbers?
 
The overall trending is because the baby-boomers are out of the equation. The generation after the boomers, and their kids, are the ones doing to buying. Any of you nascent boomers who fit between the years are simply anomalies in the equation :cool:


Other then that, the dotted line is effected by Hunting Season, Christmas and Tax Season, and school being out for the summer..
 
This chart is based on a time series analysis of the Total U.S. NICS monthly data from JAN 2003 through JAN 2013. Unit of analysis in monthly and there are 121 months in the dataset (I just added Jan 2013). The solid line is the extracted trend from the multiplicative decomposition of the time series and the dashed line in is the seasonal variation by the trend. There is a lag at the beginning of the plot to complete moving averages.

In the seasonal variation, the peak is always December and the valley right after is January. If you squint and hold your face just right you can see the node for each month in the seasonal line.
 
The overall trending is because the baby-boomers are out of the equation. The generation after the boomers, and their kids, are the ones doing to buying. Any of you nascent boomers who fit between the years are simply anomalies in the equation
Click to expand...

Right now, the "Boomers" are between 48 and 65, so they're probably still a big part of the "disposable income" crowd. I know that the gun shows I go to always have a large "grey" population! :)
 
No way, boomers stopped being boomers if they were born after '60. I was born in '60 so I am in the first batch of the "tweener" generation. Ain't no boomers younger then 53 right now. If they think they are a boomer they have an identity complex :D

And I did say that there were some technically boomer aged guys in here who simply don't fit the norm. But come on, if you don't recognize the idea that all this "we need a better world" thing also corresponds with the boomer generation then I think someone needs glasses for their mind :p
 
Last edited:
I guess it depends on whose definition you use, but I think the most widely-used range (from the U.S. Census Bureau) goes from 1946 to 1964.
 
Well, the census bureau is about the birthrate.

But any real talk of boomers is talking about sociology-political impact etc... Face it, I was born in '60 and I wasn't even in junior-high when all that stuff was going on and by the time I did get to where I could have had an impact, nothing much was going on.

When you have Disco and Bay-Watch, the rest all fades to the back of the bus :cool:
 
January 2013 (2,495,440) is down 10.36% from December 2012 (2,783,765).

But January 2013 is still 24.34% greater than the highest month in history prior to December 2012 (November 2012 was 2,006,919).
 
If we're just looking at raw NICS checks numbers, I'd also be curious to see how population growth fits into that equation.
Click to expand...
More to the point, those numbers won't include private sales. Another factor is that many states allow buyers with carry permits to bypass the NICS check.

So, there are likely many more sales not being measured there. Scientifically speaking, I'd say 41.574%.
 
It is similar to a moving average but it is actually locally smoothed trend (regression) line plotting NICS (Y) against Time (X).

I'd also like to re-ask my original question(s). This is a dramatic rise in NICS checks. We are using it as a general interest in firearms indicator (NICS checks measure a lot more than just sales, such as permit applications and so on). What we are really interested in are the social forces that are driving this phenomenon.

I've been a shooter my whole life (6 decades now) and I have never seen such widespread interest in guns, shooting, shooting sports, hunting, personal defense, and such.

The scientist in me wants to know, Why and Why now?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top