Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday September 20 2016, @02:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the taking-aim-at-statistics dept.

From The Washington Post:

The survey's findings support other research showing that as overall rates of gun ownership has declined, the number of firearms in circulation has skyrocketed. The implication is that there are more guns in fewer hands than ever before. The top 3 percent of American adults own, on average, 17 guns apiece, according to the survey's estimates.

Washington Post

Interesting. Lawyers, guns, and money! Which of these has the smallest percentage and largest absolute amount? Of course, the other major shift the survey reveals is in the rationale for owning firearms: currently, a majority of owners cite personal protection as their motivation, prior to the 1990's the majority owned guns for sport.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:02PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:02PM (#404288)

    The 3% can only use one at a time.

    So if they own 17, then 16 are sitting idle.

    Statistics are great. You can spin them however you need.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:17PM (#404297)

    I propose a law that states you must purchase 2 guns at a time. In this way I've cut the number of firearms capable of commiting a crime in half!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @01:06PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @01:06PM (#404769)

      Last I checked, firearms were generally not able to commit a crime. But maybe there are now sentient firearms?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:27PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:27PM (#404304)

    Who said anything about it being a threat? Violent death rate is way down [nationalreview.com] over the last 20 years, so obviously more guns aren't causing more deaths, at least not at the macro level.

    But, as you said you can't use more than one at a time, so what is going on? Is it fetishization? Since the violent death rate is way down (and the violent crime rate is down even more), what are they afraid of that they weren't afraid of when the country was like 300% more dangerous?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @11:37PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @11:37PM (#404558)

    Yep. I can only shoot one at a time. Didn't stop me from buying a couple cases of mosins and nearly a metric ton of ammo to feed them when it was cheap, with the express purpose of passing them all out to family and dear friends and neighbors if / when the Happening... You know, um...happens. Also, I'm not afraid to admit that I kinda like jerkin it with cosmoline, comrade.

  • (Score: 2) by Non Sequor on Wednesday September 21 2016, @02:43AM

    by Non Sequor (1005) on Wednesday September 21 2016, @02:43AM (#404633) Journal

    The 3% can only use one at a time.
    So if they own 17, then 16 are sitting idle.

    Only if you're a pussy.

    --
    Write your congressman. Tell him he sucks.