Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Three Percent own Half of America’s Guns

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

aristarchus writes:

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This discussion has been archived.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.
Three Percent own Half of America’s Guns | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 126 comments | Search Discussion
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, @06:57PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:57PM (#404411)

    Why its interesting is if you assume computers cause autism, then having the government take away the right to own computers for a mere 3% of the population would magically cure half the autism.

    Unfortunately that's how low functioning people think about guns. Why, that piece of steel in a certain shape magically all by itself with no one else to blame shoot someone. Therefore the problem is the piece of steel, and if you believe in magical thinking we could eliminate half of all violent crime at a cost of merely taking away the rights of 3% of the population.

    You are begging the question too, in the exact opposite way.

    If owning computers caused autism, then removing computers *would* reduce autism. That's kind of the definition of a causal link. Likewise, if owning guns causes an increase in violent crimes, then reducing guns would reduce the crime rate.

    If you have evidence (not annecdotes, like the pro-gun-control group uses all the time as well) then you should present it. Otherwise you are engaging in the very same logical fallacy that you are accusing others of.