Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, September 20, 2016

There are hundreds of millions of guns in the United States -- enough, according to several estimates, for every American civilian adult to own more than one.

But actual gun ownership is far more lopsided than that.

A sweeping new survey by researchers at Harvard University and Northeastern University finds that roughly half of the nearly 300 million firearms in the United States are concentrated in the hands of a tiny sliver of the U.S. population: Just 3 percent of American adults own some 130 million guns, according to The Trace and Guardian US, two news organizations that first reported on the survey.

This portrait of gun ownership represents the equivalent of about 17 guns per person among a group of "super-owners," the 7.7 million Americans who own between eight and 140 guns each.

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

Some super-owners are dedicated collectors with special rooms to display their assortment of historic firearms. Others are firearms instructors, gunsmiths, or competitive shooters, who need a variety of firearms in the course of work or competition. Some gun owners have a survivalist streak, and believe in storing up weapons, as well as food and water, in case of a disaster scenario. Others simply picked up a handgun here, a shotgun or hunting rifle there, and somehow ended up with dozens.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Not sure about 3%, a lot of people aren't going to answer if they have a firearm in their house. It's not something you should tell people.

The "super owner" part sounds about right. Sometimes you just end up with a bunch of guns.

#1 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2016-09-20 08:38 AM | Reply

Doc, great article, and regardless on how accurate the findings are, gun nuts are a huge problem in the US.

#2 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2016-09-20 10:48 AM | Reply

"gun nuts are a huge problem in the US"

I'd love to hear you expand on this. Given the context here, it would seem to mean someone who has collected a lot of guns is a huge problem.

How many shootings have these people done?

Did you mean something else?

#3 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2016-09-20 10:57 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

gun nuts are a huge problem in the US.

#2 | Posted by CrisisStills

WTF is that problem?

#4 | Posted by Sniper at 2016-09-20 12:33 PM | Reply

My grandfathers 1903, m1 garand, model 10, savage 4.10 ahotgun, IJ target sealed 8, JS lang and son 12 gauge that were given to me sure make me threat.

Quick, run to the hills.

#5 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 12:41 PM | Reply

gun nuts are a huge problem in the US.
#2 | Posted by CrisisStills

WTF is that problem?
#4 | POSTED BY SNIPER

People like you.

#6 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2016-09-20 01:22 PM | Reply

People like you.
#6 | DOC_SARVIS

From your link:
This portrait of gun ownership represents the equivalent of about 17 guns per person among a group of "super-owners," the 7.7 million Americans who own between eight and 140 guns each.

www.statisticbrain.com
U.S. Gun Ownership Statistics Data
Number of Americans who own a gun 76,000,000
Average number of guns owned in a gun-owning household 8

As Sal pointed out, people will own a variety of weapons for a variety of uses. Target shooting, trap, hunting, self defense, family heirlooms, etc. Some will collect historical weaponry, or several variations of a particular model. These are all counted as 'Gun Nut Ownership' by you. Just because when you hear the term 'multiple gun ownership', you think of an arsenal of black rifles, that isn't the story.
I personally own 5 shotguns. a 12 gauge antique, a 12 gauge pump, a 12 gauge semi auto, and two 20 gauge doubles, one over-under and one side by side. I hunt and shoot blue rock with these. These shotguns, and the few hunting rifles and self defense pistols I own put me into the super predator category, right?
You guys need to quit pissing yourselves over weapons in law abiding citizen's hands and focus on the real problems in life.

#7 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 02:14 PM | Reply

Let's see....1971 Model 94 30-30, 1975 Glenfield Model 20, 1971 Colt Frontier Scout, an H&R UltraSlugger 20ga, and my daughters's Savage Rascal. Does that make me a super-owner? 3 guns I've had since I was a pre-teen, one I bought to hunt in Maryland, and a .22 for my daughter. I'm a dangerous fanatic, clearly!!

#8 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2016-09-20 03:50 PM | Reply

...and that 3% of America controls 60% of Congress. Nothing new here.

#9 | Posted by nutcase at 2016-09-20 04:17 PM | Reply

"...it would seem to mean someone who has collected a lot of guns is a huge problem.
How many shootings have these people done?
Did you mean something else?"

#3 | POSTED BY KWRX25

No, that's exactly what I mean. You hit it on head perfectly. You're telling me stock pilling an arsenal of weapons waiting for North Korea to attack or the arrival of the zombie apocalypse is sane. Looking at it from your point of view, how many firearms does a man need to protect his family? 50% of firearms in 3% of the population is nutso, no matter if your anti gun or pro gun.

"How many shootings have these people done?" You're kidding right?

www.foxnews.com
www.nytimes.com
www.nydailynews.com
usnews.nbcnews.com

And we haven't even discussed the massive weapon stockpile Right Wing hate groups have amassed.

Not a pretty picture.

#10 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2016-09-20 04:35 PM | Reply

You guys need to quit pissing yourselves over weapons in law abiding citizen's hands and focus on the real problems in life.
#7 | Posted by Whizzo

You mean like when weapons get in the hands of citizens that aren't law abiding?
Okay, what's your solution for that one of life's problems?
Or do you not have one, and that's why you're saying it requires focus?

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 04:39 PM | Reply

As Sal pointed out, people will own a variety of weapons for a variety of uses.

The #1 way people use them to harm anyone is by killing themselves.

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 04:45 PM | Reply

"The #1 way people use them to harm anyone is by killing themselves"

Not according to the CDC or anyone.
Deaths account for a small fraction of gun related injuries.

But sorry, did not mean to rain some reality on your fantasy.

#13 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 04:53 PM | Reply

The #1 people use guns to seriously harm anyone is by killing themselves.

#14 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 05:04 PM | Reply

"The #1 people use guns to seriously harm anyone is by killing themselves."

And snoofy is off to the races running back again.

But lets see a link...

I mean we all know it does not exist, serious is obviously used for any gunshot and only a small percentage of those are actually fatal. About 30% of all gunshot incidents are fatal according to the CDC.

Try again.

#15 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 05:15 PM | Reply

Shooting resulting in injury are mostly from people shooting themselves, either on purpose or by accident.

Happy yet?

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 05:38 PM | Reply

Okay, what's your solution for that one of life's problems?
#11 | SNOOFY

First and foremost, enforce the existing gun laws.
Second, make needed changes in our mental health system.

The Obama administration has failed in gun control because it has failed to enforce existing gun laws.
In 2007, candidate Barack Obama said, "We know what to do. We've got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books."
During the Obama administration, Congress has failed to provide the necessary funding for the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). NICS is the database checked during gun purchases to ensure individuals with criminal records & mental illness aren't allowed to purchase guns. In 2007, Congress passed the NICS Improvement Amendments Act, which created incentives for states to improve the reporting of mental health information into background check system. Yet many states have made little or no progress reporting largely because Congress failed to follow through with funding, granting just 5.3% of the total authorized amount from FY 2009 through FY 2011

FBI says Dylann Roof should not have been cleared to purchase a weapon
www.google.com
America Should Be Prosecuting Straw Purchasers, Not Gun Dealers
www.nationalreview.com
"If the goal is to save lives, then prosecute criminals, Mr. President!"
www.google.com

It seems to me that the lack of enforcement is just a ploy that gets people like you, Doc and other pants ------- people to focus on the non problem, gun ownership. Enforcement of existing law would save lives, but that gets glossed over as easily led anti-gunners focus on the squirrel.

#17 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 05:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#15 Salamandagator

65% of of 35,000 gun-related deaths in the US each year are suicides. And 3% are accidents. 17% are cops of civilians stopping criminals, and 15% are criminals shooting civilians (and other gang members).

#18 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2016-09-20 05:45 PM | Reply

I have arsenal envy now. Thanks, DR.

#19 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2016-09-20 05:46 PM | Reply

"Shooting resulting in injury are mostly from people shooting themselves, either on purpose or by accident."

False again.

It's about 45%
(Morrow and Hudson, 1986)

#20 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 05:51 PM | Reply

First and foremost, enforce the existing gun laws.

What laws did you have in mind? Let's take Roof:

"an agent working for the FBI's background check system who was performing the review on Roof failed to contact the Columbia, South Carolina, police department which arrested Roof, in part because of a clerical error in records listing the wrong agency."

You think a law not being enforced led to a paperwork error?

You don't really think more laws can stop an armed assailant with intent to kill, do you?

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 05:51 PM | Reply

(Morrow and Hudson, 1986)

A higher percentage of homes had guns in them thirty years ago.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 05:52 PM | Reply

65% of of 35,000 gun-related deaths in the US each year are suicides. "

Deaths, he said harm. Big difference, deaths are only a small part.
About 73,000 a year are non fatal injuries, mind you that this is only gunshot wounds, non-gunshot firearm injuries are about 300,000 per year. But he said serious, so we can ignore the others and non-gunpowder firearms as well. Fatalities are about 31k in homicide, suicide and accident

So obviously he was wrong, and even when he backed off his comment to say most are self inflicted he comes up against the data that shows it's less than half.

I'm just poking fun at him making stuff up again.

#23 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 05:58 PM | Reply

"A higher percentage of homes had guns in them thirty years ago."

Fine
50% as maximum.
(Lott, John R.; Whitley, John E. (2001)

You are still wrong.

#24 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 06:03 PM | Reply

You think a law not being enforced led to a paperwork error?
You don't really think more laws can stop an armed assailant with intent to kill, do you?
#21 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Never said more laws.
Look a SQUIRREL!!

#25 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 06:05 PM | Reply

How many guns do I need to own to be in the 1%? and do we count by number or dollar value?

#26 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2016-09-20 06:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Never said more laws.

You said enforce excising laws.
What laws do you think aren't being enforced?
Roof was background checked.
That law was enforced.
So tell me what laws.

#27 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 06:14 PM | Reply

You don't really think existing laws can stop an armed assailant with intent to kill, do you?

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 06:15 PM | Reply

A higher percentage of homes had guns in them thirty years ago.
#22 | SNOOFY

A higher percentage admitted it. Today many deny ownership because of the current atmosphere.
I have some close Liberal friends that feel as you do about guns. They may have a parent's shotgun or rifle but would never buy a pistol. I don't acknowledge my gun ownership to them. I don't lie about it, I just don't engage in gun discussions with them. They know I hunt but they don't know about what kind or how many I own.

#29 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 06:17 PM | Reply

oday many deny ownership because of the current atmosphere.

Have you read this thread? [...]

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 06:19 PM | Reply

I'm actually in the market for a howitzer I just don't have a place to store it yet, and I'm not that keen on making the ammo for it.

#31 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2016-09-20 06:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So tell me what laws.
#27 | SNOOFY

There are a few examples in the links I provided.

existing laws can stop an armed assailant with intent to kill, do you?
#28 | SNOOFY

Stopping an assailant with intent to kill is difficult. Enforcing existing law can make it harder for them to get armed.

#32 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 06:24 PM | Reply

Enforcing existing law can make it harder for them to get armed.

Can... or cannot, in the case of Roof.
You make it sound like laws aren't being enforced.
But they are.

Your link said "Like many other jurisdictions, Wisconsin doesn't really take straw purchases of firearms very seriously. At the time of Collins's crime, the offense was only a misdemeanor."

Looks like they needed.... more laws... to address the issue.

See where this is going?

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 06:30 PM | Reply

Enforcing existing law can make it harder for them to get armed

Do you believe that can really make a difference though? There's as many guns as people in this country.

I can't imagine an enforcement scenario that would have prevented the San Bernadine shooters from arming themselves. They did it all in California which I'm told has very tough gun laws.

If you can point to a law on the books that just needs to be enforced more aggressively, but can also be enforced more aggressively without infringing on Second Amendment rights, please do so.

From your link, www.cnn.com

'Why don't you just enforce the laws that are on the books?'" Obama said. "And those very same members of Congress then cut (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) budgets to make it impossible to enforce the law."

So you agree with Obama?

#35 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 06:43 PM | Reply

#30 | SNOOFY

C'mon Snoof, some time ago we conversed on the 'Attack on the Subway' thread posted here. When I admitted that I carried concealed, you chastised me when I said I wouldn't pull my weapon to save your life. I told you I carry to protect myself, that I was not LE. You thought that since I was armed I should kill an attacker to save you. [...]

#36 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 06:44 PM | Reply

So you agree with Obama?
#35 | SNOOFY

His 2007 statement, "We know what to do. We've got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books."
Yes, I agree. Many of his other gun control positions I am opposed to.

Congress then cut (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) budgets to make it impossible to enforce the law."

Then Congress is responsible for the deaths of some Americans, IMO.

#37 | Posted by Whizzo at 2016-09-20 06:52 PM | Reply

See, no worries as now the 'experts' have determined there is no large voting block of gun owners who stand for the 2nd Amendment so Hillary and her antigun stance will sweep the polls ;)

#38 | Posted by MSgt at 2016-09-20 06:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

ou guys need to quit pissing yourselves over weapons in law abiding citizen's hands and focus on the real problems in life.
#7 | Posted by Whizzo

The guy who shot up the Planned Parenthood in Colorado was law abiding up to the moment he wasn't. Same with the Florida terrorist shooter. The Waco terrorists were law abiding until they executed the ATF official. Timmy McViegh was law abiding until the truck went boom. According to you, we shouldn't be concerned by any of them.

Or do you have a different definition of law abiding?

#39 | Posted by northguy3 at 2016-09-20 08:25 PM | Reply

so Hillary and her antigun stance will sweep the polls ;)

#38 | POSTED BY MSGT

You just spent 8 freaking years frothing at the mouth about Obama coming to take your guns. And he didn't. Now you're ranting about Hillary who has said NOTHING about disarming America.

Maybe you should get your meds adjusted and join the real world. Or are you gonna hide out in your bunker for another 8 years?

And remember Donald's real position on guns:
Back in 2000, Drumpf, in his book "The America We Deserve," said he supported the 1994 federal assault weapons ban. (The law expired in 2004 and was not renewed by Congress.)
"I generally oppose gun control," he wrote then, "but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today's internet technology we should be able to tell within 72 hours if a potential gun owner has a record."

#40 | Posted by northguy3 at 2016-09-20 08:32 PM | Reply

"With today's internet technology we should be able to tell within 72 hours if a potential gun owner has a record."

I believe NICS has 30 minutes to deny a sale, not 72 hours?

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 09:50 PM | Reply

When I admitted that I carried concealed, you chastised me when I said I wouldn't pull my weapon to save your life.

You sure that was me? I don't expect some Concealed Carry Robin Hood to save my bacon.

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 09:51 PM | Reply

We've got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books."
Yes, I agree.

That was 2007.
Tell me what laws are still not being enforced.

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 09:53 PM | Reply

41

False, they can say yes or no or go for more info which can take up to 3 days.

#44 | Posted by salamandagator at 2016-09-20 10:02 PM | Reply

Hmm. Where'd I read that 30 minute thing? Must have been a story here.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 10:13 PM | Reply

"State and local police are not required to submit criminal-record data to the FBI, David Chipman, a former agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), noted in an interview with the Charlotte Observer. Reporting "varies widely based on the practices of the individual departments. The smaller the town, the worse the records." www.thetrace.org

Whizzo.
Do you think that can be fixed merely by enforcing existing laws, or what?

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2016-09-20 10:14 PM | Reply

The #1 people use guns to seriously harm anyone is by killing themselves.

#14 | Posted by snoofy

And somehow your conclusion is to take the guns away instead of providing mental health support?

#47 | Posted by jpw at 2016-09-21 11:33 AM | Reply

You think a law not being enforced led to a paperwork error?

No, poor funding of the background check system coupled with lukewarm participation from state to state led to the paper work error.

Fixing those would fall under "enforce existing laws" would it not?

But you've heard all this before and you'll choose to dance circles again and again anyway, so who am I kidding in even addressing this.

#48 | Posted by jpw at 2016-09-21 11:37 AM | Reply

#40 | POSTED BY NORTHGUY3 AT 2016-09-20 08:32 PM | FLAG: Oh get real, you know that he would if he could find a way around the 2nd. I doubt that anyone here on the left or right do not realize that.

#49 | Posted by MSgt at 2016-09-21 12:24 PM | Reply

Now you're ranting about Hillary who has said NOTHING about disarming America.

No, she never used that word. However, here is what she HAS said:

She wants to make manufacturers, distributors and dealers open to lawsuits for selling a weapon used in a crime.
She wants to raise the tax on gun sales.
She refuses to say that gun ownership is a Constitutional right (said "if it's a right" in an interview)
She supports 'assault weapons' bans and falsely believes the last assault weapons ban was effective despite data to the contrary.
She believes that anyone from a city to a state can ban a certain type of weapon (i.e. handguns).
She believes you should be 21 before you can buy a firearm.

#50 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2016-09-21 12:41 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2016 World Readable

Drudge Retort