Fading American Gun Culture?

[ronwill]

It's not often I see anyone try to pass off this much misinformation as fact:

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSL0992291

 

[HK4U]

Sounds like a load of garbage to me.

 

[DrDavidM]

That does appear to be simply lies. This is totally contrary to what I have read in the past. How could it be that a Chicago based poll could find such results.

 

[kwo51]

This is going to be a rough ride.I pray for my kids futures and freedom.They all like guns.

 

[bplv]

But in fact, gun ownership in the United States has been declining steadily over more than three decades, relegating gun owners to minority status.

Can I get protected minority status now?

 

[PascalFleischman]

I didn't even read past the first paragraph. didn't we just see that something along the lines that there are 9 guns in the U.S. for every 10 people? How about reports this week that carry licenses are setting records every year? PROPOGANDA!, I declare.

Q: If I tell you that a dog's tail will now be called a "leg", how many legs does a dog have?

A: 5 Legs

NO! A dog has 4 legs...just because you call a tail a "leg", doesn't mean a dog now has 5 legs

 

[Brainchild]

Well,I hope this mook is wrong.But I wrote to him and told him he is a mook,in case he doesn't know.I'm polite like that.You guys should al be polite like that too.Since he clearly doesn't know what facts are,write to him and tell him a few.

 

[JC40]

I e-mailed this guy also.I don`t know where he is getting his facts from,but he needs to put down the pipe before he writes another article concerning gun ownership.

 

[echo_5]

where to start? To think that a respectable news agency like Reuters would allow one person's opinion to be printed as if it were an article is deplorable. This international syndicate must have an agenda to print such BS..........in response read and follow through with "assignment-bring a newb...." started by me in this catagory.

 

[WSDom]

Not so sure, myself

This does worry me. I'm not so inclined to dismiss the claim out of hand and here's why:

A couple years ago Wayne LaPierre himself lamented at the NRA conference that there were only 85% of the hunters that there were ten years prevously. Not only does that mean that there are 15% fewer hunters out there, it also means that there is less revenue from hunting licenses going to support wildlife management programs. Are the bird watchers and hikers going to pony up the difference?

I read outdoor articles from non-hunters who say that they grew up hunting but what they found they really like is the outdoors and have started packing a digital camera instead, or golf clubs.

I read in the article that the NRA claims "3 million members." Wasn't that number 4 million a couple years ago? What's happening here?

I see the Bambi factor at work in every child I talk to and even with Scouting (another diminishing group, sadly) and programs geared to enlisting more women and young people in shooting sports, it just doesn't seem to become more than a passing curiosity for many of them after a time. They may know how to shoot but they're not interested in shooting.

I see the way society at large views the problems with the criminals and crazies and gangbangers who give guns a bad name and how that eats into the reputation of something I cherish and I deeply resent it, not to mention the knee-jerk "solutions" that immediately arise. What happens when the elected officials just won't protect gun rights anymore? You can't flex legislative muscle forever, especially as many states change demographics and become more urban and the rural interests (and this only one of many rural issues that need proponents) just get out numbered in the state houses. What happens then?

But what worries me the most was when I went to an NRA meet and greet function a couple months ago, not to mention the gun shows and local club meetings and I see a predominantly aging population of old white men who are not in particulary good health and are just not going to be around in ten years or so. Then what happens? Are their widows going to keep up the pressure on the legislators? Are their kids going take time out from their city jobs and SUV car camping trips to support the interests of the gun owner?

Excuse me for being pessimistic, but I think I have good reason to be.

I'm not asking these questions to inflame, but if we are really looking at this issue seriously, we have to ask the hard questions and find real answers.

Thanks for listening.

 

[mom of 3 angels]

Okay, this was about too much for me! It is a Chicago based firm that had done the surveying and later in the article Chicago is listed as one of two places in the US where handguns are illegal. Hmmmm . . . I've been around enough to know that a survey can come to whatever conclusion the surveyor wants it to.
Reuters does say at the very top that "Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own" however they fail to note how MUCH of this article is his opinion--Way too much misinformation twisting!

 

[Ektarr]

...by the rules of democratic play, one might assume that the majority would have major influence on legislation. But that's not how it works, thanks to the enormous influence of the gun lobby.

This writer needs to be reminded that we do not live in a Democracy, but in a Republic. Just because even 99% of the people believe that one shouldn't own a firearm doesn't mean that their "vote" should influence my Rights.

 

[The Gunny]

Reuters is, from my understanding, a european based news service so the slant they put on things is geared towards that audience. Another thought I had was that this info was being solicited for a survey by a firm from Chicago. Now I don't know about you but if I get a question like that from someone I don't know I am not going to volunteer any info on if and how many guns I have. I have a real concern with what they plan on doing with that info. So I think no matter how they are slicing it, it's bum scoop. Just look at the number of gun sales in the US.

 

[daddyo]

When my wife was pregnant, the doctor one day started asking us all these questions. I knew where he was headed because I knew these statistics about how "dangerous it is to have guns and kids". When he finally got around to the big question, "Do you have any guns in your house?" I responded simply "Maybe." Then he asked "If you do have guns in your house, are they loaded and easily accessible?" I said "Why don't you break in one night and find out."

 

[ecocks]

When you actually read the survey

the questions mostly concern enforcing existing laws. A few of the questions were interesting...

Q. Should people who sell illegal guns receive penalties equal to or greater than selling illegal drugs?

A. Well, I say yeah and I own about a dozen weapons so what does that prove about supporting the 2A or favoring more strict gun control?

The question concerning sales of .50 caliber rifles seemed to feel it was necessary to explain that these guns could penetrate armor and had a range of a mile. Also it phrased the question by making comparisons to hunting rifles in such a way that it seemed biased to me.

Others talk about permits, criminal background checks and other common laws we currently live under in many states.

Mostly the survey seems to indicate that people feel the EXISTING laws should be enforced and perhaps have punishments strengthened but do NOT really indicate tightening of control. At least not to me.

The sample size was 1364 (or something like that) and no margin of error is identified that I noticed. So they randomly dialed less than 1400 homes (it does not specify the percentages of out-of-town/county/state/region calls made. I doubt the nationwide drop to 35% and suspect the methodology is flawed. That seems a low number for a valid national level survey.

 

[Big Bubba]

Okay, this was about too much for me! It is a Chicago based firm that had done the surveying and later in the article Chicago is listed as one of two places in the US where handguns are illegal. Hmmmm . . . I've been around enough to know that a survey can come to whatever conclusion the surveyor wants it to.
Reuters does say at the very top that "Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own" however they fail to note how MUCH of this article is his opinion--Way too much misinformation twisting!

Yes I agree the one doing the pencil pushing can make the pencil dance to any tune that the user wants to play.

 

[Brainchild]

I thought of something today.I don't normally see a reporter's emmail address at the bottom of a story.Of course,I also don't read the 'news' much either.Perhaps they knew they would get some flack from this and wanted it all to go to this mook instead of the entire agency.

 

[mom of 3 angels]

This very article was just listed as NRA-ILA's Outrage of the Week. See their comments and some real facts here:
Link Removed

 

[Mushroom]

Easy to account for!! Chicago is located in "CROOK"(Cook) county Illinois and is subservient to "King Richard" the head of the Daley Machine! These folks have been spreading this stuff since at least around the time that old Scar Face and his crowd was running the joint! And possibly longer than that.

And the Illinois sheeple just keep right on buying it! I guess it's difficult, and takes a long time, to fix stupid!

 

[ecocks]

So,

send the writer AND Reuter's (don't let them wiggle out from under puting this out on the wire for these guys) challenging their bias and agenda-driven interpretations.