A few more thoughts about the graph here, and which I wrote about yesterday.
I question the statistics regarding the number of weapons in circulation. Firearms are among the most durable of consumer goods.[1] Traditionally made of high-quality steel with wooden stocks, a firearm that is maintained with any degree of care doesn't deteriorate.[2] If you spend any time on the firearms discussion boards, you're sure to find a post from someone who has inherited an old firearm that is over a century in age.
I am reasonably certain that prior to 1968, there was no formal requirement to stamp serial numbers on firearms. Prior to 1968, in most states, buying a gun was no different (in paperwork and legal requirements) from buying a sack of potatoes. Herter's, among other companies, had a good mail-order business selling guns.
Even if one considers weapons purchased after 1968, there, things get fuzzy. Almost all states do not require registration and tracking of guns.[3] Once a weapon was sold, it can pass through many hands in the succeeding decades. It might rust away, it might not. So how they can come even close to guesstimating the number of guns in circulation is beyond my understanding.
The second quibble I have is the statistic of X number of guns per Y number of people. It really demonstrates nothing. I know a lot of people who own weapons and who do not. Damn few of those who do own guns only own one.[4] The ownership rates also likely fluctuate wildly by geographic location-- you'll probably find a hell of a lot more guns per household in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont than you will in the Upper West Side of Manhattan.
There are a lot of firearms in circulation in this country. But who has them, and how many there are, I submit are probably matters of speculation more than of statistics.
_________________________________
[1] This might not apply to polymer-framed weapons.
[2] This may not apply to weapons used for high-intensity shooting, but even those can be maintained by parts replacement.
[3] Anecdotally, I have heard that in some areas, the compliance with registration and reporting laws is so low as to render those requirements impotent.
[4] Collectors probably really skew this statistic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Not sure how they're estimating the number of guns in circulation but tax records for the Pittman-Robertson excise tax would probably be pretty close. It was enacted in 1937 so I'd wager most everything in circulation would be covered.
For a fun read check out John Ross's book "Unintended Consequences" regarding the gun culture, of which I am proudly a member...It's a great book!
Actually, other than the gun sales numbers (which are from Federal databases), virtually all of these numbers are gathered the usual way -- via the U.S. Census Bureau caucusing voting precincts and asking people, "how many guns are in your household?" amongst other questions. They then extrapolate these numbers from a random selection of voting precincts nationwide to predict what the national numbers must be. My guess is that the number is overstated in the South by people who want to seem more macho than they are, and understated in the Northeast by people who don't want to admit that they have an illegal weapon even to a census bureau person who assures them that their answer is in complete confidentiality, but that the overall number is probably fairly close to accurate.
Disclaimer: I worked for the Census Bureau doing this during the summer of 1995. So sue me for talking about something I know something about personally :).
- Badtux the Counting Penguin
BadTux, out here in the NorthWest, West, Southwest and Midwest we also have guns. Are ours counted? Mostly we don't talk about our guns and/or what we may or may not do with them...
"eat your peas"
President Obama
Yes, Mr. Natural, the U.S. Census Bureau is nationwide. It's the UNITED STATES Census Bureau, not the Southern or Northeastern Census Bureau, and when they do their sampling their sample is geographically distributed too. Like I said, a random sample nationwide.
- Badtux the Counting Penguin
I'm a little curious about that, BadTux. I've had Census short forms, long forms, the 5-year surveys to one where the census-taker came by, and I cannot recall ever being asked about guns.
The questions get mixed up to avoid overloading people and the likelihood of any specific individual ever having been asked a specific question is fairly slim. I've been in the workforce for umpty-ump years and have never been asked the household employment survey questions ("are you employed? Have you looked for employment within the past umpty-ump weeks?" etc.), but I know those questions get asked, because I've seen them. When you're sampling 6,000 people out of a population of 300,000,000... you do the math on that one.
- Badtux the Statistical Penguin
By way of explanation on where my number-of-firearms numbers came from, the 2003 number is from the Small Arms Survey conducted the same year, and all years before or since were calculated by adding or subtracting the appropriate numbers from the BATFE production reports or the Shooting Industry Magazine's US Firearms Industry Report.
The important thing about that graphic, however, is not the raw numbers, but rather the rate of change - the total numbers of firearms in the States could be significantly higher, but I am willing to bet that my year-to-year change numbers are more-or-less on the dot.
Linoge, thanks for stopping by. I think you have done a wonderful thing by putting together your graph.
Post a Comment