So how many are there? 300 million or ???

[climbnjump]

It gets repeated in articles or news reports that there are roughly 300 million firearms owned by civilians in the US. No one really knows the correct number, of course.

But an attempt was recently made to try to get a more accurate estimate and the number they came up with is a range of 412 to 660 million. So that doesn't exactly nail it down to a specific number, but it does perhaps point to more firearms than thought.

Here is the article which explains the methodology they used to come up with their number: Total US Firearms: Not 300 Million, but 412-660 Million?

 

[mstreddy]

Interesting read. Sound premise. I do wonder that given the data mentioned for 1999-2015, that there should be production data from 1899-1999.
i.e. we know that there were XXX M1911s and M1911A1s produced by the various makers and that many have been sold as surplus to the public. Same for M1903s, M1 Carbines, etc. We know that Winchester made XX model 92s, 94s and such. Similar for Colt, Smith and Wesson, and other makers. How many foreign MilSurps have been imported?

So, I would agree on the face of the story, that the number is much higher than the ~300 Million bandied about.

 

[ATN082268]

Interesting read. Sound premise. I do wonder that given the data mentioned for 1999-2015, that there should be production data from 1899-1999.
i.e. we know that there were XXX M1911s and M1911A1s produced by the various makers and that many have been sold as surplus to the public. Same for M1903s, M1 Carbines, etc. We know that Winchester made XX model 92s, 94s and such. Similar for Colt, Smith and Wesson, and other makers. How many foreign MilSurps have been imported?

So, I would agree on the face of the story, that the number is much higher than the ~300 Million bandied about.

It is interesting to note that the media doesn't seem inclined to latch onto a much larger number of guns like 600 million, 900 million, etc. Why would the media choose a number which seems very low?

 

[I6turbo]

Why would the media choose a number which seems very low?

To marginalize gun owners as much as possible, of course. In addition to using the lowest number they can get away with, they will try to claim that a huge majority of these guns are owned by a very small and declining percentage of the population, and thereby try to make most gun owners sound like a small group of extremists.

 

[mavracer]

To marginalize gun owners as much as possible, of course. In addition to using the lowest number they can get away with, they will try to claim that a huge majority of these guns are owned by a very small and declining percentage of the population, and thereby try to make most gun owners sound like a small group of extremists.

This if mainstream USA knew just how impossible of task is at hand, the leftist would loose their support from the fence sitters. I've had quite a few conversations with folks who aren't rigid 2A supporters that when presented with facts just "get it"

 

[I6turbo]

This if mainstream USA knew just how impossible of task is at hand, the leftist would loose their support from the fence sitters. I've had quite a few conversations with folks who aren't rigid 2A supporters that when presented with facts just "get it"

Beyond 2A related, there is a TON of stuff going on that, if mainstream USA understood just slightly, they would not support and many would strongly oppose. And I'm not talking about conspiracy theories or opinions, but stuff straight out of the mouths and straight off the keyboards of "leaders" and and their operatives and their propagandists in the media. A TON of stuff. But 75% of Americans aren't aware of it because they aren't paying attention, or if they do get a little wind of it, it's smothered in spin and obfuscation.

 

[GAF]

I and most of the people I know think owning guns, shooting guns and CCW is just a part of everyday normal life.