Lets have an honest discussion about the majority of gun owners.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Miami_JBT

Member
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
1,239
Location
Big Bend of FL, originally from Miami.
Gun ownership has taken a very interesting course within the 20th Century.

For the first half of the century, guns were mostly owned as tools. America was still rural for the most part and in part with a rural agrarian lifestyle. Supplementing dinner with wild game was common in many parts of the country. Most families were poor and whatever firearm they owned, they owned it for multiple reasons. They didn't have a dedicated home defense gun and a duck gun along with a deer rifle and a plinker. No, they usually had one or two guns total. Usually an affordable single or double barreled break open shotgun and a rimfire rifle. These guns were usually kept leaning against a kitchen door and used for scourging up game and keeping the hearth and home safe from intruders.

The common myth constantly paraded online and in the media is that the gun that won the west was a lever action and the single action six shooter. That isn't the case truthfully. The real deal was that most homesteaders were dirt poor and only could afford a single shot shotgun that originally was a front stuffer like a surplused Enfield 1853 or Springfield 1861. That was the gun that won the west and as the 20th Century rolled by. The same honest truths were much the same.

Gun ownership was a necessity due to rural living. It wasn't a sport or hobby for most.

With the Great Depression, that was especially more so. Folks grew up shooting, but they grew up shooting because they were expected to hunt and defend the family. Highway bandits still existed as did general thievery. Hell, look at this sign during the Great Depression.

1378501740-chicken_thieves.jpg

That wasn't posted as a joke. Kids grew up on the family's back 40 acres and learned to shoot for sure. But again, it wasn't for fun like today.

With the end of WWII though, things changed. Society changed. Suddenly, the US was the greatest economic and military power in the globe. Every economic competitor to the US was in rubble and ruin. Europe was absolutely devastated, Latin America was still mostly agrarian with a top down kleptocratic strongman style of government, and most of Asia was agrarian and in the midst of nationalists conflicts between Communism and Capitalism or outright independence from colonial powers.

Americans left the agrarian rural lifestyle and flocked to the modern conveniences of the suburban life. The family farm with the back 40 for hunting was disappearing. The need to sustain the family dinner table with game wasn't needed. Hunting went from a need to a sport and with that things started to change.

As more and more families urbanized, hunting continued to shrink overall since access to land continued to shrink. By the end of the 20th Century, the vast majority of Americans had no private access to land that they can claim to outright own for hunting, plus the lack of access to land meant less informal practice like plinking.

And with the urbanization of Americans and the rising economic abilities of Americans. Gun ownership shifted from a need to hunt to sports shooting or self defense. Your Suburbanite bought a gun for home defense or sport like target shooting at the local range or maybe a dove hunt on a leased field. With that... we went into the 21st Century where gun ownership really shifted into want instead of a need.

And what's interesting is with the disposal income, you have two classes of gun owners. The average and the enthusiast.

The average American gun owner today buys and owns a gun as a magic talisman with the belief that it wards away the energy of bad people and endows the holders with super magical nearly fantastical cosmic powers. They buy the cheapest thing at a gun shop or big box store with a sporting goods department, shoot maybe twenty rounds through it if it is a handgun, and throw it in a sock drawer or glove compartment for the next twenty years. If it is a long gun, they shoot maybe five rounds and throw it in a closet.

Then you have the folks that actually get a CCW. Guess what, most don't regularly carry. To them, it is a "just in case" thing. Like a "Oh, I have it just in case things are bad Downtown and I have to go there for business. I'll carry that day". It too is a magic talisman and a sense of falsehood. I see it all time.

I've been a member over at Arfcom for a LONG WHILE and it is like maybe 1% of the gun world in term of numbers. It doesn't think it is and many think that they're your average gun owners and that it is considered average to have 10 different ARs, plates, and a literal pile of mags. It actually is a very small community in the grand scheme of things and kind it like an echo chamber when it comes to how people think the average American gun owner is.

There was a thread where someone that plays SASS/CAS games mentioned they want to CCW their Colt 1873 Single Action. And while I doubt the poster is at the same level as Bob Munden (God rest his soul). He probably is a better handler of a gun, ANY GUN. Just due to experience and exposure. Yet there had a number of posters telling the OP that he'll die. They berated him since he didn't have the latest red dot equipped micro super capacity 9mm and wasn't going to carry it AIWB with two spares, and a BUG on him and along with a IFAK.

The honest reality is that most encounters where a gun is used for self defense. Discharging the weapon isn't even done. Simply presenting it is what was needed. The statistical chances of a raging gun battle where reloads are even needed by the average citizen is pretty much between nowhere and nope. The average citizen has a higher statistical chance of getting a getting Jessica Alba and Jennifer Lopez in bed at the same time in broad daylight.

Sure, there is absolutely nothing wrong with carrying a modern firearm and having the capability to defend one's self from multiple assailants. Hell, I do it. I own ARs, GLOCKs, 30rd mags, red dot optics, etc.... I've even CCW'ed my SBR'ed FN PS90. But I'm not your average gun owner and I understand that.

But the hard truth is. Most people are actually served with a New England Pardner 20ga and a Ruger Single Six in .22 Magnum. They aren't out there with MOLLE and Plates, doing rapid action drills at 3am with NVGs. Hell, they aren't even at the local indoor range doing simple static work like practicing trigger control and sight alignment.

Your average gun owner has no understanding of tactics, training, the laws, safety, etc... Your average gun owner is pretty much a safety hazard both physically and legally speaking. Arfcom and other forums in the grand scheme of things are a very small groups of people. Most are very passionate about the 2nd Amendment and guns themselves.

Your average American gun owner is about as politically active as a snail in a bowl of salt. They aren't. You're lucky if they vote. And those that do vote, guns aren't an issue for them.

They don't compete, they don't train, they don't get politically active, etc....

Gun ownership does not automatically equal 2nd Amendment Activism and Enthusiasm. Plenty of gun owners are anti-gun or indifferent. That's your average gun owner.

Right now, with the 2020 Great Panic I see it every day in the shops and ranges. Your average gun owner came in and bought anything that wasn't nailed down because they feared the rioting mob would break down their door. So they bought a Maverick 88 and a box of #8 bird shot and called it good or they snagged a GLOCK 19 for $700 and two 50rd boxes of Tula Steel Case FMJ for $30 a pop.

I even have some folks I know that finally got their CCW permit and it was because of the "Oh, BLM is protesting around the Capitol and I work down there. I'll carry when things look like they might be bad."

Yet these are the same people that support things like Red Flag laws, Mag restrictions, AWBs, and voted for gun grabbers like Biden or supported Anti-Gun Republicans like Brian Mast.

As a good friend says, "just because they have the same color skin, don't make them kin." Just because a person has a CCW permit or owns a gun, doesn't make them pro gun.

Edit to add,

The 2nd Amendment is still as ever important, this is not in any way to be construed as support for gun control.
 
Last edited:
Interesting post.

I agree that most gun owners aren't "gun people".

Just as most police are not gun people.

They can be a hazard, this is true, and it's up to us, the gun people, to guide them when we can.

Personally, I am involved in teaching would be gun owners, instructing the "I bought a gun and know nothing about it" people, providing assistance to would be tactical ninjas, I shoot competitive shooting, I have friends who hunt, I enjoy shooting old revolvers, etc

IME your "average" gun owner can vary significantly and largely due to attitude.

The prideful know it all's tend to be poor shooters, the absent minded can be dangerous, your tactical ninjas suffer from a lack of fundamental skills, etc

I am seeing (in my personal communities) an awakening of support for the second amendment.

When the little old auntie is interested in getting a gun "the government doesn't know about" a shift may be happening.

Anyway, I don't recommend SAA revolvers for CCW because I have put them up against modern semi's and revolvers, but I recognize that any gun you know is better than no gun at all or one you don't know.

Sometimes I CCW a SAA, but I absolutely recognize it's draw backs (which, by comparison, are significant)
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.
if it’s that we aren’t average then yeah. That’s no secret and I don’t think anyone is laboring under that illusion. We are all related to gun owners that only have a shotgun or a revolver and don’t shoot.

but this is where we disagree:
And with that... we went into the 21st Century where gun ownership really shifted into want instead of a need.
gun ownership is necessary to a free state. It is not a want as far as I’m concerned.


But the hard truth is. Most people are actually served with a New England Pardner 20ga and a Ruger Single Six in .22 Magnum. They aren't out there with MOLLE and Plates, doing rapid action drills at 3am with NVGs.

People have a habit of not preparing. They own enough food and toilet paper for a day or maybe a week. They used to own a gun for what they saw as a current threat: home invasion or robbery. For that sure a shotgun was all they needed.

now people see the current threat as our out of control federal government and so the shotgun is clearly not sufficient. They despite lack of training intuitively perceive a need for plates and NODs.


The average gun owner is subject to change. Needs will change. Antifa and riots went a long way.


It seems like you’re trying to make a case for an assault weapons ban. Saying nobody needs the military gear. We all just need 22 revolvers.
Well I couldn’t disagree more. We may not have needed that stuff the last 50 years but we will need it in the next ten. And even if we don’t, it remains our right to have them and use them any way we desire because we are free.
 
Interesting observations. I mostly agree with what you are saying. Society and the reasons people own guns have changed drastically since the days of the Founders and Framers. I don't believe, however, that the Second Amendment is any less relevant today. Thank God there are enthusiasts who are active in defending our rights, even if the majority of gun owners are apathetic. I am probably somewhere between the one gun owner and the mall ninja who owns all the latest guns and gadgets. I have the basics covered in pistols, rifles and shotguns. I try to practice fundamentals as much as possible, but probably don't train as hard or as often as I should. When I began to carry I decided I would follow the advice of Massad Ayoob and others and carry as often as possible. My CCW is now pretty much a part of my wardrobe. The next few years may prove to be a challenge for ALL gun owners.
 
gun ownership is necessary to a free state. It is not a want as far as I’m concerned.

Gun ownership is necessary for a free state. But people are politically apathetic. The vast majority of Americans never owned a firearm for political reasons. They owned them because they needed them or now simply want them.

It seems like you’re trying to make a case for an assault weapons ban. Saying nobody needs the military gear. We all just need 22 revolvers.
Well I couldn’t disagree more. We may not have needed that stuff the last 50 years but we will need it in the next ten. And even if we don’t, it remains our right to have them and use them any way we desire because we are free.

Nope, not at all. I don't want an AWB aby any means. I'm simply pointing out that gun ownership does not equal 2nd Amendment Support. I own guns because they bring a smile to my face. Most gun owners constantly try to come up with a reason on why they own what they own.

Gun Control wins when you have to push the idea that you need to justify what you own. I own guns because I enjoy them. Sure, my SBR'ed Colt is a great home defense gun and my FNAR in .308 is a fantastic rifle for long range shooting. But having to justify what you own and why leads to failure.

A free person should be able to own what they want without any need or explanation. If I want to own a MG42 and a tripod I should be able to. I shouldn't need to justify it.

I can just as equally defend myself with my SBR'ed Colt as I can with a single shot 20ga. It is the indian, not the arrow after all.

But having to justify what I own and why is a fool's errand. I shouldn't need to justify why I own any gun I have no differently than why I don't have to justify why I own a big screen TV or a pile pencils.

I recall after the LA Riots, people went nuts and panic bought in California. Those same people justified their purchases with the riots and guess what... they still supported gun control candidates and policies.
 
Interesting observations. I mostly agree with what you are saying. Society and the reasons people own guns have changed drastically since the days of the Founders and Framers. I don't believe, however, that the Second Amendment is any less relevant today. Thank God there are enthusiasts who are active in defending our rights, even if the majority of gun owners are apathetic. I am probably somewhere between the one gun owner and the mall ninja who owns all the latest guns and gadgets. I have the basics covered in pistols, rifles and shotguns. I try to practice fundamentals as much as possible, but probably don't train as hard or as often as I should. When I began to carry I decided I would follow the advice of Massad Ayoob and others and carry as often as possible. My CCW is now pretty much a part of my wardrobe. The next few years may prove to be a challenge for ALL gun owners.
Been carrying since before I was 21 since I carried at the family business. A day I don't carry is the day I'm either six feet under ground or on my death bed.

The reasons for gun ownership among the general public has changed. But the existence of the 2nd Amendment hasn't. it affirms that people have the right to keep and bear arms for whatever reason they choose to follow.
 
OP:
Bravo! Spot on...you were able to articulate what I've been thinking for years as a collector, competition shooter and retired LEO!

I'd like to add that since prior to WWI the number of people entering into our armed services and law enforcement are increasing that have never fired a gun before entering service. In the mid 90's I saw academy classes where none of the recruits ever held a revolver and over 50% never fired a gun before! Especially today unless the recruit saw military service it's unlikely that they ever fired a gun before!

Sad but true...

To understand the origins of the Second Amendment means understanding the meaning of "regulated" and militia"!
The intent was to insure the citizens were armed and trained to protect the states and new nation against tyranny and foreign threats and guarantee citizens the right to self protection!

Smiles,
 
I just hope that the 'gun people' that did not vote for the most pro-gun politicians in the races they were allowed to vote are few and far between. ...
 
Interesting post.

I agree that most gun owners aren't "gun people".

Just as most police are not gun people.

They can be a hazard, this is true, and it's up to us, the gun people, to guide them when we can.

Personally, I am involved in teaching would be gun owners, instructing the "I bought a gun and know nothing about it" people, providing assistance to would be tactical ninjas, I shoot competitive shooting, I have friends who hunt, I enjoy shooting old revolvers, etc

IME your "average" gun owner can vary significantly and largely due to attitude.

The prideful know it all's tend to be poor shooters, the absent minded can be dangerous, your tactical ninjas suffer from a lack of fundamental skills, etc

I am seeing (in my personal communities) an awakening of support for the second amendment.

When the little old auntie is interested in getting a gun "the government doesn't know about" a shift may be happening.

Anyway, I don't recommend SAA revolvers for CCW because I have put them up against modern semi's and revolvers, but I recognize that any gun you know is better than I gun at all or one you don't know.

Sometimes I CCW a SAA, but I absolutely recognize it's draw backs (which, by comparison, are significant)
Yup, it is up to the educated to educate the uneducated. We all were once novices too. And yes, I've been known to CCW my Ruger New Model Vaquero in a Mernickel OWB. ;) I just happen to understand its limitations.

Most cops are not gun people. I know this from professional experience as one. Getting most cops to qual is like taking a 5 year old to the dentist. They'll kick, scream, and come up with every excuse possible.

I just find it interesting that a number of people automatically assume gun ownership equals 2nd Amendment Activism and Enthusiasm. When in reality it isn't. Furthermore, with the way things are going. We are seeing fans of Authoritarianism (like ANTIFA) arm up and get training. These are folks that are literally against the 2nd Amendment and what it espouses. Yet they're buying up anything not nailed down. Part in fear of retaliation from their political opponents (the Right) and part in because they truly believe in their cause and are simply using guns as a tool to achieve that cause.

So it comes into question, do you want to help square away the very person that wants to strip you of your AR-15 and 2nd Amendment rights?
 
It is interesting to consider what a "gun owner", and what a typical gun owner is. Is the spouse of a hunter/shooter a "gun owner" even if they have a gun that is their own? My father grew up in rural PA,NY,and OH. He had 6 siblings and his father often worked 2 jobs. A firearm was merely a tool to put food on the table and enable him to participate in an activity he loved. My mother grew up in Queens, and a firearm was for killing people. He eventually acquired a deer rifle (was gifted a sporterized 03A3 built in 1942) and had (and still has) a single shot 28ga. I promise that gun policy does not impact their voting choices.

A kid from church has parents in the English Department of the local university. He wanted to shoot and hunt. His mom wanted him to sing and participate in plays. Nothing doing, he came over a couple of time a month to shoot and killed a buck 2 seasons ago. She realized that if she wanted to do anything with her son, she was going to do what he enjoyed not vice-versa. She started coming with him to shoot. Last season she borrowed a rifle and hunted with us. He acquired a .22 and a .30-30, she got a .30-06 and will hunt again this year. I guarantee gun rights will impact his voting and that it does for her, it will be in the other direction (although I keep trying to indoctrinate her with my wacko views).

But it is worth considering, everyone in my household is individually a gun owner in that they have at least one firearm that is theirs, I shoot regularly and hunt, one shoots targets from time to time, one shoots infrequently, one almost not at all, my parents are still gun owners, and of the four in the English Department family two are gun owners. Is there a typical "gun owner" in the group?
 
OP:
Bravo! Spot on...you were able to articulate what I've been thinking for years as a collector, competition shooter and retired LEO!

I'd like to add that since prior to WWI the number of people entering into our armed services and law enforcement are increasing that have never fired a gun before entering service. In the mid 90's I saw academy classes where none of the recruits ever held a revolver and over 50% never fired a gun before! Especially today unless the recruit saw military service it's unlikely that they ever fired a gun before!

Sad but true...

To understand the origins of the Second Amendment means understanding the meaning of "regulated" and militia"!
The intent was to insure the citizens were armed and trained to protect the states and new nation against tyranny and foreign threats and guarantee citizens the right to self protection!

Smiles,
With the modernization of warfare and the modernization of the armed forces following the Dick Act of 1903. The militia system as a whole has been fully supplanted and replaced with the modern police force.

Look at the history of the NRA and CMP. The NRA was originally a sports shooting organization designed by former Union Officers that saw how pitiful Union Recruits were with firearms during the war. The CMP was similar with Roosevelt's experience during the Span-Am War. The goal of both organizations was to improve the basic skills of the average American.

The regulated militia in centuries past was the main body that the political system called upon to restore law and order. Prior to the advent of the modern police force, it was the militia that was called upon to restore order when Riots happened. It was the militia that backed up the local town marshal or sheriff. But as tine progressed after the Civil War, the militia units became informal drinking clubs and boys organizations for the socially connected. This all came to a head during the Span-Am....

All the while, your average American was willfully unable to actually perform maritally.

So professional standing organizations are formed both within the military and outside of it with police agencies.

And with that... the trend further continued along due to urbanization that most people are inadequately trained and knowledgeable in handling firearms properly.

Anyways....

The intent of the 2nd Amendment was simple. Each person has the right and civic duty to defend hearth and home from domestic troubles like thieves and also deal with more serious matters like despotism both at home and abroad.

The question is are they properly educated in doing so? Both physically with a firearm and in terms of thd civic lessons regarding proper function of government and inalienable rights?
 
Thanks for taking the time to write such a long and informative post. Certainly it is replete with your opinion and many generalizations but that is OK. You seem well informed and are an intelligent writer.

My greatest fear is that things like eliminating the Senate filibuster, getting rid of the electoral college, packing the court, and adding DC and Puerto Rico as states, will allow a one party anti gun government to erode 2A to meaninglessness. I think limiting freedom of speech by use of "hate speech" laws and circumventing the unreasonable search by red-flag laws will drastically change the demographics of gun ownership. I do't think things will bode well for our grandchildren's children as far as gun ownership goes.

The nuclear family of the 50's, with mom-dad & kids, is becoming a thing of the past. Our culture is changing...

Let me end by saying that I hope I am WRONG about all of this.
 
I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make.

Kinda where I'm at. My guns are still tools and I consider them as such. Even those that are only used at the range. As for shooting chicken thieves during the Great Depression, Most of those folks didn't have gun, much less the ammo to feed one. Even back then, in most scenarios, it was illegal for a civilian to shoot and kill someone for stealing food. Trespassing laws back then favored the trespasser, not the landowner.
The average American gun owner today buys and owns a gun as a magic talisman with the belief that it wards away the energy of bad people and endows the holders with super magical nearly fantastical cosmic powers

I don't know where you are from, or what it is you've been smoking, but around here that is as far from the truth as one can get. Seems to me, those so called "super magical nearly fantastical cosmic powers" are in your possession. Like everything else in life, even "average" people are different. So are their opinions. Luckily we live somewhere we can openly express them. Keeping that right has more to do with gun ownership than any thought of magical talisman.
 
The honest reality is that most encounters where a gun is used for self defense. Discharging the weapon isn't even done.

That may be. Indeed it has been so for me, twice. But I'm not betting my life on that, and I remind those new gun owners of that.

There was a thread where someone that plays SASS/CAS games mentioned they want to CCW their Colt 1873 Single Action. And while I doubt the poster is at the same level as Bob Munden (God rest his soul). He probably is a better handler of a gun, ANY GUN. Just due to experience and exposure. Yet there had a number of posters telling the OP that he'll die. They berated him since he didn't have the latest red dot equipped micro super capacity 9mm and wasn't going to carry it AIWB with two spares, and a BUG on him and along with a IFAK.

I suspect at least some of those posters shoot IDPA or IPSC, and view SASS/CAS as reenactment more than practical training. I know I'd feel better about carrying a gun I am familiar with, whether it were an 1873, 1911, or Kahr .380.

But the hard truth is. Most people are actually served with a New England Pardner 20ga and a Ruger Single Six in .22 Magnum. They aren't out there with MOLLE and Plates, doing rapid action drills at 3am with NVGs. Hell, they aren't even at the local indoor range doing simple static work like practicing trigger control and sight alignment.

Had I not the foresight to know that recent events were going to happen, and been training for them since the 80's, I might be inclined to agree. The Pattersons are a prime example of what you mention, and sadly do represent a large facet of Gun Owner America. They had some guns, a little (very little) knowledge about them, and that's it. Common sense was lacking. Leaving cover and legal shelter behind, they foolishly went out into their yard to confront a large group, at least one of them armed. I think a window open, a shot with a blank, and later, "Oops, I was cleaning it" would have been more effective in sending the message.
 
The average American gun owner today buys and owns a gun as a magic talisman with the belief that it wards away the energy of bad people and endows the holders with super magical nearly fantastical cosmic powers.

i am not a fan of the "magic talisman" reference because it is derisive to a basic truth. You even pointed this out yourself. Given that according to several studies, estimates are that the vast majority of successful Defensive Gun Uses involved no shots fired, It is demonstrably true statistically, that just having a gun, and being able to present it, brandish, threaten, etc is sufficient. Sure, occasionally someone needs to be shot, but historically, that's more the exception than the rule. Because of that, the belief that guns ward away the energy of bad people, turns out to be pretty close to correct. Of course, most of us above average gun owners want skills and training and to be able to shoot if we need, but that doesn't mean we should be derisive towards "magic talismans".

What is interesting to me is how that has changed recently. The video evidence in many, many riots this summer shows that the rats don't scatter when they hear gunshots. Rather the opposite is true: they all come running from blocks away, with their phones out trying to become youtube famous and video the action. And even more interesting, brandishing guns at riots doesn't seem to intimidate people because they simply believe you won't shoot them. They're more likely to try to grab your rifle and take it from you.

HOWEVER, that's not the case with large knives, which seem to intimidate and make people reconsider closing to bad breath distance. That makes me glad that the "knife rights" movement has been even more successful in the last decade than the gun rights movement.
 
i am not a fan of the "magic talisman" reference because it is derisive to a basic truth. You even pointed this out yourself. Given that according to several studies, estimates are that the vast majority of successful Defensive Gun Uses involved no shots fired, It is demonstrably true statistically, that just having a gun, and being able to present it, brandish, threaten, etc is sufficient. Sure, occasionally someone needs to be shot, but historically, that's more the exception than the rule. Because of that, the belief that guns ward away the energy of bad people, turns out to be pretty close to correct. Of course, most of us above average gun owners want skills and training and to be able to shoot if we need, but that doesn't mean we should be derisive towards "magic talismans".

What is interesting to me is how that has changed recently. The video evidence in many, many riots this summer shows that the rats don't scatter when they hear gunshots. Rather the opposite is true: they all come running from blocks away, with their phones out trying to become youtube famous and video the action. And even more interesting, brandishing guns at riots doesn't seem to intimidate people because they simply believe you won't shoot them. They're more likely to try to grab your rifle and take it from you.

HOWEVER, that's not the case with large knives, which seem to intimidate and make people reconsider closing to bad breath distance. That makes me glad that the "knife rights" movement has been even more successful in the last decade than the gun rights movement.
The videos have shown that simply presenting a firearm to someone doesn't automatically scare them away. But that doesn't change why most purchasers get one. They get it for a psychological comfort qnd not more. They never intend to aactually use it. A number of videos have shown that.

A number of people are not afraid of a gun being presented because they know through experience that most people won't discharge it. Why? Because a number of people that present a firearm do it as a verbal threat and nothing more. I recall one video where a White Woman accidentally bumped into a Black Woman and didn't apologize. The Black Woman became confrontational and the White Woman drew her gun. The Black Woman scoffed at the gun because she wasn't being physically aggressive. In fact, she taunted the White Woman until she holstered her piece and drove off.

It is really interesting, especially when comparing the presentation of a knife.

The vast majority of people have been cut and have a primal fear with the pain of being cut. Folks don't like pain. Hence why bayonets even today are a tremendous psychological weapon fof crowd control.

But in my personal experiences, most that panic buy a gun do so for psychological comfort and nothing more. They really do think that it will ward away bad guys, especially since statistically simple presentation does end the situation. And it is because of that that they don't get the proper training.

Look at the mantra of the shotgun and how people still believe simply racking the action scares away burglars.
 
Hunting, shooting and protecting your person/home from a criminal..............a lot of people own guns for those reasons.
And a lot of them that do, have no idea what the 2A is really about.

Sad, but for decades people have been conditioned to obey and or take the easiest route.

Lazy and avoiding anything of stress...........the average person in the US has had it too easy.

IMHO the left was hoping for the veterans and boomers to get too old, cash in their firearms to make 700 club donations.
But then we had the Gulf and other wars.

A whole new crop of people that know whats what.

The folks that had the Nazis do stuff to them and their families, are about gone.
They know what evil a government can do.
 
Old timer had a Smith M60 for personal protection.
Sold it to the LGS.
The WD40 (or whatever) had shellacked and locked up the internals.
How long that rig laid in a sock drawer, and how much of that time inoperative.................who knows?
2 hrs of Gunscrubber had it looking and working like new.
 
I'd like to add that since prior to WWI the number of people entering into our armed services and law enforcement are increasing that have never fired a gun before entering service. In the mid 90's I saw academy classes where none of the recruits ever held a revolver and over 50% never fired a gun before! Especially today unless the recruit saw military service it's unlikely that they ever fired a gun before!

Sad but true...

I think that's a good thing.

Fewer bad habits to overcome.
 
But in my personal experiences, most that panic buy a gun do so for psychological comfort and nothing more. They really do think that it will ward away bad guys, especially since statistically simple presentation does end the situation. And it is because of that that they don't get the proper training.
my point is, i don't really care, nor do i see psychological comfort as a bad thing.... i'm just glad they're buying guns. your point that all the new panic gun owners will still vote D is well taken. Still, it's a step in the right direction. I mean, a big part of why they didn't own them previously was that they didn't see a need. they viewed gun owners as paranoid nuts. now they can at least understand, even if other issues are more important to them and drive their choice for D.

i'm fully aware of the "arming the enemy" viewpoint, where many do not want all the suburban karens and antifa blm etc to buy guns. I have a somewhat nuanced view.
 
Research studies demonstrated that before the current gun buying panic, the majority of CCW types (who might have been gun world politically correct) did not get any training besides a mandated state class (if there was one). So the point about new owners is really off the point as it suggests a pre panic different reality. That was not the case.

I know several hard core 'conservative' gun owners (not that this is a good sample), that buy guns are didn't train or compete. They would shoot a box at the range, maybe once a year or go to the 'ranch' and shoot a rock or two.

Saying that political demographic buying guns is a bad thing is just anti-American BS. All Americans should exercise their rights. Recall, the conservative gun control panic in CA over African-Americans with guns.
 
Hunting, shooting and protecting your person/home from a criminal..............a lot of people own guns for those reasons.
And a lot of them that do, have no idea what the 2A is really about.

Sad, but for decades people have been conditioned to obey and or take the easiest route.

Lazy and avoiding anything of stress...........the average person in the US has had it too easy.

IMHO the left was hoping for the veterans and boomers to get too old, cash in their firearms to make 700 club donations.
But then we had the Gulf and other wars.

A whole new crop of people that know whats what.

The folks that had the Nazis do stuff to them and their families, are about gone.
They know what evil a government can do.
The Communists butchered my family in Cuba.... anyways.

I recall back in the late 90s and early 00s being the only guy at the range with a AR-15 and 30rd mags. I was looked at with vitriol and curiosity at the same time by Boomers. It was weird.

Now I show up with my milsurpls and fudd guns and the Millennials and Gen Z Kids look at me with the same vitriol and curiosity that the Boomers gave me. But it is because I have something with a wood stock and blued steel.

The grabbers are playing a generational game and looking at having time on their side.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top