Gun Culture - 1994 vs 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.
benEzra said:
Here is some data to get started. It's a few years old and it's a post I put together for a DU thread so not all of it may be relevant, and the numbers may have risen somewhat since I last looked, so use it as a jumping-off point.

We have hard data on the number of Americans who hunt, which is tracked annually, and the Census Bureau releases a report on hunting and fishing every 5 years.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/fhw06-nat.pdf

They show 12.5 million licensed hunters over the age of 16 as having hunted in 2006 (link, p. 4). If you add in the estimated 1.6 million hunters under 16, you get ~14.1 million active hunters in 2006 (p. 4). For the 5-year period between 2001 and 2006, they found that 18.6 million people hunted at least once during that time.

The consensus around the 'net is that the number of gun owning adults in the United States is about 80 million. So you're looking at a little under 1 in 5 gun owners being an active hunter, and little under 1 in 4 having hunted at any time in a 5-year period.

Over half of those own handguns (I have the cite floating around here somewhere, but don't have it at the moment, sorry), although many and perhaps most handgun owners also own long guns. Somewhere around 16 to 20 million of us own "assault weapons" as defined by H.R.1022 et seq, if you look at the ownership totals of all the guns so defined, but since the definition of "assault weapon" is arbitrary, that number can range anywhere from 4 to 40 million depending on whose definition you use.

About 34.4 million people went target shooting in 2009, about 8.9 million of whom were using AR-15 type rifles and other modern-looking carbines, which dominate both competitive and recreational target shooting in the USA.

http://www.nssf.org/newsroom/releases/2010/041910.cfm

As far as gun sales go, in a typical year, 5 to 9 million gun sales are approved by the NICS Federal background check system (which includes new and used guns sold by dealers, but not private sales between individuals in states that don't require those to go through NICS). This is about evenly split between handguns (mostly semiautomatics) and long guns (also mostly semiautomatics). About 8 or 9 billion (yes, with a "b") rounds of ammunition are sold each year as well, the overwhelming majority of which is expended by recreational target shooters, as hunters would generally fire only a few hundred rounds a year. There was a surge in 2008-2009 due to fears about new proposals for an "assault weapon" ban, leading to 12 million NICS approvals in 2008 and about 14 million in 2009, with 14.033 billion rounds of ammunition sold in 2009 as well.

http://www.ammoland.com/2010/01/13/gun-owners-buy-14-million-plus-guns-in-2009

I don't have citations for this handy, but a single model of rifle, the AR-15 platform, accounts for about 1 in 4 centerfire rifles sold annually. AR-15's are manufactured by approximately 30 companies and are currently the top selling centerfire rifle in the United States.

The top selling ammunition caliber in the USA is .22LR, due to its low cost. I don't have sources handy for this either, but the top selling centerfire rifle calibers are AFAIK .223 Remington (AR-15, mini-14), 7.62x39mm (AK, SKS), and .308 Winchester (M1A, FAL, many target and hunting rifles), in that order. I believe the top selling centerfire handgun caliber is consistently 9mm, though I can't find any sources at the moment.

In most polls as to the reason for owning a firearm, the reasons are consistently (1) defensive purposes, (2) target shooting, (3) hunting, and (4) collecting, in that order. For example:

http://www.nssf.org/newsroom/releases/2010/033110.cfm
http://www.nssf.org/share/PDF/NSSFHarris-data-participation.pdf (raw data for above)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/20098/gun-ownership-use-america.aspx (absolute numbers for all categories are higher than actual participation, but relative order is the same)

So you know where I'm coming from, I'm a nonhunter who shoots recreationally, competitively when I can (USPSA pistol and carbine), and holds a CHL. I'm somewhat interested in hunting and may actually get around to taking the NC hunter's safety course this year, but it's not high on my priority list.
Click to expand...
Outstanding. I have some reading to do. Thanks.
 
The 94 hit me by surprise. I immediately took a loan out and bought an HBAR. I had a 40 witness and S&W 915 as my only high cap guns. Mags for all of these went out of sight. I had 4 for the Witness and 5 for the 915. I had 5 twenty round mags for the HBAR that I had brought back from ADuty. I still have the and the work today. I had only 2 thirty rounders until my son 'left; some when he was home on leave from the 82nd,
I carried a 1911 for CCW and fired Service rifle comp with the HBAR. Around 1997 I got a nice High Power with 3 mags and an M1 carbine that included 4 Issue 30 round mags.
On 9/11 I helped patrol the bridges on I-10 near the border and carried the HBAR and 1911, and my buddy had a British Jungle Carbine with AP rounds and a Colt Commander.
By that time high cap mags were selling for triple their normal price,
The day the ban ended I bought a Bushmaster M Forgery, and a SIG 229 with 5 mags. I haven't stopped. I now have 7 AR's of different types and at least 15 mgs per gun.
 
The day the ban ended I bought a Bushmaster M Forgery, and a SIG 229 with 5 mags. I haven't stopped. I now have 7 AR's of different types and at least 15 mgs per gun.
Click to expand...

This is why any new ban would be innefective. Too many people own too many modern rifles and high capacity magazines compaired to 20 years ago.
 
gp911 said:
People couldn't learn all about firearms from their living room couch back then, so if the people on TV said something about evil assault weapons being banned then it must be true, unless you owned one and knew better. A lot of hunters were okay with the ban because hunting already has magazine restrictions, licensing, etc and they figured nobody was coming for their hunting guns so why worry about those ugly commie guns and their "banana clips" and whatnot.
Click to expand...

All I had was what most civilians had. Gun magazines and newspapers. The newspapers carried some of the political stories and the NRA magazines carried our side of it.

I remember taking my SKS out back then with people publicly telling me it was "illegal" even though I bought it legally from the local sporting goods store. Regular uneducated shooters at that time seemed to think anything with a gas tube was military only.
 
In 1994 AR's were sort of on the fringe. There were a few around but they were not mainstream and practically nobody hunted with one.
Click to expand...
Yes. They were very much an enthusiasts' gun, and there weren't very many good options for optics either. The most common configuration I saw was 20" HBAR boat anchors mostly limited to iron sights only unless you wanted a low-powered traditional scope in a gooseneck mount. Aftermarket pistol grip stocks had hit the market for the SKS and Ruger mini-14, so you occasionally saw those (and I wanted one badly for my mini pre-1994 but never made it a financial priority) but guns with traditional looking straight wooden stocks dominated at the range.

Owners of modern-looking rifles were sometimes subjected to snide comments by older or more traditional shooters at the range, too, showing just how successfully the media had propagated the "black gun = evil gun" meme. I remember talking to people who had been approached by random strangers at the range and criticized for owning a gun "like that". Never mind an AR was and is functionally identical to a Ruger mini-14...plenty of shooters who should have known better were as emotionally wrapped up in black-rifle hysteria as the media were.

Fast forward to now, when the AR isn't just in the mainstream but *defines* the mainstream, and probably 50 million gun owners collectively own half a billion full-capacity magazines for various guns, and there is simply no way a ban could fly now, either politically or logistically.
 
chicharrones said:
That is my memory as well. I just didn't see near as many in the gun stores or at the range back then. The military pattern rifles I saw were nearly all mil-surps back then.
Click to expand...

Honestly I never even knew ARs existed, it was all AKs that would be talked about.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
 
I remember the George H W Bush import ban in, 1989 (I believe). For me there was little warning. I bought an Uzi Mini-carbine immediately. But really didn't like shooting it much, so I sold it after owning it a few months. It simply did not seem to be accurate enough for me for a rifle.

The 1994 AWB was something that I was fairly familiar with. But information was not timely and was gained mostly from reading gun magazines. I was attending gunshows frequently between 1989 and 1994. But it was at this time that my financial situation changed and I bought very very few firearms for the next 10-years.

Owen Sparks said...This is why any new ban would be innefective. Too many people own too many modern rifles and high capacity magazines compaired to 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

Grandfathering existing guns would make a new ban in effective relative to reducing crime if that is the justification for the legislation. Our President said something significant about taxation during the campaign... he basically said that he wanted to tax people earning 250K or more at a higher rate because it is "right". A gun ban would likely be sold in the same way and the facts or the reality relative to law enforcement would not matter. Hence it is about people control for our "own good" just like Obama Care.

A ban would only be effective from an anti-gun supporter perspective if the actual guns are moved to the NFA catagory or banned outright. There would be a problem of definition just like during the '94 AWB time.

A magazine ban is another matter entirely. The government (if passed legislatively) could in fact make it law that use of magazines that exceed 10-rounds is illegal. Shooting ranges would have to comply. You would still see the occasional person wandering around the woods with his 30-round mag, but in general a ban would end it. This is what I am afraid of. As a civilian. I personally don't care for box magazines that hold more than about 20 rounds. But everyone is different. It is not for me to say that I am right and someone else is wrong with regard to something like a detachable magazine.

BenEzra said... Yes. They were very much an enthusiasts' gun, and there weren't very many good options for optics either....
Click to expand...

That is pretty much my take as well. I saw lots of SKS and AK clones but few AR-15 or clones at that time.

I recall my father and I discussing the "assault rifle" issue. His point was that he saw no utilitarian purpose for them. He lived through the Depression and there was no attempted overthrow of the governent then. So why would anyone justify owning one of these rifles for "self defense" when a handgun or most any rifle would adequately fulfil the civilian need. My point was mostly about freedom. Why should the government be allowed to control ownership or sales of rifles when the owner was not a felon? People shoot them for fun. Some hunt with these rifles.

He also looked at it from a cost point of view... how can any normal working person afford to plink away hundreds of center fire rounds on any regular basis? He didn't know about military surplus sources and was comparing the cost to normal center fire ammunition. He felt the same way about shooting away with almost all handguns except 22's. Who could afford it?

BenEzra said... Owners of modern-looking rifles were sometimes subjected to snide comments by older or more traditional shooters at the range, too, showing just how successfully the media had propagated the "black gun = evil gun"....

Fast forward to now, when the AR isn't just in the mainstream but *defines* the mainstream, and probably 50 million gun owners collectively own half a billion full-capacity magazines for various guns, and there is simply no way a ban could fly now, either politically or logistically.
Click to expand...

Yes, they do seem to be mainstream now which is probably why you see people using them for criminal pursuits more than in the past.

Gun legislation politically is one thing, but logistically is an entirely different matter. Like the illegal alien issue, it is physically impossible to enforce a ban or deport 12 million people. So it would be selective enforcement where LE would be influenced by their prejudices.

I just hope that we don't have to deal with this. No new laws!
 
Yes, they do seem to be mainstream now which is probably why you see people using them for criminal pursuits more than in the past.
Click to expand...
Actually, people are *not* using them for criminal pursuits more than in the past. Rifle crime now is AFAIK as low as it has ever been in the history of the United States. In any given year, less than 3% of U.S. homicides involve any kind of rifle ("assault weapon" or not), and rifle crime has decreased significantly since 2004.

FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2010, Murder, by State and Type of Weapon

Sum the columns in Excel and compare the total in the "Rifles" column to handguns, shotguns, knives, fists/feet, and blunt objects. Rifles are consistently least misused of *any* class of weapon in this country, bar none.
 
I think this post on vuurwapen blog summed it up nicely: http://vuurwapenblog.com/2012/11/07/sporting-purposes-how-hk-really-does-not-suck-or-hate-you/
vuurwapen said:
But in the '80s and '90s, magazine editors, hunting guides, state game commissioners, and competitive shooting groups were consulted by the ATF in order to determine whether certain rifles were importable under the '89 import ban, and taking into consideration the "sporting purposes" test. I won't be debating the merits of that "test" here, because it is a somewhat complex matter, although my position on the issue should not be a huge mystery (hint: it's dumb).

What I want to focus on is the response of the magazine editors in particular. On multiple occasions, ATF asked them if rifles such as the SG550, FN FAL, AK-47, etc. had any useful "sporting purpose." When polled directly in 1989, 0 (zero) of 14 magazine editors responded in the affirmative.
....
Well, of the manufacturers, trade groups, and so on that received letters from ATF seeking their input, exactly one company made an active attempt to stop what they saw coming....Which manufacturer was this?

HK.
Click to expand...
Basically, the gun world of the US at that time said "Yeah, ban AK's, FALs, AR15s and the like. They have no purpose. Now, even hinting that there might not be a reason to own X gun will get you internet lynch-mobbed.
 
-v- said:
Now, even hinting that there might not be a reason to own X gun will get you internet lynch-mobbed.
Click to expand...

For a good reason. The choice to use virtually whatever gun for a legal purpose is personal. Bans based on cosmetics, irrelevant technical details or other people's opinions have never accomplished anything, they just undermine the freedom of choice.

I can't even remember how many times someone has told me that my 11" AR15 isn't suitable for hunting. I beg to differ, I've used that particular rifle successfully since the 80's and I have literally hundreds of downed game animals to prove it. After all, it's my business what I hunt them with.

Live and let live.
 
As long as either the House or the Senate is made up of a majority of red states we're fine. Plus too many Democrats are scared of having the issue backfire on them. And now with gun companies being as strong as they are and gun issues being litigated with some measure of success. I think the gun companies would take a shot at legally fighting a ban on certain models of firearms and magazines if it meant a nationwide attack on their profit margins.

Some might say they never fought any of the liberal states policies, but those states weren't really a profit loss. But lose the entire country, and you are taking about tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars in lost profits. Whose going to buy an AR they can only get ten round mags for. Used goods would become the premium ticket and gun companies don't make any money off of the private sale of used goods.

With the AR15 being as popular as it is and the money that stands to be lost if the mag ban were to happen again. I think someone would want to fight it. It's too big of a business not to. What is the justification going to be on limiting magazine capacity when folks can just tape mags together. Yes some rate of fire would be lost, but not a ton.

I love capitalism, it's perfect justification for telling the government to back off.
 
Many Democratic legislators do not support a ban of any kind on firearms. But the Democrats seem to be much better at creating a solid voting block as compared to the Republican members. That said, I don't see any legislation passing both houses for the next two years unless there is some sort of dramatic event which propagates such action. The "event" that comes to mind is not a shooting in a school or movie theater, but rather some sort of organized rebellion that is geographically widespread inside the US. I would think it too late at that point and I don't support such a scenario.
 
Over the last 20 years, when ever the subject comes up "Will you go and collect legal guns from Citizens" Canada, or the US of A. Question to Police.

Politically correct statements emerge. But as a Domestic Violence call is the most dangerous patrol call at this time. It would be nothing compared to trying to collect the 70 year old former Marines M1. The Mil Spec 3006 would make a mess of the Fords and GM vehicles. "Get off my lawn" would be epidemic.

The biggest comment in the Police Stations? "You have to be kidding!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Mike OTDP
  • Locked
Gun Culture 3.0?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
Zaydok Allen
Zaydok Allen
E
  • Locked
What was the RKBA/GUN climate like in 1994?
Replies
5
Views
520
HD Fboy
H
D
  • Locked
Why a Renewal of the 1994 Assault Weapon “Ban” is NOT Happening
Replies
13
Views
2K
Jeff White
J
M
  • Locked
Media's pet phrase: "Gun Culture"?
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
Akita1
Akita1
K
  • Locked
My LTTE got published in the MD Journal
Replies
2
Views
654
Tharg
T
Back
Top