Attitudes towards firearms: Categorizing people.

[Dr_B]

Fellow THR members,

I'm in the initial design stages of a study of attitudes toward guns and methods of firearms storage. I am interested in your thoughts on a particular issue that is relevant to the study: developing a list of categories that can be used to classify study participants' views on gun ownership. I will spare you the dry details of the study, but the categorization will help me interpret their interview data later on.

For example, some people (like me) like guns and think anyone who is law-abiding should be allowed to own them. No restrictions on how many, what caliber, magazine capacity, etc. Other people, to set out another example, are of the type that think only the police should have guns. Those are kind of two extremes, but that is the sort of thing I am getting at.

I'm interested in your input. I want to know, if you had to put the general public into categories, what would they be?

 

[Tim the student]

Off the top of my head, without knowing the specifics of what you are trying to answer, I'd keep it simple. Something along the lines of:

Very Pro-gun
Pro-gun
Neutral/No opinion etc
Anti-gun
Very anti-gun - of course, if you are studying methods of storage, IDK how many in this group would have one to store. Of course, they will (well, probably) have an opinion as to how others with guns should store them), but that may be a separate question you may not be trying to answer.

I'd try to keep the definitions somewhat loose.

Very pro- supports very few restrictions, or supports no restrictions.
Pro- supports more restrictions, such as background checks, or a ban on fully automatic weapons
Neutral -
Anti- Supports many restrictions, such as background checks in conjunction with waiting periods, bans on certain types of semi guns, bans on certain types of magazines
Very anti - supports very, very stringent gun laws. Thinks it should be very difficult for a "civilian" to own a gun, or that only the military and police should have guns.

I'd be interested in as many specifics of your study in the making as you care to share.

 

[Dr_B]

Tim the student:

The overall goal of the study is to study contextual factors that relate to storage practices. I am a human factors psychologist and most of my work involves transportation safety issues. There are many firearms safety studies out there that are politically biased, and I am beginning to dabble in firearms research in hopes of contributing something to the literature that doesn't begin with an agenda from the outset of the study design.

So, I am going to look at demographic variables like age and gender of parents, how many kids they have, how old the kids are, and what gender are they. I will also be having them report their position on gun ownership by selecting a category (i.e., the topic of this thread). Then they will be asked to tell me their preferred method for storing firearms.

An interview will follow, digging a little deeper into why they chose that method of storage.

That's the gist of the study design right now. It will become more detailed in the coming weeks.

I can envision lots of categories for attitudes toward gun ownership. I want to keep it rather short... just like you did there with five choices. But I am very interested in what people here at THR think about the variety of attitudes out there in the public. I think the members here at THR probably think more deeply about that sort of thing than the average member of the public.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I'm thinking it would be very hard to make sure you're measuring separate and distinct attitudes, killing the validity...

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Attitudes

I'm not a practitioner in the "psy-arts" but I have spent some time in the field, working rehab and education. Some understanding of what makes people tick is unavoidable.

It won't be as simple as just "gun attitudes;" such attitudes are ancillary to other motivating factors.

For example, someone who has a driving need to control people will likely exhibit "anti-gun attitudes" but their 'flavor' will be different from someone who is simply afraid of them.

So in attempting to classify people by "degree" of pro or anti, the underlying driver will almost certainly be obscured.

On the "pro" side, you will also have motivators beyond just "liking" guns. You'll have folks who are driven by love of hunting, love of the sport, patriotic concerns, need for self defense, and latent political awakenings. The "liking vector" will be a secondary manifestation (gawd, I sound like a badly written undergrad paper).

Anyway, the point is, you'll be dealing with other dimensions than just an outward expression of positive or negative affinity for firearms.

That's gonna make correlation and tabulation . . . interesting.

 

[cyclopsshooter]

I'd try to keep the definitions somewhat loose.

This is wise.

My initial reaction to your question about storage and transportation boiled down to the life style situation individual firearm owners find themselves in.

A single male in his own home with total control over who can enter will be more apt to leave firearms and related materials just laying about.

A man with young children or a roommate will certainly be on another level of safe storage requirements.

Environments and social responsibility- Both could be cured by universal firearms instruction... if it were to become socially acceptable in the minds of the public.

Sorry, didn't catch part of post 3

Single / Lives alone
Cohabitation-with firearms enthusiast
Cohabitation-with novice (includes children)

This is a pretty simple list... probably would fill out with environmental qualifiers. With myself as an example: I manage a gun shop in a gun friendly rural area. I have two part time guys, one a retired local LEO and a retired state trooper. Gun storage to me is only used for preservation of the guns condition and value. Damn near everyone in my daily life is well trained on fireams. Guns are all around me unsecured- I check the chamber on every one I touch and require safe handling practices around me. Ammo is everywhere too... With the irons that I shoot I dont give a hoot about storage or finish wear... rifles get thrown behind the seat on top of each other like firewood- pistols "generally" are holstered and thrown in a box or bag for the range trips. [My storage technique is only to make sure the damn thing is unloaded] ...and to keep a close eye on the ones I know are-

This will likely change when I have children

Ok.. I really belong on the special bus tonight... still din't catch the part about general public including haters. Can we just pretend this is a graduate seminar with a Prof that's running late

 

[Nushif]

[...] developing a list of categories that can be used to classify study participants' views on gun ownership. [...]

Were I on the board for your defense on this subject I'd advise you to tread very, very carefully, as in the efforts to do this you're very likely to start along the path of confirmation bias and removing a lot of depth from whatever study it is you're doing.

I have found very few legitimate studies that categorize people along one axis with no significant and I do mean very, very, very significant caveats.

 

[morcey2]

I think another category might be Pro-gun, but uninformed/uneducated about RKBA. I know many people who support the 2nd amendment but believe that it's about hunting and target-shooting, not defense. Hunting could be entirely banned without violating the 2A.

Same with anti-gun people. Many have the same misunderstanding.

Matt

 

[justice06rr]

If I were to categorize the general population on firearms owner attitudes, it would be:

1. Pro-gun / Pro-2A : possibly was or currently in Military/LEO or related to one; Hunters, Competitors, Self-defense types, etc. Very little restriction on guns including NFA items.


2. Neutral : ok with guns in the proper hands i.e. Police/Military using them and may have shot a gun or two, but has no desire to own one.

3. Don't like guns/Uneducated about guns : Think that guns are evil/scary and have no knowledge of guns, have bad experiences with firearms, and get swayed by the anti-gun media

4. Anti-gun and "Pro-Ban" : may have some knowledge of guns but do not like them at all and votes to ban almost all firearms except for Military/LEO, registered hunters and competitors, etc. Votes for firearms registration, strict ammo restrictions, and tough gun ownership requirements


As far as storage, Cyclops posted some good points. I'm in the group with no kids and living in my own house with 2 male roomates, so firearms and ammo can be openly displayed in the home and stored loosely(no safe) in closets and under the bed/on the nightstand.

I'm not so sure if you're asking to categorize firearms storage too?

 

[beatledog7]

What is your survey population? All gun owners? People generally? Geographic or demographic restrictions?

 

[GEM]

Looked at the work of Nyla Branscombe - she has an instrument about gun attitudes that she developed?

 

[Bigdog57]

I have always considered people fall into three broad categories:

1) Pro-gun - a gn-owner, takes part in one or more aspects of the Shooting Sports, believes in self-defense as a part of self responsibility.

2) Anti-gun - whether from personal events, or adherence to The Party's agenda, and a general attitude of wanting to control others.

3) Non-gun - no knowledge or experience with guns, may fear them but isn't a true 'anti' yet. Many can become Pro-gun if taken to the range, and educated on firearm safety. usage and the Shooting Sports. Others can become 'Anti' if they can be frightened by the Anti-gun message and rabid disinformation. These are the folks both extremes must seek to attract.

 

[Snag]

1) Hates guns, can't stand the sight of them, runs away if sees one of if one is mentioned.
2) Dislikes guns, walks away casually or suddenly has somewhere to be if sees one or one is mentioned.
3) Not sure what to think of guns, could go back and forth between #2 and #4.
4) Completely neutral. Has no opinion towards guns, spends time worrying about other things.
5) Not sure what to think of guns, could go back and forth between #4 and #6.
6) Likes guns, likes when the conversation lands on guns, probably has one somewhere.
7) Loves guns, starts the gun conversations, probably has one everywhere.

 

[Ramone]

Well, I think we're way over simplifing 'pro-gun'...

Strict 2A types- 'Shall not be infringed' PERIOD- not even supporting the Felons/Mentally Ill prohibition

"reasonable restrictions" types- run the gamut from those who think prohibitions to Felons and the mentally ill are OK, but nothing more, to those that support Magazine Capacity restrictions, or think training should be required, or safe storage should be required. Some are OK with Concealed Carry with permits, but not open carry.

Fudds- not so common as they once were, they think that 'no one needs' to own a rifle that isn't bolt action and wood stocked. A whole lot of 'pro gun' of this type supported the AWB.

 

[Owen Sparks]

I think it comes down to individualists vs. statists.

 

[hermannr]

I understand what you are trying to get at, and am trying to visualize: To start I am a strict 2A libertarian type...as long as a person is not in prison or a mental hospital...what do you (collectively) understand "shall not be infringed" to mean.

I have had guns in the house I lived in since I was a kid (now retired). Gun cabinets were made to display your fine guns, and keep the dust off, not to limit access. Back in the 50's, as a 12 year old, I had my own guns, in my own cabinet, in my own room. They were mine, not my dad's,. to use when I chose (and had enough money to go to the local hardware store and purchase more)

My wife and I have raised 5 daughters, all with their own families now, and we have 14 grandchildren. We never locked up any firearms. We trained all of our daughters to shoot and respect firearms...and are now working on the grandchildren as their parents feel they are ready.

The only use I have for a gun safe is when we are away from home, and in case of fire. As we are rarely not home, I still don't own a gun safe. (combined with the fact of where I live, even UPS has a hard time finding us)

My BIL (approximately same age) has more firearms then I do. He has 4 adult children...they have all been taught to shoot and respect firearms. He has two huge gun safes. One for long guns and one for ammo and handguns. Unless he is going to the range all of his firearms are locked up inside the safes. He asked me once why I was open carrying a CZ85 at church...then he said, well, I guess it is the best place for it with you. My BIL is not a strict 2A gun owner...he can live with some restriction...I do not.

 

[michaelbsc]

I think it comes down to individualists vs. statists.

This is a tremendously important distinction to learn. We get stuck trying to defend our tree, while the other side doesn't see any trees at all.

The mistake we make dealing with them is believing we're talking the same language and we just have a disagreement. Truth be told they don't even understand what we're saying many times.

The truly believe in Leviathan.

 

[GEM]

A research project might get interesting categorizations from the choir but I'm afraid such a categorization might have prejudices that don't reflect the underlying processes and might just be naive.

Individualistic vs. statist sounds good. How are you going to test that? Also, that variable depends on context.

There is a good deal of technical personality research that might better frame some issues.

If the OP wants ideas from gun folks, that's great. A reasonable approach would be to ask the same question in an antigun venue.

But they cannot be used as real evidence for the underlying processes.

It just gives some in both groups an opportunity to vent and project their surface analyses that might have little validity.

Sorry to be a downer but that's way I call it.

 

[Dr_B]

I've been monitoring the posts here, and I have to say I am appreciative of the comments people are leaving. Thanks!

Special thanks to the poster who mentioned the Nyla Branscombe article. I contacted her regarding a copy of her measure.

I noticed some people have questioned the validity of categorizing people according to their gun attitudes. One thing to keep in mind is that I am not attempting to create categories that are all-encompassing. I am simply trying to determine a parsimonious set of categories that I can use to sort the data once all data are collected. The real meat of the data will come from interviews once we have had participants complete a short set of self-reports about gun attitudes and preferred storage methods.

In short, I am hoping to use my own developed categories in conjunction with any published measures I can find in order to get a sense of gun attitudes from more than one measurement perspective.

I am also aware that there are underlying reasons for selecting categories, and that any two people may select the same category for themselves for different reasons. That is what my follow-up interview will be for; to dig into why they self-reported in a specific way.

I have also noted the post above mentioning having a conversation with an anti-gun person about categorization. Good idea. I tend to NOT talk about guns with such people, but its and excellent idea to get their perspective.

 

[J-Bar]

Let's see...you are trying to categorize people before you know what their opinions are. Sounds backwards to me.

Ask your subjects if they own a firearm, how do they store and transport their firearm, and why did they chose to do it that way.

Then look at THEIR responses. They will tell you what categories they fall into.

Otherwise you are fitting data to a preconceived system. Not very scientific to my way of thinking.

You might find the strongest correlation is male versus female...you don't yet know what the correlations will be.

 

[GEM]

I might suggest that if you aren't connected to university data bases like PsychInfo or other social sciences ones, you use Google scholar and search on firearms, attitudes, personality.

There is a wealth of info there. Scotch, Southern Honor Society - for example, that's one view point.

No use going over well plowed ground or reinventing the wheel.

 

[siglite]

One angle to consider is the concept of force monopoly.

The crowns of europe and other totalitarian states always attempted to maintain a monopoly on the use of force, and particularly deadly force. Thus, this is a consideration.

During the 60s (and before, really) there was a growing trend in academia wherein, it was more and more widely believed that only the government should have the right to use force, and violence was never acceptable, even in self defense. Adherents to this philosophy tend to believe that the state should have an exclusive monopoly on deadly force. There are many who believe this.

In the middle, you have people who believe that the state should have a monopoly on deadly force, but believe "the people" should have arms for "sporting purposes." Meaning, duck hunting. These folks have no understanding of the purpose of the Second Amendment as well as similar clauses in various state constitutions. It is an uncomfortable truth they refuse to address, and in many cases, even recognize.

Then the third group understands the ultimate purpose behind the Second. They've read Madison's musings on an armed populace versus an army. And if not, they at least understand that the ultimate purpose of civilian ownership is a terrible, brutal, bloody final check on governmental encroachment of liberty. These people tend to have an understanding that the result of granting a force monopoly to government is the use of that force to enslave the populace. Meaning, they can read history.

Most of the "what kind of gun is kosher" argument occurs between sets two and three. Many among group three tend to believe that if they had the cash, they should be able to buy an Abrams and park it in their yard. Where many in group two believe you couldn't possibly need anything more lethal than a single-shot rifle for deer hunting. So, when asking these questions, a lot of times, it helps to cut to the chase. "Should government hold an exclusive monopoly on deadly force, or should it be shared among the people, the states, and the government to keep everyone honest?"

 

[Owen Sparks]

As the last post discussed, people of Scots-Irish origin are much more individualistic. This may explain why people in the South are far less collectivist in attitude about guns than people from Wisconsin which was settled primarily by Germans, or New Englanders which was settled by the English. By collectivist I mean that they tend to think in terms of the group rather than the individual. What is best for ‘society’ in general rather than what is best for the single member of society in particular.

If you try to argue individual rights with them they tend to speak in plurals using terms like “we, us and our” rather than ”I, me and mine”. The theory is that this mindset is imprinted on the genetic code by many many generations of subjugation. Therefore the individual has no right to armed self-defense only society as a group has a right to armed self-defense through the state.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

if you had to put the general public into categories, what would they be?

The proper way to do this would be to gather pilot data first -- perhaps through a questionnaire -- then develop your categories based on the response patterns.

 

[harrygunner]

I believe attitudes about guns have little to do with guns themselves. Rather, I'd include questions like:

- Do you feel in control of your life?
- Do you trust yourself?
- How much do you trust others?
- Do you keep your word? Often, always, rarely?
- If you had absolute power, how would you deal with those that wrong you?
- How quickly do you categorize others? What information do you use to do that?
- How afraid are you?
- How do you handle risk?
- Is life filled with bounty or is life difficult, holding little of what you need?
- Who has the duty to take care of you?

IMO, those kinds of things might be more correlated to a person's attitude about guns and how they store them if they own them.

My sense of accountability has guns in my home either on a responsible adult or in the safe.