Gun survey and SD situations

[GEM]

https://deliverypdf.ssrn.com/deliver...pdf&INDEX=TRUE

Saw this on Truthabout guns as a report and got the PDF above. You can read the report, doesn't take long.

Interesting tidbits - the very high percent of some kind of gun usage for SD. The high percentage of having or having had an EBR. The percent of DGUs with two more assailants (>50%).

These are interesting tactical points - we have the endless discussion sometimes of is 5 enough. If half the incidents are 2 or more, that makes you think.

Abstract
This report summarizes the findings of a national survey of firearms ownership and use conducted between February 17th and March 23rd, 2021 by the professional survey firm Centiment. This survey, which is part of a larger book project, aims to provide the most comprehensive assessment of firearms ownership and use patterns in America to date. This online survey was administered to a representative sample of approximately fifty-four thousand U.S. residents aged 18 and over, and it identified 16,708 gun owners who were, in turn, asked in-depth questions about their ownership and their use of firearms, including defensive uses of firearms.

Consistent with other recent survey research, the survey finds an overall rate of adult firearm ownership of 31.9%, suggesting that in excess of 81.4 million Americans aged 18 and over own firearms. The survey further finds that approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. Handguns are the most common firearm employed for self-defense (used in 65.9% of defensive incidents), and in most defensive incidents (81.9%) no shot was fired.

Approximately a quarter (25.2%) of defensive incidents occurred within the gun owner’s home, and approxi-mately half (53.9%) occurred outside their home, but on their property. About one out of ten (9.1%) defensive gun uses occurred in public, and about one out of twenty (4.8%) occurred at work.

A majority of gun owners (56.2%) indicate that they carry a handgun for self-defense in at least some circumstances, and about 35% of gun owners report carrying a handgun with some frequency. We estimate that approximately 20.7 million gun owners (26.3%) carry a handgun in public under a “concealed carry” regime; and 34.9% of gun owners report that there have been instances in which they had wanted to carry a handgun for self-defense, but local rules did not allow them to carry.

The average gun owner owns 5 firearms, and handguns are the most common type of firearm owned. 48.0% of gun owners have owned magazines that hold over 10 rounds, and 30.2% of gun owners – totaling about 24.6 million individuals – have owned an AR-15 or similarly styled rifle. Demographically, gun owners are diverse. 42.2% are female and 57.8% are male. Approximately 25.4% of Blacks own firearms, 28.3% of Hispanics own firearms, 19.4% of Asians own firearms, and 34.3% of Whites own firearms.

These are higher figures that usual. Hope it holds up as legit. Truth website points out that such data feed into the common usage argument for court cases.

Dr. Yamane - https://guncurious.wordpress.com/author/davidyamane/ discusses this as part of his liberal gun owners commentaries. Good guy, met him.

 

[Kleanbore]

Higher usage stats than I would have expected.

 

[Jeff White]

I have a problem with these surveys that rely on self reported claims of defensive gun uses. I've posted it about Gary Kleck's work here on THR before. They seem to have made the same mistake Kleck did in accepting an incident where a firearm was not displayed as a defensive gun use. In my opinion this skews the number of defensive gun uses towards the high side. By their standard every time I confronted a trespasser it was a defensive gun use strictly because I was armed at the time.

 

[Kleanbore]

I have a problem with these surveys that rely on self reported claims of defensive gun uses. I've posted it about Gary Kleck's work here on THR before. They seem to have made the same mistake Kleck did in accepting an incident where a firearm was not displayed as a defensive gun use. In my opinion this skews the number of defensive gun uses towards the high side. By their standard every time I confronted a trespasser it was a defensive gun use strictly because I was armed at the time.

I agree.

When I stumbled into a store robbery about to happen around a decade ago, I moved into position to defend agains the robber, and my action caused him to bolt and run. I was armed and ready, but I did not have to draw.

I do not consider that to have been a defensive gun use.

 

[GEM]

There is a debate about that and it is a good point. Kleck has been challenged on his numbers and I know Kleck thinks Lott's are funky to say the least. Such is the academic literature. Just FYI folks.

 

[Kleanbore]

The numbers for incidents that involved firing, display without firing, and neither are in the report. They indicate to me that the skewing is not that significant.

 

[Blue Jays]

Who genuinely responds to random surveys in any way, shape, or form?
I disconnect callers, toss mail into recycling, and classify emails as spam.
Needless to say, I do not put too much stock into what surveys indicate.

 

[Kleanbore]

Needless to say, I do not put too much stock into what surveys indicate.

People who are responsible to their shareholders for their performance, who pay to have the surveys conducted scientifically by professional organizations, and who make important decisions on the basis of the findings, do "put stock" into them.

Did you read about how it was done?

 

[CapnMac]

Extrapolating such numbers is very tricky.

Only 31% of the polled 54,000 responded that they owned firearms (and, also, were willing to participate in the survey, both are large "asks"). So, the inference of national ownership, and rates of ownership (how many per each) thus becomes suspect.

I am troubled that the geographic break down of respondents was not given.

For one, it makes geographic comparisons of crime victimization impossible--and that's a middling crucial data point.

In considering the US population for statistical purposed, my mind turns to this graphic (and this was from 2012)

 

[Kleanbore]

I am troubled that the geographic break down of respondents was not given.

It was.

 

[Blue Jays]

"…who pay to have the surveys conducted scientifically by professional organizations, and who make important decisions on the basis of the findings, do 'put stock' into them…"

Polls are to be taken with a big grain of salt.
Can you think of ANY recent events (within the past five years or so) where pollsters got things TOTALLY wrong despite their access to latest techniques, modeling, predictive technology, and research data?

 

[CapnMac]

It was.

Did not see that in the report. Now, I may have missed it. The Appendix lists a preliminary study in Vermont.

 

[DT Guy]

If someone contacted you and wanted to know the answers to those questions, would you be likely to give forthright answers? I don't think I know a single firearm owner who would.

The principle of mediocrity thus suggests a serious flaw in all 'self-reported' firearm data, IMHO.

Larry

 

[Blue Jays]

"…I don't think I know a single firearm owner who would…"

I agree with that assessment. Nearly each person I know would quietly hang-up without saying a word.

 

[bdickens]

I don't hang up because if I don't recognize the number I don't answer.

Texts from unknown sources get deleted unread as do emails.

 

[CDW4ME]

There are people on gun forums that apparently don't anticipate the possibility two or more assailants, though it was >50%.
Evidence to support that statement would be carrying 5-6 rounds capacity by choice when one could do better.
Other studies show it takes two hits to incapacitate an attacker and the average hit ratio is about 50% = 4 rounds fired for 1 attacker.

One carrying 5-6 rounds capacity by choice, when they could otherwise do better, either does not entertain the possibility of two attackers or they anticipate shooting like John Wick under stress (don't we all).

 

[John_R]

The average gun owner (admits to owning) five firearms. Seems like no gun owner in any online forum is "average."

 

[John_R]

There are people on gun forums that apparently don't anticipate the possibility two or more assailants, though it was >50%.
Evidence to support that statement would be carrying 5-6 rounds capacity by choice when one could do better.
Other studies show it takes two hits to incapacitate an attacker and the average hit ratio is about 50% = 4 rounds fired for 1 attacker.

One carrying 5-6 rounds capacity by choice, when they could otherwise do better, either does not entertain the possibility of two attackers or they anticipate shooting like John Wick under stress (don't we all).

In 82% of defensive gun incidents, the defender did not fire the gun at all. A Derringer would have worked. Of course, no one knows that going in.

 

[AlexanderA]

Any survey about guns is worthless, because (a) the high rate of non-responsiveness, and (b) the lack of truthfulness among those who do respond. Let me put it this way: would you tell some random pollster about your guns?

The only way to get a handle on gun ownership and use is to extrapolate from hard figures, such as sales, background checks, and carry permits. Even that has weaknesses such as the number of pre-existing guns, permitless carry, or illegal carry.

 

[John_R]

It's like polls on sexual behavior, but in the opposite direction. People want everyone to think they're Hugh Hefner, when they're really virginal dweebs.

 

[JFrank]

Any survey about guns is worthless, because (a) the high rate of non-responsiveness, and (b) the lack of truthfulness among those who do respond. Let me put it this way: would you tell some random pollster about your guns?

The only way to get a handle on gun ownership and use is to extrapolate from hard figures, such as sales, background checks, and carry permits. Even that has weaknesses such as the number of pre-existing guns, permitless carry, or illegal carry.

Or monitor sites like THR where fellas brag all day every day about how many and what kind they have, including components stored up.

 

[Kleanbore]

Who genuinely responds to random surveys in any way, shape, or form?
I disconnect callers, toss mail into recycling, and classify emails as spam.

Those who did that would not be included in the 54,000 respondents, would they?

 

[Blue Jays]

/\/\
Yes, wise owners do not willy-nilly offer firearms or usage information to pollsters.

 

[CapnMac]

included in the 54,000 respondents

Polled 54K, and 16.7K responded affirmatively, per the article.

Also unstated is how many persons were contacted to get the 54K number. We are left to presume, from how it's written that 54K answered "yes" when asked if they wanted to participate in a survey. Direct marketing numbers suggest you need to contact about 20 or 25 to one to get people to even answer phone surveys.

Without the metrics we are left to guess as to how many of the "other" 69% were no answer, hang-up, etc.

Which is also why the geographic data are also important. If every one of the 54K are in Allegheny County, PA, that's going to be a different result than if in several PA counties (or in several States, etc.)

The uncertainties here suggest that the calculations made from the data probably ought be rounded only to the nearest 10% and not the fractional amounts quoted. Otherwise this is a bit like polling Missourians and asking about how many Trabant autos they own.

 

[Kleanbore]

There are people on gun forums that apparently don't anticipate the possibility two or more assailants, though it was >50%.

That's probably largely because they practice by shooting at a single stationary target in front of them.

Anyone sho puts any thought into whether an attacker with a choice would go it alone or take along another set of eyes would probably think differently.