NYC gun purchases

[GEM]

NYC residents still concerned about crime, Siena poll finds

A quarter of city residents surveyed say they’ve taken a self-defense class in the last year.

gothamist.com

A larger share of New York City residents said they had taken steps to keep themselves safe, compared to people elsewhere in the state. A quarter of the approximately 345 people surveyed in New York City said they’ve taken a self-defense class in the last year. More than a third of city residents told pollsters they had bought a personal safety device like a Taser in that timeframe, and 17% said they had bought a gun. For each of those categories, the city surpassed the statewide average

Interesting turn on the common conceptualization of NYC being antigun. Perhaps, the regular folks don't meet the expectations of their politicians.

 

[Styx]

NYC residents still concerned about crime, Siena poll finds

A quarter of city residents surveyed say they’ve taken a self-defense class in the last year.

gothamist.com

Interesting turn on the common conceptualization of NYC being antigun. Perhaps, the regular folks don't meet the expectations of their politicians.

Our definition of being "antigun" is extremely liberal. You support even one gun control measure and those heavily vested in gun culture refer to you as being "antigun." It's not that everyone in NYC is antigun, but rather some support gun ownship AND regulations, e.g., AWB, capacity limits, registration, mandatory training, red flag laws, permit schemes, background checks, no carrying outside of the home in busy areas, etc.

 

[twofewscrews]

I don't believe that NYC has become less anti gun. 345 out of 8 million people is a useless poll. The sample size is nowhere near large enough to be of use.

 

[GEM]

Our definition of being "antigun" is extremely liberal. You support even one gun control measure and those heavily vested in gun culture refer to you as being "antigun." It's not that everyone in NYC is antigun, but rather some support gun ownship AND regulations, e.g., AWB, capacity limits, registration, mandatory training, red flag laws, permit schemes, background checks, no carrying outside of the home in busy areas, etc.

Good point - the gun world tends towards absolutism. That's a topic for a different thread. As far as the sample size, that's a technical argument. Let's just down play what might be positive news if it makes you happy.

 

[Styx]

Good point - the gun world tends towards absolutism. That's a topic for a different thread. As far as the sample size, that's a technical argument. Let's just down play what might be positive news if it makes you happy.

I'm not downplaying anything. I'm adding context to what's mentioned in the OP from someone who was born and mostly raised in NYC, and whose majority of family members still live there.

What I stated wasn't necessarily negative either. I simply stated that IMHO the majority are NOT antigun, but rather support gun rights with limitations. They maybe willing to buy a gun for the first time for home defense, but will still support their elected officials when it comes to some gun control measures.

Yes, it's a good thing that others in NYC are finally exercising their 2A rights for the first time.

 

[GEM]

A study a few years ago found that the modal gun rights position (asked at that time) was:
1. Most agreed that people had the right to own guns for self-defense
2. However, they wanted guns to be restricted to law abiding citizens and thus were ok with shall issue permits and background checks. Restrictions on felons was acceptable.

That was about 70% of the sample. They didn't ask about AWBs and mag limits, IIRC. I would have to dig to find the reference.

There is a tendency of some not to see some progress if not absolute as not progress. There is also a tendency to down play increased participation by new demographic groups while the industry thinks it's great news.

 

[AlexanderA]

A substantial part of the "antigun" movement wants guns for themselves, but not for other people. That is, once they have their gun(s), they are quite happy to slam the door shut after themselves. They also believe that whatever rules are adopted, won't apply to them.

This is the result of thinking about guns as a "zero sum game." You are stronger if you have a gun, but your potential opponent doesn't.

Very few people are antigun absolutists in the sense that they would willingly disarm themselves.

 

[herrwalther]

A substantial part of the "antigun" movement wants guns for themselves, but not for other people. That is, once they have their gun(s), they are quite happy to slam the door shut after themselves. They also believe that whatever rules are adopted, won't apply to them.

The same people that are in favor of waiting periods get upset when they have to wait for their own purchases. Anti-gun people are some of the biggest hypocrites I have ever encountered.

 

[P89DCSS]

I don't believe that NYC has become less anti gun. 345 out of 8 million people is a useless poll. The sample size is nowhere near large enough to be of use.

Nothing wrong with the sample size. Probability and Statics is not intuitive, your's is a common misconception.

 

[Speedo66]

Since meeting the requirements for obtaining a handgun permit in NYC are onerous, i.e., expensive, time consuming, and basically a bureaucratic nightmare, it’s very possible the ones getting them are the wealthy or well connected elite, as has always been the case in NYC.

These are the “okay for me, but not for thee”, who while getting their guns are outwardly anti-gun. Back in the Lindsey days they were the so called “limousine liberals”. Robert DiNiro, while posturing as anti-gun, has one, as do other “celebrities“.

I’d be interested to see economic data as to who are getting these guns.

 

[AlexanderA]

The NYC mindset is more "European" than just about any other place in the US. Part of that is a great deal of hypocrisy about guns. In other words, "ban them, except for me."

 

[reddog81]

Nothing wrong with the sample size. Probability and Statics is not intuitive, your's is a common misconception.

Yeah, The sample size is valid assuming the sample was completely random. Sampling people outside a gun store, self defense course or an anti-gun rally or many less obvious methods would discredit the sample much more than the size.