Where does YOUR state rank?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's virtually impossible to clearly establish an accurate count of gun owners. Maybe the number of new sales from a certain point forward, if the individual state registers all FFL transfers (like CA does), or new residents moving into the state (like CA does), but even then that doesn't take into account any guns owned prior to the "start date" of FFL transfers of private sales, let alone family transfers not registered, or unlawful transfers.

Doing a poll and then extrapolating numbers? Really? Dream on.

CA has seen some huge sales of new firearms in recent years. Some years came close to seeing almost 1 million guns sales recorded. FWIW, the state didn't start archiving sales of long guns until 2014, so who knows how many of those are in owner hands?

Info post San Bernardino shooting incident: https://www.sacbee.com/site-services/databases/article53245015.html

Some 2015 article info on gathered "statistics": https://www.revealnews.org/article/in-california-handguns-enter-2nd-decade-of-rising-sales/

The "number" of lawful gun owners in CA is usually thought (estimated? believed?) to be around 8 million people, but that number could easily be an under representation of the actual number of lawful gun owners. Might be off a bit in the other direction, too, as some occasional "buy back" events have revealed a lot of older guns being disposed of by family members who are cleaning out guns owned by an older generation. I saw back's of SUV's, trucks and car trunks filled with older shotgun and hunting rifles at one buy back event I witnessed. (One guy brought in more than 90 guns he just decided he didn't need to own anymore.)

Now, if we're talking about the number of actual guns in CA? Good luck. The guns owned before the '68 GCA, and then much later the state first starting to register and archive sales, is unknown. Back then it was possible to send a money order to a dealer to buy a M1 Garand or M1 Carbine and have it mailed to you. I remember my father buying a M1 Carbine that way, for $13, from an ad in the back of a gun magazine. (No, I don't own that great example of a .30 Carbine, but I fondly remember trips to the backwoods where we'd shoot it.)

I'll offer that I've learned of a LOT of new guns owners numbered among younger CA residents in recent years, and they weren't just buying one gun, either. They were coming back to buy more when the 30 day limit for a single gun purchases had passed. Lots of new enthusiasts and owners who want to be able to own a firearm for defense.
 
You folks did what I hoped you would do and that was to pick this apart and find the flaws. That 4K vs. 300M was one of the things I questioned, plus my own reluctance to answer any poll caused me to suspect this one. The additional links several of you provided are helpful. Thanks !
 
JTHunter said:
reluctance to answer any poll
Click to expand...
There's a primary key.
Imagine if they had polled, instead, about how many bottles of liquor the respondents had.
How many "detail" questions after that first would make you nervous?* And, that's a legal product.
And, for all the reasons noted above, I'm not sure you could get even a half-accurate survey of how many tvs are i nthe average household.
Somewhere in there, the "Why do you want to know?" counter-question is going to be nearly inevitable.

Ever since this thread first posted, I've been trying to find a bit of apocrypha--that in a phone survey of phone ownership (this, back in the landline only days) they were surprised by the number of "no" responses. As in, [ring-ring] "Yeah?" "This is a phone survey, do you own any phones?" "No." [click] This was likely related to grad school Stat class (CRS is being ugly today)--so the analytical problem would be sorting then answers. Literal--it's somebody else's phone, so I don't own it. Figurative--MaBell "owns" the phone, we just lease it. With Apathy/Ignorance, and then being Deliberately Dismissive to further confound the data analysis.

Such is life.

____________________________________________________
*Actually had a phone survey asking me about booze ownership. The "tree" of questions was pretty obvious once it started. Have any? If, yes, how many? More than two, what proof? If over 70, what variety? And so on. Flummoxed the caller by having more than 10 fifths of single malt (hey, my fam loves me), but no two alike (and spelling out Scots' names was a hoot; l-a-g-u-v-a-l-i-n . . . )
Would I ordinarily tell strangers of my riches? No, I was bored waiting on a service call to show up.
Am I worried I told all you strangers? Not so much; rathe more than several of you I'd happily crack into the good stuff with.
 
It is difficult to imagine a less reliable form of data collection.
 
So this thread remains open, and the useful thread about NICS checks in WA state was suddenly closed -- and completely DELETED -- for no explicable reason?
 
FLNT4EVR said:
NY is in a fight for the bottom ranking. If we keep electing jerks like Cuomo we will take it over. GO NY !
Click to expand...
I see you are located in "up state NY" FLNT4VR. Good luck!:D
No, seriously - I mean that. My state, Idaho is ranked near the top. But the Boise Valley, on the west side of the state is filling up rapidly. I figure it won't be long until the Boise Valley is out-voting the rest of the state - just like NYC out-votes the rest of the state of New York. My only consolation is that I'm 70, and probably won't be around long enough to see it. I do feel sorry for my grandchildren.
 
I wold not answer a poll on the phone about guns. Or anything else. I would not lie, just say no thanks and hang up.
 
This is just another BS poll.
A sample of 4000 in 50 States, is 800 per State, in a country of over 300 million.
There is no way, I don't care how scientific you thinkmyour pollmis, that that is a proper representation on what is happening out here.
People are making millions making polls say whatever thry want them to.
Do not believe polls of any kind.
 
Now I know that the results are not accurate especially since there is a big difference between rural and city gun ownership. In order to get there sampling they had to go where people cluster (think cities). And most rural folks I know in Kansas have at the bare minimum a .22lr and shotgun. They’re necessary tools, just like a tractor. If you wanna know why think wolves, or mad cow disease.
 
Last edited:
Hasaf said:
Right, that is why "Big Data" is frequently a much better choice.
Click to expand...

"Big Data" keeps coming around - I first saw reference to it in the mid'90s, and it wasn't new then - but the reason it has never fulfilled the PR claims is something every programmer and statistician knows:

"Garbage in, garbage out."
and
"With enough data points, you can get any results you want."

Amazon, Microsoft, and Google have all been publicly burned by Big Data results.

The search and filtering algorithms are very sensitive to the bias of the coders.
 
Good Ol' Boy said:
I can pretty much guarantee my state of VA is more armed overall than the poll shows.

As are probably a lot of the states listed.

Polls these days are a few thousand people at the best, not even remotely close to anything based in fact.
Click to expand...

I would suggest to stay informed. Virginia which has alway's been a Red State is losing ground fast. Last time I checked we had a Liberal Gov. Where were you when the last one let out thousands of Criminals from state prisons right before the Hillary election and restored their right to vote. NO Virginia is losing. I highly suggest you spend a little money and help protect this state. Start here.

They put out a monthly news letter with Facts. Not polls.

lHP7L0O.png
 
Last edited:
TRX said:
"Big Data" keeps coming around - I first saw reference to it in the mid'90s, and it wasn't new then - but the reason it has never fulfilled the PR claims is something every programmer and statistician knows:

"Garbage in, garbage out."
and
"With enough data points, you can get any results you want."

Amazon, Microsoft, and Google have all been publicly burned by Big Data results.

The search and filtering algorithms are very sensitive to the bias of the coders.
Click to expand...

A bigger problem than query bias is, as you say, garbage in. As a young man, I lived in a county that had a Sheriff/Coroner who was very hesitant to call a suicide. Even the presence of a note and an obvious means would be classed as an accident. As far as I recall, under that Sheriff, there were no suicides in that county for over twenty years. This is a county that has unemployment rates that are always 2, or more, times the national rate.

The issue with that is that even the study we are discussing references a study that used suicide by firearm, as compared to other means, rates as a method of establishing an estimate of comparative firearms access. This approach is an example of a Big Data approach to estimating relative firearms access rates. Now, in theory, the "non-reporting" counties would cancel themselves out. However, that is not necessarily the case when the aggregate data is looked, particularly when the non-reporting counties are not representative of the rest of the state. The only non-reporting that would not 'mess with the data' would be non-reporting on places that are at the mean in all relevant matters. I don't suspect that to be true of the Northern California counties (think: Siskiyou, Modoc, Tehama, and the like).

So, yes, big data has problems; but it still tends to provide better (meaning more representative of the studied po0ulation) than methods such as the survey under discussion. the anecdote that I shared is an example of how the data can skew in unrepresentative directions. The question remains, in a large population, which provides a better understanding?
 
Large Urban areas are a disaster for gun rights. One reason why Virginia is turning Blue. And they grow as such rapid rates. We do not need a poll to understand which states are against gun rights. Certain states on the West Coast and East Coast, are a few examples that a middle school kid could figure out. Big cities like LA, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. have a huge impact on the electoral vote.
 
Labguy47 said:
Now I know that the results are not accurate especially since there is a big difference between rural and city gun ownership. In order to get there sampling they had to go where people cluster (think cities). And most rural folks I know in Kansas have at the bare minimum a .22lr and shotgun. They’re necessary tools, just like a tractor. If you wanna know why think wolves, or mad cow disease.
Click to expand...

Wolves in Kansas? When did this happen?
 
JTHunter said:
Firearm ownership rates by states. Not too surprised but Alaska has the highest rate.

https://www.alloutdoor.com/2018/10/...ent=2018-10-27&utm_campaign=Weekly+Newsletter
Click to expand...

I have real doubts as to the accuracy of this article.

I actually live in NYS and was never polled,so how do they come up with such numbers.

And the fact remains that if you live in NYC,or Detroit,did you actually admit to owning a firearm ?.

I just find the missing facts to be a huge myth buster of that poll.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
16 billion dollars in ammo to be destroyed
Replies
11
Views
1K
Al Thompson
A
il.bill
  • Locked
Video of CCI Producing .22 Rimfire Ammunition
Replies
16
Views
1K
il.bill
il.bill
hso
  • Locked
Good piece from All Outdoors
Replies
0
Views
506
hso
hso
JTHunter
  • Locked
More proposals from the White House
Replies
1
Views
823
Walkalong
Walkalong
hso
  • Locked
Interesting article - Knives and Heller
Replies
9
Views
760
herrwalther
H
Back
Top