Many fewer U.S. gun owners

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
WinterBorn said:
The magazine is not as relevant as the source of the data. The FBI Uniform Crime Reports, amoung other sources. The poll you are cheering for was based on talking to 1500 people and extrapolating the numbers to reach a national one. Which sounds more accurate to you?
Click to expand...

Cite the text in the FBI Uniform Crime Report ( with a link) that says guns owned by individuals and households increase...then you'll have a valid source.


BTW, are you saying that a sample size of 1,500 is invalid?
 
Topspin said:
fuck letting kids play video games, hey kid shoot a real gun!
Click to expand...

Except it appears they ain't all that interested...


Hunting's popularity has waned across much of the country as housing tracts replace forests, aging hunters hang up their guns and kids plop down in front of Facebook rather than venture outside.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
The falloff could have far-reaching consequences, hunting enthusiasts say. Fewer hunters mean less revenue for a multi-billion dollar industry....


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://theintelligencer.net/page/content.detail/id/125115/Hunting-traditions-sag-as-land--desire-disappear.html?isap=1&nav=537[/FONT]
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812043 said:
Cite the text in the FBI Uniform Crime Report ( with a link) that says guns owned by individuals and households increase...then you'll have a valid source.


BTW, are you saying that a sample size of 1,500 is invalid?
Click to expand...

Did I say the FBI UCR said that? No, I just used it as an example of the data sources.

Is 1500 invalid? No. Is it definative? No.
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812045 said:
Except it appears they ain't all that interested...


Hunting's popularity has waned across much of the country as housing tracts replace forests, aging hunters hang up their guns and kids plop down in front of Facebook rather than venture outside.
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
The falloff could have far-reaching consequences, hunting enthusiasts say. Fewer hunters mean less revenue for a multi-billion dollar industry....


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://theintelligencer.net/page/content.detail/id/125115/Hunting-traditions-sag-as-land--desire-disappear.html?isap=1&nav=537[/FONT]
Click to expand...

You forgot some other far reaching consequences. Hunters help balance natural species, conserve natural resources, and provide the lion's share of the funding for state conservation efforts.

But I guess none of that matters?
 
WinterBorn said:
You forgot some other far reaching consequences. Hunters help balance natural species, conserve natural resources, and provide the lion's share of the funding for state conservation efforts. But I guess none of that matters?
Click to expand...

You're correct. None of that matters in light of the subject being discussed. Thanks for admitting it.

WinterBorn said:
Ask your grandfather or your father when he first went shooting. Find someone around our age who hunts and ask them how old they were when they went for the first time. You will find its not new. Hell, the Boy Scouts used to teach gun safety.
Click to expand...







Key words: "grandfather"..."father"..."when he first went"..."went for the first time"..."used to".





Gun ownership is declining along with the popularity of hunting, perhaps?




 
university of Chicago violence studies are bullshit, why? because the NRA didn't put it out.

these assclowns can only repeat NRA talking points

thanks fellas this shit is hillarious
 
WinterBorn said:
Did I say the FBI UCR said that? No, I just used it as an example of the data sources.

Is 1500 invalid? No. Is it definative? No.
Click to expand...

So your purpose in quoting the UCR was to move completely off-topic, and your sniping at the 1,500 sample size was invalid.
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812053 said:
You're correct. None of that matters in light of the subject being discussed. Thanks for admitting it.



[/FONT]




Key words: "grandfather"..."father"..."when he first went"..."went for the first time"..."used to".





Gun ownership is declining along with the popularity of hunting, perhaps?



[/FONT]
[/B]
Click to expand...

Oh? Hmmm, it seems that part of the difficulty is the expense of finding and leasing land on which to hunt. The reason for increases in gun purchases is the threat of robbery and home invasions, which has been widely publicized during the economic downturn.
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812055 said:
So your purpose in quoting the UCR was to move completely off-topic, and your sniping at the 1,500 sample size was invalid.
Click to expand...

No, my using the FBI UCR as an example of the data sources for an article I do not have in front of me.

My sniping at the 1500 sample size is valid because it is not exactly the last word. The poll you quoted uses data from 1500 people who were involved in face-to-face interviews last between 60 and 90 minutes. Anyone you know willing to sit and be interviewed for 60 to 90 minutes? And the source stated that not all the people were asked the same questions. Which allows the interviewer to determine which interviewees get asked about certain topics.
 
WinterBorn said:
Oh? Hmmm, it seems that part of the difficulty is the expense of finding and leasing land on which to hunt. The reason for increases in gun purchases is the threat of robbery and home invasions, which has been widely publicized during the economic downturn.
Click to expand...


The reason is relevant...how?


"For 25 years, interest in hunting has been declining in Virginia. The number of hunting licenses issued annually is half what it was in 1974. Hunting licenses are down 1 percent to 2 percent every year, according to the state Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. The number of licenses decreased from 253,425 in 2009 to 245,185 in 2010, or 3.3 percent."

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/...ing-declines-in-virginia-a-way-of--ar-793690/


Where's your statistical evidence that there have been "increases in gun purchases"?
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812064 said:
The reason is relevant...how?


"For 25 years, interest in hunting has been declining in Virginia. The number of hunting licenses issued annually is half what it was in 1974. Hunting licenses are down 1 percent to 2 percent every year, according to the state Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. The number of licenses decreased from 253,425 in 2009 to 245,185 in 2010, or 3.3 percent."

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/...ing-declines-in-virginia-a-way-of--ar-793690/


Where's your statistical evidence that there have been "increases in gun purchases"?
Click to expand...

I have none. Give me a week to talk to 1500 people and we can extrapolate it out. lol
 
¯¯¯̿̿¯̿̿’̿̿̿̿̿̿̿’̿̿’̿̿;812064 said:
The reason is relevant...how?
Click to expand...

It is relevant because it shows cause why one would decline and one would increase.
 
WinterBorn said:
No, my using the FBI UCR as an example of the data sources for an article I do not have in front of me.

My sniping at the 1500 sample size is valid because it is not exactly the last word. The poll you quoted uses data from 1500 people who were involved in face-to-face interviews last between 60 and 90 minutes. Anyone you know willing to sit and be interviewed for 60 to 90 minutes? And the source stated that not all the people were asked the same questions. Which allows the interviewer to determine which interviewees get asked about certain topics.
Click to expand...

Your sniping is invalid because your criticism is anecdotal.
 
WinterBorn said:
I have none. Give me a week to talk to 1500 people and we can extrapolate it out. lol
Click to expand...

Defenition of NRA tool. Your study from Chicago University sucks
where's your data "Ahh, hmm hum a de hum"
not valid sample size, it's not in line with my NRA talking points. Somebody get Haunz
 
Gunlovers want us to believe that "someone" is plotting to steal their guns, leaving them at the mercy of a Socialist government....

The facts, as usual, tell a different story.

A 2008 Gallup poll revealed that 28% of the population supported a total ban on handguns — the lowest level since the poll was first taken in 1959 (when support for a total ban was 60% of the population). This same poll revealed that 49% of Americans in 2008 preferred more restrictive gun laws, compared to 78% when the question was first asked in the 1990 version of the poll.

A 2009 CNN poll found even lower levels of support for gun laws: in this poll, only 39% favored more restrictive laws. The poll indicates that the drop in support (compared to 2001 polls) came from self-identified Independents, with levels of opposition among Democrats and Republicans remaining consistent...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top