I know people out here in Colorado who have purchased guns simply to make a political statement that the government is not going to take this right from them.

And ... there are Democrats and liberals, besides those on the right, that feel this way.

Gun safety/advocacy may not determine the presidential election, but Democrats at the state and local level are going to risk further electoral difficulties if they don't come up with some other gun solutions.

I talked to some people who went to a humongus one in Austin. Some said they feared gun bans/confiscations, were scrambling for ammo, etc. But quite a few said they wanted to be there just so everyone could see.

That's a demonstration.

The gun banners are in quite a fix. Everytime they raise their heads to wack-a-mole heights, they increase gun/ammo sales. If they truly believed gun proliferation was a problem, they would just shut up. But priorities aren't always what they seem.

kang's link: 378,642 people or one in every 14 adults has a gun license in Massachusetts. Up from 227,612 in 2010. A 66% increase.

A 61% increase in licensing rate, since Massachusetts added nearly 200,000 people between 2010 & dec 2014:

Census Bureau estimated that the Massachusetts population count had increased.. to July 1, 2014 to a new total of 6,745,408 persons..

Population 2010: 6,547,629
pop " ....... 2014: 6,745,408 >>> increase of 197,779

2014: 378,642 / 6,745,408 = 0.0561 = % ccw permit (I thinks)
2010: 227,612 / 6,547,629 = 0.0348 = ... " ..... "

maths: 0.0348 + (0.0348 x Y) = 0.0561
0.0348 x Y = 0.0213
Y = 0.0213 / 0.0348 = 61.2% increase in ccw rate '10 - '14;

That's approx. a 15% increase in ccw permits (& gun licenses?) every year for past 4 years. When taking into account rarely if ever used ccw permits obtained just to have one - you cannot infer a 61% increase in gun owners over the 4 year period.

Within the last few years there’s been a significant rise in the last 3-4 years,” said .. NRA certified instructor.

She says without producing a figure for comparison.

The number of legal gun owners in Massachusetts is growing. The 22News I-Team obtained and analyzed state data showing how many people have a license to carry from 2009 to September 2015... 38,666 residents have a FID card, which permits the purchase, possession and transportation of non-large-capacity rifles, shotguns and ammunition.

The number of people who do NOT own guns in Massachusetts is RISING also.
And a license to carry does not necessarily equate to a 'new gun owner'.

An LTC is actually required to *purchase* a handgun in MA. An FID is only good for rifles and shotguns.

http://www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/dfg/dfw/education-events/hed/gun-licensing-requirements.html

Your statement "When taking into account rarely if ever used ccw permits obtained just to have one" should be even scarier to gun confiscation folks as this could easily be people getting one to make a statement for the RKBA or to try or make sure they get grandfathered in, etc. Regardless, non-gun owners supporting gun ownership. Kind of undercuts any argument about the number of American gun owners versus non-gun owners if by your own words, we have people who don't own guns getting CCW permits most certainly will be in the gun ownership rights group.

" - you cannot infer a 61% increase in gun owners over the 4 year period. " is quibbling over the crumbs. 61, 66, 57, it is increasing far and above the rate of population increase.

beardown: Regardless, non-gun owners supporting gun ownership.

You apparently read it wrong; most increase I mentioned would be to existing gun owners obtaining a ccw permit, 'just to have it'. Tiny percentage of non gun owners would get one, unless they subsequently became a gun owner as well.

beardown: - you cannot infer a 61% increase in gun owners over the 4 year period. " is quibbling over the crumbs. 61, 66, 57, it is increasing far and above the rate of population increase.

Again that's not what I wrote; since the total of 'non-gun-owners' is increasing along with that of gun owners, & you missed the point about existing gun owners getting ccw permits. Somewhere between 5% & 10% yearly increase in gun owners, imo, for those 4 years. Massachusetts doesn't have that high a rate of gun ownership to begin with (22.6%, 2015).

Actually there are 3 reputable polls that show NATIONAL gun ownership RATES have fallen over the past 20 years: Gallup, Pew, & GSS (general social survey).

1) Gallup: .. even Gallup's numbers show a decline in gun ownership since the early 1990s, from 54% of households in late 1993 to 43% as of this fall. http://www.gallup.com/poll/186236/americans-desire-stricter-gun-laws-sharply.aspx

2): General Social Survey (GSS) .. data show a substantial decline in the shares of both households and individuals with guns... 1973, 49% reported having a gun or revolver in their home or garage. In 2012, 34% said they had a gun in their home or garage.
.. personal gun ownership in 1980, 29% said a gun in their home personally belonged to them. This stands at 22% in the 2012 GSS survey. http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/section-3-gun-ownership-trends-and-demographics/
3) ... The Pew Research Center has tracked gun ownership since 1993, and our surveys largely confirm the General Social Survey trend. In our Dec 1993 survey, 45% reported having a gun in their household; in early 1994, the GSS found 44% saying they had a gun in their home. A Jan 2013 Pew Research Center survey found 33% saying they had a gun, rifle or pistol in their home, as did 34% in the 2012 wave of {GSS}.

Self reported DGUs are to be ignored, disagreed with and mocked, but self reported gun ownership is to be taken as the gospel.


The Onion couldn't do it much better.

To paraphrase Mr. Orwell, "Some statistics are more worthy than others".

It is almost certain, based on NICS check data that 2015 will be the highest year on record for private gun sales in the United States.

But ... when national polls ask how many households own guns, the numbers appear to be the same or dropping. How do we reconcile this seeming contradiction? The answer is likely in a Zogby Analytic question asked in February of 2015.

Zogby
QUESTION: “If a national pollster asked you if you owned a firearm, would you determine to tell him or her the truth or would you feel it was none of their business?”

Gallup recently released a poll showing that gun ownership had declined from polls they had taken in an earlier time period. That number is inconsistent with the number of firearms that have been sold since President Obama took office, but the difference can be answered by the Zogby Analytic question above. The poll indicates maintaining anonymity is a contributing factor

36% of all Americans feel it is none of the pollster’s business and that includes 35% of current gun owners 47% of Republicans and 42% of Independents

If we take the lower number, 35%, and apply it to the lowest numbers for gun ownership from a national poll, found in the General Social Survey (GSS), we see that it implies that gun ownership is up, not down.

The lowest number in the General Social Survey is 32% of households.

For those who are challenged by algebra, bear with me. If 35% of gun owners believe that gun ownership is something that is "no business of national pollsters", it suggests that only 65% of gun owners would admit to gun ownership on national polls.

The true number of gun owners would be, using the lowest numbers from the GSS, 32% of households multiplied by 1/.65 or 1.54 X 32%, which comes to 49%. 49% happens to be about the number of households that reported gun ownership in the late 1970’s. Of course that doesn't account for the population increase, just the percentage of adults."

In Massachusetts and Illinois, both with FID/FOID card requirements, legal gun owners do not have the option to refuse to answer or lie to a pollster. If they want to legally own a gun, they have to put themselves in the government database. By definition, the numbers of legal gun owners in those states are reasonably accurate, and not subject to the under reporting that voluntary national polls suffer from. While not necessarily projectable nationally, both states show a substantial increase in new gun owners in the past 5 years and if anything, probably have a lower number of new gun owners on average, due to more restrictive practices.

AR-10 lower reciever. Some day I will get an upper for it. Gun safe is getting tight now, lol. And if called for some kind of poll, I own no weapons.

to purchase a handgun in MA. I guess all these long time gun owners are just getting around to purchasing their first handgun.

donP: Zogby QUESTION: “If a national pollster asked you if you owned a firearm, would you determine to tell him or her the truth or would you feel it was none of their business?”
..36% of all Americans feel it is none of the pollster’s business..

Zogby did a push poll. As they did with hillary in the very same survey: QUESTION: "If Hillary Clinton is elected president, she will be 70 years old within her first year of office. Do you Agree or Disagree the Democrats should consider a younger candidate for President?"

They are pushing that she will be 'too old' for being president, the subtle suggestion.

As zogby did with keystone: Do you agree or disagree that the Keystone Pipeline should be approved by the US Congress so that we can continue to put pressure economically and militarily on countries such as Russia, Iran and Venezuela?"

Regarding the firearms poll donP cites, the concern which arises for those of us more statistically minded than he is, is why do actual polls not reflect the zogby results above? If 36% of all Americans feel it is none of the pollster’s business, this would be reflected in the survey's results as a 'did not reply' or 'unsure' or especially 'refused'. Yet it doesn't, thus demonstrating the zogby firearms poll as a sham:

ABC: Do you or does anyone in your house own a gun, or not?" Yes No
/2013 ..43 55 = 98%
/13 .....42 57
/13 .....44 56
/11 .....44 55
/09 .....41 58 http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

Observe how the above poll results add up to upper 90 percentile, which refutes zogby's push poll. The push poll leads inordinately higher 'none of your business' results, which skews the zogby poll.

donP: If 35% of gun owners believe that gun ownership is something that is "no business of national pollsters", it suggests that only 65% of gun owners would admit to gun ownership on national polls.

No, it only suggests that if the poll is worded with 'none of your business' as a reply, rather than simply yes or no, then the poll will skew. And you obviously didn't read the zogby link, which stated that 55% (not your 65%) responded 'tell the truth', while 36% responded noyb, & 9% were unsure.

donP: The true number of gun owners would be, using the lowest numbers from the GSS, 32% of households multiplied by 1/.65 or 1.54 X 32%, which comes to 49%. 49% happens to be about the number of households that reported gun ownership in the late 1970’s." Of course that doesn't account for the population increase, just the percentage of adults

Since you obviously didn't read the zogby link, which stated that 55% (not your 65%) responded 'tell the truth', while 36% responded noyb, & 9% were unsure. So your results above, invalidly skewed as they are to begin with, would actually be increased by the 55% figure vs. 36%, and the percentage of guns per household would be higher skewing it above the 1970 results.
And population increase over the 50 years has nowt to do with gun ownership rate.

Fortunately, those of us not of your particular religious bent aren't buying what you're trying to sell

Jimmy has all kinds of polls and surveys and he gets to decide which ones are valid and the rest are all just "push polls" if they don't agree with his religious belief that there are fewer gun owners.

But yes, he does seem to avoid the facts of MA and IL in terms of actual governmental measurement of new gun owners. But he has 15 handy excuses in a thousand words or more as to why they are wrong too.

Meh? Some people can't accept the religious concept of transubstantiation and others can't accept the idea of new gun ownership growing.

The one thing he and his ilk never seem to have though are all those voters that they claim agree with them.

They may just be "directionally challenged" and can't find the polling places on election day.

No doubt my wait will be a long one...

But that one was really a high fat, fast ball, right over the plate.

icon: You are striving mightily to divert attention from the OP

What did donp's zogby post have to do with the OP then? I simply replied to his zogby poll.
And note donp typically did not provide a link or source for the zogby push poll; I guess better than a liar's link tho, since readily obtainable by googling.

The {zogby} poll asked the question, “If a national pollster asked you if you owned a firearm, would you determine to tell him or her the truth or would you feel it was none of their business?”

This zogby poll is NOT asking responders whether they own a gun or not, they ask if they feel it is anyone's business whether they own one or not. Jeez, are you two that dumb you can't see thru this push poll, & think it has some kind of credibility as to gun ownership? look at it this way, at 55% to 36% that means 40% of those with an opinion, think it's none of the pollster's business whether they own a gun. Well sure, it's nobody's business to know if I or your or them own a gun, but if I was simply asked if I owned one by a reputable pollster, I would tell the truth.

donp: Jimmy has all kinds of polls and surveys and he gets to decide which ones are valid and the rest are all just "push polls" if they don't agree with his religious belief that there are fewer gun owners.

You know you have such a pathetic understanding of polling it makes me sick to read even your ad hominem. You admonish me for deciding which polls 'are valid', while posting junk science & weird logic from a zogby internet push poll, which isn't even a scientific poll. Then the noyb result of 36% you & boot polisher icon try to equate somehow with being the reason for low gun ownership rates, when the very result should raise suspicion as to the poll's inaccuracy.
You both are seriously delinquent in understanding what makes a proper poll and how to interpret results.

And only bozos would take zogby as always true anyway, & there is no corroboration amongst other pollsters, & nate silver even confirms my suspicions: Nov 18, 2008 Zogby Engages in Apparent Push Polling for Right-Wing Website By Nate Silver http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/zogby-engages-in-apparent-push-polling/

“push poll”, which the Random House Dictionary defines as “a seemingly unbiased telephone survey that is actually conducted by supporters of a particular candidate {or cause} and disseminates negative information about an opponent.”

Oct 28, 2009 Zogby Again Polls on Misleading Question, This Time with Racial Tinge By Nate Silver

Note to John Zogby (from nate silver): along those lines, I think you need to examine the thought process behind your interactive (Internet) polling, which any objective attempt at analysis will demonstrate has achieved vastly inferior results, beyond any shadow of a doubt. They don’t do justice to the years of solid work embodied in your live-operator polls. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/note-to-john-zogby/

Mar 24, 2009 The Worst Pollster in the World Strikes Again By Nate Silver Zogby International conducts two types of polls. One type are conventional telephone polls
Zogby, however, also conducts Internet-based polls. These polls are conducted among users who volunteer to participate in them, first by signing up at the Zogby website and then by responding to an e-mail solicitation. These Internet polls, to the extent they rely on voluntary participation, violate the most basic precept of survey research, which is that of the random sample. And as you might infer, they obtain absolutely terrible results. http://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/zogby/
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Zogby+poll+push+poll+right+wing+

Not only that, your replies are still prolix, rambling, and badly formatted...