Argue policy, not armchair psychology.

The statistic is worth discussing.

And, for the record, I am white.

Maybe the issue is what beliefs we are being fed by the media? My guess is that a case could be made about how media, especially television is used to convince white people that we are especially in danger of being attacked. Jerry Mander's book, "Four Arguments For the Elimination of Television" quoted some studies which showed that most of the people who watch lots of t.v. believe they have a much higher statistical chance of being attacked than they actually have in reality. He also showed that t.v. tends to depict more violent persons as people of color than white folks.

So, maybe this post has a valid point worth discussing?

Guess I'd better go find myself an asbestos suit, because I can sense a flame war in the making.

And then there is the question that usually doesn't get asked: how can we create a peaceful society, where we can all feel safe at home and in public, without resorting to mass arming/shoot-outs?

Good luck with this OP, MrScorpio. It may start a flame war, but maybe the flames will shed some light.

to you MrScorpio.

Peace, out.

The fucking numbers speak for themselves.

What do YOU make of the math?

demographic numbers are meaningless without context. Gun owners are more likely to be rural--and the rural population of the US is 80% non-Hispanic white, about 8% Hispanic and about 10% black. Demographics, from the census: 72% white (and 63% "non-Hispanic white), 12% black, 16% Hispanic. Depending on how the survey classifies "Hispanic/Latino" (and it's probably largely self-reported), the "white" numbers may include Hispanics who self-identify as white (they're 9% of the "white" total in the census).

It doesn't change the facts, no matter how long gun cuddlers put their fingers in their ears and go la la la la as loud as they can.

Let's face it - the plain facts all point toward gun ownership being negative for our society -- on the whole. Every argument in favor of guns requires twisting facts into pretzels or saying stupid things about how we shouldn't have laws because people will break them.

I'm not a "gun lover" (I think the Second Amendment doesn't confer an individual right and is outdated, that large-capacity magazines, handguns, and, probably, semi-automatics, should be banned, and that the US gun culture is, frankly, insane). I also don't think that making an argument based on meaningless statistics is useful or does anything to advance sensible firearms regulation.

It was more of a general statement.

It seems that there are no arguments that the absolutists accept. It's like banging your head against the wall.

Just do it.

Gun ownership is not always because of fear.

Max Brooks* recommends a shotgun and plenty of ammo.

Remember, they're slow, and when they're dead, they're dead.

Reference: the last two episodes of Star Talk Radio, hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson. Interview with Max Brooks.

*Max Brooks is the author of World War Z, and yes, he is Mel Brooks' son.

I've got a shotgun, misc others, and an uparmoured truck that's ready to run them over....

I actually think the zombie planing is pretty funny. It's a refreshing break from y2k and now the doomsday prepping. Plus zombies are neat.

A couple of Canadian virologists published a very serious paper using Zombies as a metaphor to study the evolution of a world-wide viral outbreak. It was well reported in the science (and no doubt Zombie) media.

Even the CDC has used it as a metaphor.

The Star Talk podcasts are damned good. If you are into taking them down, you have to listen to them.

Thanks!
It would be funny if Mel made an appearance in the movie.

And I put "spoken to" in quotes because it was at book signings, it's not like we're friends or anything.

Anyway, after he sold the movie rights he's had literally no input of any kind on the movie, which is actually standard Hollywood SOP.

What I found ironic was that I actually use portions of the book to teach my high school English class: I use it as a lead in to teach about Cold War era propaganda and process essays, etc. The "Duck and Cover Turtle" and the weird civil defense manuals, that sort of stuff. Turns out, Max Brooks did his Master's thesis on Cold War propaganda, which is where he got the idea for the book.

He had nothing to do with the movie, which I have seen.
If you love the book, you might want to stay away...

Just build yourself some (fringe science) disintegrators:

Odic Ray

Death Ray

Angel Light (presumably the "Angel of Death&quot

Scalar Fields

And, of course, Tesla Coils.
Plus his "Earthquake Generator"


And since you'll likely need electricity to run them, build one (or more) of these:

Thorium Plasma Battery

Free Energy Generators (#1)
Free Energy Generators (#2)



(from an Evil Mad SubGenius Scientist)

This is not a surprise

Do those percentages show percentages of each race who own guns, or percentage of gun owners who are of each race?

If you go to the link, percentages of each race who own guns is shown a little further up:



So white people are, roughly, twice as lkely to own guns as black people, and 3 times as Hispanic.

just because of the racial demographics of the state, right?

We have a BLACK President over a federal government which is spying on it's own citizens, sounds like this whole country is living in fear of something.....

But way to turn a issue into some useless racist talk!

Are there any citizens who have guns but do not have them registered? Or stole them? Or don't tell anyone in a survey about them?

The explanation at the bottom of the chart doesn't seem to take into acoount criminals, felons, etc. who probably don't register OR admit to owning guns.

I just don't need them.

If, however, I ever feel the need to "protect" my property, then I'll build a perimeter of these guys:

65% of those surveyed were white. Together they own 82% of guns. That doesn't sound like a big disparity. I wonder if that can partially explained by the urban/rural divide.

Yes, whites are over represented among gun owners. But not to the extent rural people are. A gun owner is over 1.5 times more likely to be rural but only about 1.25 times as likely to be white. I think what would be interesting is comparing the gun ownership rates of rural whites to that of rural blacks and hispanics. I think the numbers would be much closer than the overall ones are. Both blacks and Hispanics are much more likely to live in cities than whites are.

They don't advertise it, they didn't exactly acquire them through legal means, and they aren't inclined to answer the questions of the Pew Research Center. Or be contacted by them.

Why are people who claim to be so against racism so obsessed with race?

Just a question that comes to mind when I read bash whitey threads.

But you start from the bullshit premise that legally owning a gun is a problem that needs solving and that there is something wrong with owning a gun.

Focusing only on who owns guns deliberately ignores the real problem where guns are concerned - who is using them in illegal activities? What portion of legal gun owners of any color are involved in gun crimes?

That's the question you want answered, if you're sincere in your outrage about the "gun problem."

Fear? Do you live in constant fear of fire if you own a fire extinguisher?

It's not that others are obsessed with race so much as they're attuned to the slights received for no other perceptible reason than their race.

The fact that gun ownership is overwhelmingly a white male phenomenon may or may not be tied to racism but the skew is so great that racism is worth consideration for discussion.

So 65% of people own 82% of guns. That doesn't sound so out-of-whack to me. Even for that, I wonder how much can be explained by rural/urban splits.

if you think that's not so out of whack, you're likely one of the two people in this thread that feels that way.

We find that 31% of white people personally own a gun, compared with 15% of black people and 11% of Hispanics.

By comparison, 39% of rural people personally own a gun, compared with 24% of suburban people and 18% of urban people.

So where you live is a stronger predictor of gun ownership than race. Personally, I'm curious as to what the predicted rates of gun ownership by race would be if you only based them on where people live.

That 39% of rural folk own guns doesn't explain that. Only 15% of the population live in rural counties.

I'm juror 3.

Juror #2 was correct -- it was a reference to white people in general.

I apologize to those who read it that way.

then racism is worth consideration.

Who owns guns is irrelevant. What they are doing with those guns is all that matters.

We know that where the offender is known the race of offender and victim are the same in vast majority of cases. We also know that where offender is known (roughly two thirds of murders) the number of victims who are white is disproportionately small compared to presence in the population. *

The Pew survey demonstrates that the majority of gun owners state that they own them for self-protection. Since the risk of homicide by gun is much smaller for whites, why are whites so afraid and whom do they fear?




* https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain

in the panel studies that track this question. We used to own guns mostly for hunting or other recreation. Now hunting is on decline as is gun ownership. It's a shame the PEW study apparently isn't robust enough to crosstab on factors like how motivation correlates to whether the person lives in an urban area or rural for example, and what the distribution by locale is of white gun owners.

Gun violence has been dropping along with all violent crime (except for the spike in 2011.) Gun ownership has also declined during that period so it's unlikely that there is a causal link. From what I've read no clear cause has been found for the decline in gun violence nationally. So again, why are white people so armed for self-protection?

I do think that FOX and other conservative media plus Nancy Grace influence perception of gun violence and also perpetuate the fear of minority violence against whites, but that's my speculation not data.

I also think that to dismiss racism/bigotry out of hand as a motivation for gun ownership is a bit naive given the history of this country and the backlash evident since Obama became president.

is this view useful for addressing gun violence or is it merely another attempt to smear gun owners as racists?

Say that your opinion is actually true. How would you address this problem? What problem are you actually trying to fix? Or are you merely asking questions?

That's why it's worth discussing. I don't know (and apparently those have studied this question don't know) if racism is a pertinent factor in the reason for the disparity in gun ownership rates. What I do know is to dismiss racism out of hand is naive.

As far as what to do if it could be proven that the reason for the disproportionate ownership is related to racism, perhaps change attitudes and prejudices?

if disproportionate ownership has no impact on gun violence then why the need to address it? Just to feel good?

It doesn't matter who owns guns or why they own them. All that matters is what they do with those guns. If there is no demonstrated harm then why waste your time when there are so many other more pressing issues to address? If white gun owners are not responsible for a disproportionate proportion of gun violence then what harm is there beyond the not so surprising revelation that some people are racists?

I guess I fail to see what pressing problem you are trying to fix.

That's why. If one sees a gun as the solution there's less incentive to seek out other less violent solutions.

The fact that gun violence overall is on the decline doesn't mean that the rise in gun ownership for self protection isn't problematic. We all know some of the anecdotes of people shooting an innocent out of fear and even more incidents of shooting in momentary rage. When the weapon used is a handgun it's probably not a weapon kept at the ready for hunting.

Again though, I'm not trying to fix anything. I'm interested in exploring why the trend exists and what the potential outcomes of such a trend are.

The reality is, suburbanites are not driving into Detroit and committing the hundreds of annual murders.

Like others point out, what is critical is what is being done with the guns that are out there.

We need economic changes to combat poverty. And we need social and cultural changes to combat the cult of machismo infecting the inner cities.

everyone know I have several fire extinguishers, I might. If I obsess about other people taking my fire extinguishers, I might.

Change fire extinguisher to tool kit - are you living in fear of something that will cause you to use one of your tools?

Come on.

It was too good.

Here is what I'm packin'. This is my home collection. Don't tease me for taking pictures as these are part of my retirement portfolio :



This weekend. my buddies and I are going to put on camouflaged fireman outfits and run around in the woods spraying paper fire targets.

Either that, or the things are inflatable

By the way, having wondered recently about non-violent video games focusing on emergency crews and situations, I came across this: Virtual Firefighting Training

Personally, I could get into a game like that!

At 325 gpm, can one person hold that water hose?

Holding in place not a problem. Advancing while flowing 325 generally takes two plus 1 or 2 to support the line if your moving more than a few feet.

But, I did read a little before posting that yesterday, and there was mention of one person being able to handle 50psi, but that it would take more people to handle and advance with 100psi.

So, flow-rate can be high at a lower pressure and a larger hose, right?
Although I read that a larger hose then becomes much heavier...

Probably because my dad is a retired firefighter and has a few antique fire extinguishers around.

honest question - what do the crime stats say?

It is not who has guns that is important. It is who is doing the killing that matters.

because it would bring up forbidden facts. That would be racist.

And what exactly was that point? And how am I proving it? Tell me exactly what I did.

This should be interesting.

And paranoid and perhaps racist.

You're response is rather paranoid and reactionary. I'm just waiting for you to spout off about "reverse racism" to complete the trifecta.

Pointing out that one race has more guns and speculating why isn't racism. And furthermore gun advocates would do well to control their tempers as it doesn't impress me that some hothead has a weapon. It just makes me question if you should.

But it's trying to make the conclusion that whites have more guns because they're more fearful of crime. Or blacks. Or perhaps zombie attacks.

Blacks are more often murder offenders than whites but they're also more often the victims of murder.

urban/rural divide too. Where I grew up I didn't know any non-white people that didn't own at least a rifle or a shotgun, including me. I suspect handguns might be a little different. Concealed carry permits would be a lot different.

Where I am now I barely know anyone with a gun.

so I would question the "living in fear" conclusion.

What percentage Hunts? What percentage does historic reenactments? Are we including antiques that have been in the family for generations? Be much more interesting how the numbers breakdown for Semi-Automatic Pistols.

would break down on similar lines. They're discretionary purchases for most people, so people who have the most money to spend are the most likely to own them.

the people living in the areas with the lowest crime rates and fastest police response times have the most guns!

so they own most of the guns. Look at the table in reply #56, and you see 59% of rural households have a gun; 36% of suburban, and 28% of urban.

Which is the single oddest thing I can think of

Millions of people have alarms on the house, car, everything.
Millions of people put a name tag on their cats and dogs and other pets
Millions mark their items with some sort of security
Millions buy locks for their doors

Millions put out neon stickers warning there is an alarm, to tell all perps- hey, go to the house next door and leave us alone

YET gun owners who fear everything, sleep with their gun and bullets, and tell no one at all they have one, thereby basically saying
come on in and lets play who is the fastest gun slinger in the west.

Why don't gun owners want to advertise.

(and don't give me the then they will steal the gun line).

So what in the world are guns being used for?

Oh wait, I already know.

And guess who is indeed the only group that wants to overthrow THIS government.
Why, it's the minorityless tea party republicans isn't it???
never mind.

Very interesting reaffirmation of one something so obvious that I cannot say it suprrises me.

By the way, you don't need a gun to hunt, and one can collect bottle caps.

btw, aren't gun/bullet owners also the ones that put everyone down as being afraid of their own shadows, while they have their trusty gun/bullet to keep them safe?

Just wondering.

no firearms within.

Only 26% of the households out in the Wild, Wild West don't have a gun!!
But, in the Northeast, only 21%!!

I would have thought that it would have been the other way around.

See the table above it (also see reply #56), which reports the figures as "do people in these demographics have a gun", and you see that, in the West, 30% of households have a gun; in the Northeast, 25%. By far the most populous state in the West, of course, is California. The figures are higher for the South (42%) and Midwest (45%).

.

.

Nor does it address the race of the victims.

So what's your point?

whites kill whites, blacks kill blacks.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6

My only point is that there is an extensive collection of crime data that addresses many aspects of gun violence for those with the inclination to actually take the time to study and learn.

If guns are for protection them more black people should have guns or at least it should be more equal, right?

(Of course that doesn't take into account guns for sport, hunting, etc as someone said earlier.)

lets not forget the OP is about legal gun owners.

Murder rates reflect criminal activity, not legal gun owners protecting themselves in their homes.

I'm white and when I'm home alone with scary noises outside, my imagination usually cooks up a creepy, toothless, redneck type of white guy. I'm not sure you can assume all white people have guns primarily to ward off imaginary hoards of dark-skinned people. Personally I think it's the hunting that jacks up the numbers for whites. Its just part of rural, white culture. I don't see all that many people of color out there during hunting season. The guns in our house are unloaded and locked away, only taken out at hunting season.

and blacks killing blacks, it doesn't appear that this apparent racism is manifesting itself in any negative way.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-6

The history of the country, settling the west and the south, hunting. All these things have been traditions handed down for generations, mainly by whites. The blacks of course didn't have guns early on (for obvious reasons). But later on they did, for hunting and such. If they could afford them (many blacks were dirt poor from the results of slavery and discrimination).

Criminals own guns. I wouldn't say they own guns because they're fearful, though. It's necessary to their line of work. Which brings me to...

Why I own a gun. Because of the criminals. I wouldn't say I own a gun because I'm fearful, though. It's a practical thing, a recognition that I am a target of criminals (being female), and that crime is a fact of life, and that the law can't get anywhere in time to prevent a crime. So I have protection to use, just in case. Among other things. I have a car to drive away in...I wouldn't say I own a car because I'm fearful. I have a rolling pin and some knives I can use...but I wouldn't say I own those things because I'm fearful.

And if I end up having to use the gun or those other items of protection, I wouldn't say I would use them out of fear, although that may be part of the reason at the time. It's a simple matter of protection. If I need them.

I get a flu shot sometimes, too. I wouldn't say I'm fearful of getting the flu, esp since I've never had it. It's just protection. A recognition that there's this illness out there that some shot might protect me against.