TexasCHLforum.com

I see a lot of people on here stating that they wouldn't answer a telephone poll that they owned firearms and I have a question.

Do you think that not answering or answering in the negative gives politicians more desire to seek action on gun control because of the seemingly dwindling number of gun owners according to these "polls"?

As Chas stated the industry puts us around 200 million but I never really see that number cited outside of pro-gun circles. The things usually cited are polls conducted over the phone or by mail and they all show similar trends.

I have to wonder that if we represented ourselves more accurately if we'd have less trouble because we would be vocal/represented in all aspects of what they use...

And to be clear - I don't want to tell strangers I own firearms any more than I want to tell someone I have information that could lead to Hillary Clinton's arrest!

Charles L. Cotton wrote:This isn't a study, it's a result-oriented lie. Industry figures indicate the number of American gun owners is probably between 150 and 200 million people.

Chas.

And in the seventh year, there was tenure and a happy hour...

I myself know a couple people that only own one firearm. I don't know how. It's like trying to eat just one potato chip or something. I had one gun once. Seems like for about 5 minutes now, but it was really for about 6 months. However, there are are folks out there that only have one.

CoffeNut, I get your point. There may be some truth to that, but I'm pretty sure the folks that matter have a pretty good idea that this "study" is worthless and that they also have a fair idea of the real number. And I'm somewhat certain that even that number is way off. As many have said, they possess firearms that were obtained before background checks were required. Some have inherited firearms that were purchased before background checks were required. Others have been given to them without any background check being performed. And still more have been purchased from private individuals without any background check being performed.

I'd like to amend my theory that anyone has a fair idea of the real number. They have no clue how many there are and how many own them.

3%? -

CoffeeNut wrote:I see a lot of people on here stating that they wouldn't answer a telephone poll that they owned firearms and I have a question.

Do you think that not answering or answering in the negative gives politicians more desire to seek action on gun control because of the seemingly dwindling number of gun owners according to these "polls"?

As Chas stated the industry puts us around 200 million but I never really see that number cited outside of pro-gun circles. The things usually cited are polls conducted over the phone or by mail and they all show similar trends.

I have to wonder that if we represented ourselves more accurately if we'd have less trouble because we would be vocal/represented in all aspects of what they use...

And to be clear - I don't want to tell strangers I own firearms any more than I want to tell someone I have information that could lead to Hillary Clinton's arrest!

I don't think it would matter, as Charles stated, this study, and most like it are designed to further an agenda, to create the illusion, that there are only a few "gun nuts" who are hoarding guns and ammo, to increase fear among the sheeple. I for one have never been asked by a pollster/survey taker about firearm ownership, and I doubt that even if I were, and I answered honestly, it would make any difference, because they can simply disregard any info, that doesn't fit their preconceived propaganda.

Gun owners speak with their votes, and the left are fully aware of that fact, but rather than admit that, they claim that the NRA, is such a huge money spending lobby group, that somehow influences lawmakers. But lawmakers are influenced by votes, and no matter how much money a lobby group throws at a candidate, the voters ultimately have the final say. Look at all of the millions Bloomberg and his minions spend trying to get candidates elected, only to have pro 2A candidates win, with a lot less money given to their campaigns. So the left have to fight back with bogus studies, flawed research, and proclamations that are total fabrication, to try to sway the uninformed.

another thing that always smells fishy to me is that they use this statistic of "% of the general USA population". It's not that there's anything wrong with slicing up the data that way as long as the results are presented in such a way that they can be interpreted fairly. However, in my opinion, the reason that they use the general population is so that they can present the result as a much smaller number. Because if you are using the "general population" as the basis of the experiment, then how many newborn babies are you polling? How many shut-ins? The upper bound of the data is some number lower than 100%. But when the general population reads a statistic that is present as a percent, they automatically assume a scale of 0-100%.

Perhaps a better number would be drawn from looking at it as a percentage of the number of US households. Because if they called my wife and my two kids and asked if they own guns, they may answer "no" Because they've never purchased, inherited, or been gifted any guns. But if I have 8 guns and we have 4 people in our family I can honestly and with a straight face say that that's just two guns per person in my household. Just two.

Define "gun".

This is clearly a distribution problem. We need to take from the wealthy and redistribute to the poor.
I am poor. Please PM me if you have eight or more guns. I have a wish list.

allisji wrote:another thing that always smells fishy to me is that they use this statistic of "% of the general USA population". It's not that there's anything wrong with slicing up the data that way as long as the results are presented in such a way that they can be interpreted fairly. However, in my opinion, the reason that they use the general population is so that they can present the result as a much smaller number. Because if you are using the "general population" as the basis of the experiment, then how many newborn babies are you polling? How many shut-ins? The upper bound of the data is some number lower than 100%. But when the general population reads a statistic that is present as a percent, they automatically assume a scale of 0-100%.

Perhaps a better number would be drawn from looking at it as a percentage of the number of US households. Because if they called my wife and my two kids and asked if they own guns, they may answer "no" Because they've never purchased, inherited, or been gifted any guns. But if I have 8 guns and we have 4 people in our family I can honestly and with a straight face say that that's just two guns per person in my household. Just two.

This, they never stated the number of gun owners and adult population

JakeTheSnake wrote:This is clearly a distribution problem. We need to take from the wealthy and redistribute to the poor.
I am poor. Please PM me if you have eight or more guns. I have a wish list.

There ya go!! That's the way BHO does it. I don't know why it won't work for us. Unfortunately, I don't think I have any guns available for redistribution right now, but if I get some I'll let you know!!

Jusme wrote:Here is the key phrase: About 22 percent of Americans SAY they own guns, compared to 25 percent in the 1994 study. (emphasis mine)

This relates directly to people who won't divulge whether or not they own guns, especially to strangers on the telephone. I have never been asked about gun ownership by any pollsters/survey takers, and wouldn't admit if I were.

So roughly 1/4 of all Americans are gun owners. And Hillary believes that roughly 1/4 of all Americans are "deplorable".

Coincidence? I think not.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Jusme wrote:Here is the key phrase: About 22 percent of Americans SAY they own guns, compared to 25 percent in the 1994 study. (emphasis mine)

This relates directly to people who won't divulge whether or not they own guns, especially to strangers on the telephone. I have never been asked about gun ownership by any pollsters/survey takers, and wouldn't admit if I were.

So roughly 1/4 of all Americans are gun owners. And Hillary believes that roughly 1/4 of all Americans are "deplorable".

Coincidence? I think not.

NRA members are her enemy
GOP members are her enemy
That is as many as her supporter if not more.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:

Jusme wrote:Here is the key phrase: About 22 percent of Americans SAY they own guns, compared to 25 percent in the 1994 study. (emphasis mine)

This relates directly to people who won't divulge whether or not they own guns, especially to strangers on the telephone. I have never been asked about gun ownership by any pollsters/survey takers, and wouldn't admit if I were.

So roughly 1/4 of all Americans are gun owners. And Hillary believes that roughly 1/4 of all Americans are "deplorable".

Coincidence? I think not.

Yep, anyone who disagrees with her belief in disarming Americans, is deplorable.

Side note: I found some t-shirts on line I may order. Just google deplorable t-shirt and there are several options.

All of these studies are designed to portray gun owners, and 2A supporters as a fringe portion of society, so that they can begin to strip away our rights.

JakeTheSnake wrote:This is clearly a distribution problem. We need to take from the wealthy and redistribute to the poor.
I am poor. Please PM me if you have eight or more guns. I have a wish list.

I'm just a poor city boy that can't afford an AR with which to resist the overreaching arm of a potential tyrannical government.

Also, zombies. I need one just in case of zombies. You know.

Anyone wishing to donate a spare AR to this needy, underprivileged, deserving individual please PM me at your earliest convenience.

I currently am just under that 8 gun threshold. My solution is to acquire more guns so that I am over that threshold.